Reviews

From the August 1989 issue of Car and Driver.If we had to characterize Chrysler’s Ea­gle Division, we’d describe it as “the new home of pretty neat alternatives.” You’d almost think that Chrysler had been working with a sorcerer lately: suddenly, the once-shaky Eagle lineup looks posi­tively scrumptious.Eagle’s dazzling new Talon TSi AWD (C/D, July) is a car with 90 percent of the abilities of the Porsche 911 Carrera 4—at about one-quarter the price. Eagle’s well-balanced Premier sedan flaunts nimble road manners every bit as good as those of the acclaimed Ford Taurus. And just to ensure that there are no ugly duck­lings in the Eagle aviary, Chrysler has mercifully retired the unpopular Medal­lion sedan.And then there is the perky new Eagle Summit, a car ready to take on the auto world’s most renowned purveyor of good stuff: Honda. The Summit is yet another product of the highly successful Chrysler-Mitsubishi partnership. This joint venture has placed several rebadged Mitsubishis in Chrysler dealerships, and it is also re­sponsible for the Diamond-Star Motors Corporation, the U.S. facility that pro­duces the impressive Laser/Eclipse/Tal­on sports coupes for the two companies. Unlike the Diamond-Star coupes, however, the Summit is wholly designed and built by Mitsubishi. Mitsubishi sells three- and four-door versions of the car as the Mirage. Chrysler/Plymouth and Dodge dealers sell their own version of the three-door under the Colt badge. Ea­gle gets the four-door version, which it sells as the Summit. Still with us? The Summit’s styling is a study in Japanese uncontroversial. The shape maintains the interesting slim-headlight treatment characteristic of Mitsubishi’s products, although the Summit’s hoodline is not as dramatically low as the Honda Civic’s. The Summit’s wheelbase is nearly two inches shorter than the Civic sedan’s, yet the Eagle is three and one-half inches longer overall. In all but two critical inte­rior dimensions—front legroom and rear hiproom—the Summit equals or betters the Civic. And the Summit has a greater than two-inch advantage in rear­-seat legroom over the Honda. That means that four passengers of adult size will easily fit into the little Eagle. Choosing the right trim level is crucial if you want to obtain the highest Summit. Both the base DX package and the costli­er LX trim kit offer an 81-hp 1.5-liter in­line four-cylinder as standard equip­ment. But only the LX offers the optional DOHC 1.6-liter four-cylinder. This en­gine cranks out 113 hp, a robust 32-hp increase over the base engine and 21 more ponies than you can get in a Civic four-door. Like all Mitsu twin-cam engines, the 1.6-liter dynamo revs with abandon all the way to its 7000-rpm redline. And it makes a satisfying growl all the while. Even with this willing engine, howev­er, the Summit LX—weighed down with such luxurious touches as power win­dows, power locks, and air condition­ing—feels chunky. The LX’s 9.6-second 0-to-60-mph run reflects how severely 2587 pounds of sedan can burden 113 eager horses.Driving the Summit LX is never a bur­den, though. The five-speed manual gearbox (the only transmission available with the DOHC engine) is a joy, so keep­ing the revs up is easy. And the LX’s stan­dard power steering makes maneuvering through city traffic a breeze. You sense that same lightness of oper­ation when hustling down your favorite back road. Fitted with the optional four­teen-inch alloy wheels and 195/60-14 Yokohama tires, the Summit feels nim­ble. The steering is accurate, and the sus­pension dances through the twisties with modest understeer and just a trace of en­tertaining off-power oversteer. This car doesn’t make you work hard for your fun. Good as it is, you’ll never forget that the Summit has an econobox heart. The suspension—struts at the front, a solid axle and coil springs in the rear—is limit­ed in travel and reaches its bump stops easily. A high-g run through a choppy bend can produce some pretty unsavory body motions.But for most driving the Summit is as easy to live with as any small sedan you’ll find—the Civic included. The interior displays the quality we’ve come to expect from Mitsubishi: the seats are supportive and attractive, the layout is airy and spa­cious, and the instruments and the con­trols are logically arranged and easy to operate. About the only gripe we have is with the chintzy-looking sun visors.In overall goodness and quality the Summit LX can match the Honda Civic four-door blow for blow. And the LX has more power than the Civic. So why hasn’t the little Eagle usurped the little Honda in our hearts and minds?More Eagle Reviews From the ArchiveCheck out the price, amigo. At $14,297, the Summit LX with the DOHC engine and all the goodies is hardly a fire­sale bargain. For that kind of money you can get into low-level versions of such considerably larger cars as the Honda Accord and the Ford Taurus. In fact, the Summit LX costs about two grand more than a fully loaded Civic sedan. There’s no question that the Eagle Summit LX is a fun, functional package. But before we’ll be won over, Chrysler’s sorcerer needs to say the magic words that will make a few thou disappear from the Summit’s bottom line. SpecificationsSpecifications
1989 Eagle Summit LXVehicle Type: front-engine, front-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door sedan
PRICE
Base/As Tested: $10,639/$14,297
ENGINEDOHC 16-valve inline-4, iron block and aluminum head, port fuel injectionDisplacement: 97 in3, 1596 cm3Power: 113 hp @ 6500 rpm 
TRANSMISSION5-speed manual 
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 96.7 inLength: 170.1 inCurb Weight: 2587 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 9.6 sec1/4-Mile: 17.0 sec @ 80 mph100 mph: 36.2 secTop Speed (gov ltd): 108 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 200 ftRoadholding, 300-ft Skidpad: 0.80 g 
C/D FUEL ECONOMY
Observed: 25 mpg
EPA FUEL ECONOMYCity: 23 mpg 
C/D TESTING EXPLAINED More

Don’t drive the Porsche 911 S/T. That public-service announcement is for the owners of the 911 GT3 and GT3 Touring, two sports cars closely related to the new S/T. Owners of those cars should be delighted with the steering, brakes, handling, and performance of their cars and will remain so provided they don’t get a chance in one of the 1963 examples of the 911 S/T that Porsche will produce.The 911 S/T is the latest creation from the Porsche GT department (the engineering team whose resume includes heavy hitters such as the GT3, GT3 RS, Boxster Spyder RS, and Cayman GT4 RS). In all but name, the S/T is the long-awaited follow-up to the lightweight, manual-only 911 R that put a chef’s kiss on the last (991.2) 911 generation. Presumably to keep the last R a distinct once-in-a-generation thing, Porsche didn’t christen the new car the R. Instead, it wears the S/T badge, a link to a limited-production race-car version of the 911 S from the late 1960s/early 1970s.The new S/T isn’t a race car or even a track car. It’s a road-focused 911 with a lot of parts from the GT3 and the GT3 RS. A short-throw six-speed manual is the sole transmission choice, and tucked behind the rear wheels is the GT3 RS’s naturally aspirated 4.0-liter flat-six. The S/T leaves the engine unaltered—output remains at 518 horsepower at 8500 rpm—but in the interest of quickening throttle response, the weight of the clutch and flywheel are halved, resulting in a weight reduction of 23 pounds. Let’s just say that the C/D staff didn’t think that this zingy engine needed faster responses. We joked that the regular GT3 used a fidget spinner as a flywheel; we’ll amend that to say that the S/T’s tachometer is like a fidget spinner. Taking the mass out of the flywheel does result in a rattling sound from the clutch and engine from idle to about 2900 rpm.The solution is to keep the revs up, which is easier thanks to a shorter 4.30-to-1 final-drive gearing that replaces the GT3’s 3.96 ratio. The speeds in gears drop, and responsiveness rises. Whereas second gear is good to 80 mph in the GT3, it maxes out at 72 mph in the S/T. Porsche claims 60 mph will arrive in 3.5 seconds, two-tenths quicker than the company’s claim for the 502-hp manual GT3. Our test team managed a 3.3-second run to 60 with a GT3 manual, so expect the S/T to knock a tenth or two off that time.The weight savings don’t stop at the flywheel and clutch. The carbon-fiber doors and roof are GT3 RS parts, the carbon-fiber front fenders are unique to the S/T, and the Touring’s carbon-fiber hood caps the spacious front trunk. A thinner windshield sheds a few pounds. Magnesium wheels and carbon-ceramic brakes are standard. A 6.6-pound lighter battery is fitted, the carpets go on a 4.4-pound diet, and the carbon-fiber rear anti-roll bar from the GT3 RS’s Weissach package shaves another 4.4 pounds. To shed 14.3 pounds and to purge technology from the chassis, the rear-wheel-steering system is axed. Total it all up, and Porsche says the S/T comes in at 84 pounds lighter than the lightest 911 GT3 Touring. We won’t be able to weigh an S/T until we have one in the States, but based on our test numbers for a manual GT3, we’ll play carnival barker and guess it weighs around 3100 pounds.According to the engineers who developed the S/T, removing the rear steering initially made a mess of the car’s handling. To set it right, a slower rack with a 15.0:1 ratio replaces the GT3’s 14.2:1 unit, the electric assist was extensively retuned, and the mechanical limited-slip differential locks more casually. The result is a pure, uncut steering feel. Bend the S/T hard into a corner, and the tugs and vibrations tell a story of the changing grip of the road surface and the stress placed upon the standard Michelin Pilot Cup 2 tires. The limits are high, but the S/T normalizes 1-g cornering by coordinating chassis and steering actions in a secure and easy way. Porsche confidently let us have a go in a GT3 Touring after driving the S/T, and it couldn’t quite match the fluidity and sensations coming through the S/T’s wheel.Driving a Touring makes the S/T’s chassis differences apparent. On choppy asphalt, the Touring tosses and skips over sharp impacts whereas the S/T smothers them. Springs and dampers are identical between the two cars—the difference is in the damper tuning. The S/T’s are slightly more compliant and dull sharp impacts. There’s no getting around the stiff spring rates, so this isn’t a cushy ride, but it’s a little more friendly than the Touring’s.Driving both cars reveals the little things about the GT3 and GT3 Touring that bothered the GT development engineers. While nearly all the changes seek to distill the GT3’s already-pure driving experience, one alteration points to the obsessive nature of the crew that made this car. The team didn’t like the way the retractable spoiler on the current 911 rises awkwardly into the wind, leaving the rear end looking like a Transformer mid-transformation. So, the S/T gets a subtle Gurney flap on the edge of its retractable spoiler, which allows the spoiler to rise at 74 mph rather than 56 mph and at a less jaunty angle.Upgrading to the S/T over a GT3 Touring requires a lot more cash, and that’s if you can secure an order for one. The S/T starts at $291,650, over $100,000 more than the Touring. Rare Porsches are always expensive, but the upcharge brings a lot of small, well-placed tweaks that improve the driving experience. But, if you never drive it, you’ll never know what you’re missing out on.SpecificationsSpecifications
2024 Porsche 911 S/TVehicle Type: rear-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 2-passenger, 2-door coupe
PRICE
Base: $291,650
ENGINE
DOHC 24-valve flat-6, aluminum block and heads, direct fuel injectionDisplacement: 244 in3, 3996 cm3Power: 518 hp @ 8500 rpmTorque: 342 lb-ft @ 6300 rpm
TRANSMISSION
6-speed manual
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 96.7 inLength: 180.0 inWidth: 72.9 inHeight: 50.4 inPassenger Volume: 49 ft3Trunk Volume: 5 ft3Curb Weight (C/D est): 3100 lb
PERFORMANCE (C/D EST)
60 mph: 3.1 sec100 mph: 7.2 sec1/4-Mile: 11.3 secTop Speed: 186 mph
EPA FUEL ECONOMY (C/D EST)
Combined/City/Highway: 15/13/17 mpgEditor-in-ChiefTony Quiroga is an 18-year-veteran Car and Driver editor, writer, and car reviewer and the 19th editor-in-chief for the magazine since its founding in 1955. He has subscribed to Car and Driver since age six. “Growing up, I read every issue of Car and Driver cover to cover, sometimes three or more times. It’s the place I wanted to work since I could read,” Quiroga says. He moved from Automobile Magazine to an associate editor position at Car and Driver in 2004. Over the years, he has held nearly every editorial position in print and digital, edited several special issues, and also helped produce C/D’s early YouTube efforts. He is also the longest-tenured test driver for Lightning Lap, having lapped Virginia International Raceway’s Grand Course more than 2000 times over 12 years. More

Lukewarm feelings about our experience behind the wheel of the latest Nissan Z-car left us anxiously awaiting the track-oriented model wearing the vaunted NISMO badge. That car has finally arrived in the form of the 2024 Nissan Z NISMO, but the automaker is asking for a couple of big concessions if you want to snag one of your own. Depending on the sting of inflation and your preferences as a driver, they might be deal breakers. That said, Nissan’s go-fast division has significantly upped the Z’s game over the heretofore top-level Performance model. Underfloor chassis braces add noticeable rigidity to the NISMO’s structure, while firmer bushings, larger passive dampers, and stiffer springs and anti-roll bars discipline its body motions and sharpen its reflexes. Larger 15.0-inch front brake rotors with four-piston calipers (13.8-inch, two-piston rear units carry over from the Performance trim) bring greater security in braking zones. Wider 19-inch Rays forged aluminum wheels wrapped with Dunlop SP Sport Maxx GT600 summer tires (sized 255/40R-19 in front, 285/35R-19 in back) greatly increase overall stick. Countering the 100 or so pounds of extra mass those upgrades bring is a hotter tune for the Z’s twin-turbo 3.0-liter V-6, now rated at 420 horsepower and 384 lb-ft of torque, gains of 20 horses and 34 lb-ft. Increased cooling capacity, including a larger engine-oil chiller, should help protect the engine and drivetrain during the track days this car was designed for. Which brings us to issue number one: NISMO engineers opted for a beefed-up version of the Z’s nine-speed automatic transmission, rather than its six-speed manual, because it’s simply the quicker way around a racetrack. That may be true, and this two-pedal ‘box does display impressively snappy and well-orchestrated shifts via a new Sport+ drive mode. But this misses the point of a driver’s car. With only steering-wheel paddles and an electronic shift dongle on the console to busy ourselves with, our attention often drifted to the antiquity of the Z-car’s switchgear. Still, back-to-back laps of the Performance model and the Z NISMO revealed the latter to be vastly better at instilling confidence. While forward thrust feels about the same (figure on getting to 60 mph in the low-four-second range), the new car’s steering responses are crisper, its cornering attitude is more stable, and it hangs on in turns with a tenacity its lesser kin lacks. Combine all of that with revised stability- and launch-control programming, and exploring this car’s limits is a breeze. Surprisingly, the civilized demeanor extends to the street, where a reasonably compliant ride, more relaxed Standard and Sport modes, and embracing support from the model-specific Recaro seats had us marveling at the car’s dual-natured temperament. You could drive this thing daily. The Z’s aerodynamics, and arguably its aesthetics, benefit from the NISMO’s aggressive bumpers, rocker-panel extensions, and slightly taller rear spoiler. Color choices are limited to black, white, red, silver, and a model-exclusive Stealth Grey, but you can’t delete the ankle-height red stripe that rings the body and kills some of the retro vibe. Inside, more scarlet touches grace the seats and the 12.3-inch digital instrument cluster, with bits of dark microfiber thrown in on the steering wheel and elsewhere for good measure. More in Nissan ZYet the root of the Z NISMO’s rub is its starting price, which at $66,085 is some $12,780 higher than the Performance model’s. It’s also a bigger outlay than what a BMW M2 or a Ford Mustang Dark Horse demands, and not far below the ask of a Chevy Corvette Stingray or a Porsche 718 Cayman. Nissan says it hasn’t ruled out a manual version if customer demand is sufficient, but even then this might be a tough sell. SpecificationsSpecifications
2024 Nissan Z NISMOVehicle Type: front-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 2-passenger, 2-door hatchback
PRICE
Base: $66,085
ENGINE
twin-turbocharged and intercooled DOHC 24-valve V-6, aluminum block and heads, direct fuel injectionDisplacement: 183 in3, 2997 cm3Power: 420 hp @ 6400 rpmTorque: 384 lb-ft @ 2000 rpm
TRANSMISSION
9-speed automatic
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 100.4 inLength: 173.2 inWidth: 73.6 inHeight: 51.8 inPassenger Volume: 52 ft3Cargo Volume: 7 ft3Curb Weight (C/D est): 3700 lb
PERFORMANCE (C/D EST)
60 mph: 4.1 sec100 mph: 9.6 sec1/4-Mile: 12.6 secTop Speed: 155 mph
EPA FUEL ECONOMY
Combined/City/Highway: 19/17/24 mpgTechnical EditorMike Sutton is an editor, writer, test driver, and general car nerd who has contributed to Car and Driver’s reverent and irreverent passion for the automobile since 2008. A native Michigander from suburban Detroit, he enjoys the outdoors and complaining about the weather, has an affection for off-road vehicles, and believes in federal protection for naturally aspirated engines. More

From the February 1995 issue of Car and Driver.We were in the new Mercedes C36 on Autobahn-8, following public-relations man Jürgen Hodel’s S500 from a hotel in Stuttgart to the Frankfurt airport. The morning commuter traffic was heavy and surprisingly like an American freeway in the way drivers hung in the left lane. But occa­sionally the road would clear and Hodel’s S500 would streak ahead. Trying not to let the big S-class escape from view, I’d floor the pedal and listen to the breathed-on straight-six wind up through its range, changing from a bass growl to a tenor whoop and back as the transmission (an adapted E420 mecha­nism) found new gears to explore. On sev­eral occasions, the pedal flattened the mat long enough for the speedo needle to stroke the 155-mph mark, the point at which the car’s electronics inhibit further adventure. At that speed, the C36 slashes through the air with a suppressed roar, its engine uttering a determined, hard-edged snarl. But the wheel remains unperturbed, almost restful in your hands, and the car tracks like a monorail. HIGHS: Tons of torque, bags of grip, loads of refinement.The C36 is the result of a marriage made in Swabian heaven. It’s a Mercedes C280 with some additional development work from veteran Benz-transformers AMG. Considering it’s the folks at AMG who gave us the Hammer and other pumped-up Mercedes monster-cars, their work on the C36 is remarkably subtle­—particularly from an exterior viewpoint. There is a new, deeper front air dam with foglamps and a slatted mouth that emulates the grille, new side skirts, and a new rear apron. All of it is tasteful and fairly restrained. Also added are AMG badges, dual chrome exhaust outlets, and distinctive 17-inch AMG wheels with tires so low in profile they look like rubber bands on cotton reels. When you examine the pedigree, you see classic thoroughbred inbreeding: parts from various Mercedes models combine to broaden the standard C280’s perfor­mance envelope. For the C36, the AMG guys found another 74 horsepower to add to the C280’s 194-strong stable. First they increased the bore of a stock C280 engine (known internally as the M104) from 89.9 to 91 mm. Next, they slid forged aluminum pis­tons into the bigger sleeves, bumping the compression ratio from 10 to 10.5:1. At the bot­tom end, they installed a specially machined and balanced S350 turbodiesel crankshaft, extending the engine’s stroke from 73.5 to 92.4 mm. That resulted in a displacement of 3.6 liters. Then they took a stock cylinder head, enlarged the ports for better gas exchange, replaced the exhaust valves with sodium­-filled units for better heat dissipation, installed an AMG intake camshaft with greater lift, and advanced the exhaust-cam timing. An intake manifold from the E320 was bolted on, along with a low-back-pres­sure exhaust system. That left AMG to fig­ure a ton of new software algorithms for the variable valve timing, the variable vol­ume intake system, the ignition timing, the fuel-injection pulse widths, and the elec­tronic transmission. When finished, AMG had an engine that makes at least 252 pound-feet of torque (90 percent of its peak) between 2800 and 5300 rpm. By twisting the drive­shaft that hard, AMG was courting final­-drive failure, so it installed a heavier-duty differential originally developed for the still-gestating new E-class car. It uses the same 2.87:1 final-drive ratio as the C280, but has wider gear teeth. With all the go-faster bits in place, some new brake and suspension disciplines were in order. Front discs come from the SL600—big 12.6-inch rotors with four-piston calipers—and the rear brakes are from an E420. Together, they claw the C36 to a stop from 70 mph in 163 feet. The car retains European Sport-spec spring rates but has upgraded anti-roll bars to increase roll stiffness by 35 percent in front and by 49 percent at the rear. Special AMG-tuned gas shock absorbers with degressive damping characteristics were installed to take the edge off bumps—like potholes and expansion joints—that pro­duce high damper-piston speeds. Despite the extensively modified pow­ertrain and firmer chassis, the C36 feels a lot like an authentic three-pointed-star car . . . albeit one that starts with a healthy bark and then struggles to run evenly for awhile, going rumpity-rump until it warms to a mildly surging idle. LOWS: Feels a bit numb at normal speeds. Costs $14,000 more than a BMW M3.As you get in, you see the telltale AMG doorsills, the initials on the 160-mph speedometer, the gray leather segment on the steering wheel, and “C36” embossed on the gear-selector knob. Apart from these clues, the interior is much as it would be in a C280, because U.S. customers get wood trim rather than the tacky fake car­bon-fiber surfaces European C36s are stuck with. The transmission selector is unchanged, jinking through the wiggly quadrant to find drive. As the car rolls off, it jiggles slightly on its springs, revealing a degree of firmness and roll control not found on the cooking C-class cars. Then, as you press the pedal floorward, the C36 thrusts forward with unmistakable energy, the exhaust growl full of deep staccato impulses from the bigger-bore cylinders. The acceleration figures are impres­sive, testifying to standstill-to-60 sprints in just 6.0 seconds and a standing quarter-mile time of 14.6 seconds at 97 mph. Top speed is limited to 155 mph, as we observed on the auto­bahn, although the elec­tronic watchdog on our U.S. car was slightly off and it averaged only 152 mph during top-speed tests. But that’s close enough, and more than most U.S. owners are ever likely to see. Anyway, the best thing about the new C36 is its torque. It’s a tide that picks the car up and washes it forward with relentless intensity. What more could you ask for? Not much, but we must confess that some of us found the car curiously schizophrenic. During relaxed motoring, you have the thick, syrupy veneer of Benz luxury, with its super-damped, slightly detached sense of isolation. Push through that and there’s fairly abrupt power delivery waiting beyond the slow throttle tip-in, and quick, decisive responses from the gumball tires just beyond the usual on-center steering dead zone. As the road bends ahead, you turn the wheel, and for a split-second nothing hap­pens. This despite a faster steering ratio than in the C280. Then the car turns in like a good sports sedan should. But sometimes it turns in more than you’d predicted from the slow off-center response, so you have to redraw your line. There’s a momentary absence of linearity, and it’s less than reas­suring. And yet, beyond the film of vagueness, there’s little to complain about. The C36 has bags of power and tons of grip. Once in the throes of a wide-open throttle blast, the car commu­nicates its intentions in no uncertain terms. And once you’ve swung into a bend and the car has taken a firm and determined set, the handling is wholly confidence-­inspiring. But still, there’s that moment of transition as the C36 wakes from its languor. This paradox arises, we think, because of the car’s parentage. Mercedes-Benz provided the layer of refinement found in all of its cars. AMG, on the other hand, prepares cars for competition and ampli­fies performance any way it can. For Klaus Ludwig, who drove a Mercedes-Benz in the ’94 German Touring Car Champi­onship, AMG produced enough to win. More C-class AMG Reviews From the ArchiveFor the rest of us, AMG has imbued the $51,750 C36 with the grunt to see off almost anything with four doors. And it has done so without harming the car’s social acceptability. While the aero body kit and big wheels speak of sportiness, they do it without demeaning the car’s image. Nor has any of the driveline or sus­pension work markedly compromised its versatility for everyday use. In that respect, the C36 is even better than a BMW M3. Perhaps because of that, it has less of the M3’s exuberance, expressive­ness, and communication. But for the kind of driver Mercedes is courting, it has about all it needs. VERDICT: So subtle the masses may miss the point. SpecificationsSpecifications
1995 Mercedes-Benz C36 AMGVehicle Type: front-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door sedan
PRICEBase: $51,750 (est.)
ENGINEDOHC 24-valve inline-6, iron block and aluminum head, port fuel injectionDisplacement: 220 in3, 3606 cm3Power: 268 hp @ 5750 rpmTorque: 280 lb-ft @ 4000 rpm 
TRANSMISSION4-speed automatic
CHASSIS
Suspension, F/R: control arms/multilinkBrakes, F/R: 12.6-in vented disc/10.9-in vented discTires: Bridgestone Expedia SO-1F: 225/45ZR-17R: 245/40ZR-17
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 105.9 inLength: 177.4 inWidth: 67.7 inHeight: 55.6 inPassenger Volume, F/R: 49/38 ft3Trunk Volume: 12 ft3Curb Weight: 3458 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 6.0 sec1/4-Mile: 14.6 sec @ 97 mph100 mph: 15.4 sec130 mph: 31.4 secRolling Start, 5–60 mph: 6.4 secTop Gear, 30–50 mph: 3.4 secTop Gear, 50–70 mph: 3.8 secTop Speed (gov ltd): 152 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 163 ftRoadholding, 300-ft Skidpad: 0.83 g 
C/D FUEL ECONOMY
Observed: 19 mpg
EPA FUEL ECONOMYCity/Highway: 18/22 mpg 
C/D TESTING EXPLAINED More

Much like a soccer league full of six-year-olds, everyone on this field is a winner regardless of the outcome. The 2023 Honda Civic Type R and the 2024 Acura Integra Type S both are fabulous front-drive performance machines—which makes sense, since the Venn diagram outlining the merits of the two models is practically a single circle. But there are no ties in love and war, and ultimately, one of these two fraternal twins must stand atop the other.In one corner, we have the OG, the Civic Type R. While the aesthetics aren’t as angry as they were in its first U.S.-bound iteration, the Civic’s 315-hp turbo four and standard adaptive suspension are poised to make short work of any twisties. If you desire a hint more livability, the Integra Type S is a slightly more upmarket offering, throwing in some popular creature comforts and a dollop of extra power. Let’s see if that’s enough to make a difference.2nd Place: 2024 Acura Integra Type SPutting the Integra Type S in second place was not an easy decision, but we have our reasons. There’s no denying that the Integra is the more livable hot hatch for its semi-stratospheric window sticker. Its interior materials are a bit nicer, with dashes of red leather playing well against the microfiber on the seats. There are additional fripperies that make daily driving more tolerable, too, like an ELS audio system, heated seats, and parking sensors.But the cabin has its downsides. The Acura’s rear end is a bit more rakish than the Honda’s, translating to slightly less rear headroom—our six-foot staffers’ noggins rubbed the headliner—as well as mildly worse rear visibility. The Integra (3212 pounds) is also a bit heavier than the Honda (3183 pounds), but the 29-pound variance should be compensated for by the Type S’s five additional horsepower, right?HIGHS: Creature-comfort cornucopia, extra-emotional exhaust, arguably angrier appearance.LOWS: A good bit more expensive, less rear headroom and visibility, extra power doesn’t equal extra performance.VERDICT: While the Integra Type S is still a fine choice, it doesn’t scratch every itch its sibling does.Wrong. Our testing recorded a 5.1-second sprint to 60 mph, not as quick as the Honda. The theme continued in the quarter-mile, where the Acura’s 13.7-second, 105-mph dash also earned the silver. Passing power lagged too, with the Type S requiring 10.7 seconds to go from 30 to 50 mph and 6.9 seconds to go from 50 to 70. One win for the Acura came in fuel economy: In 200 miles of 75-mph cruising, the Type S got 31 mpg, securing a victory by just 1 mpg.Part of the reason the Integra Type S’s turbocharged 2.0-liter four-cylinder makes 320 horsepower (rather than 315 as in the Type R) is its freer-flowing exhaust, which produces a burblier, cracklier note with the occasional overrun that nearly every driver preferred over the Honda’s more muted global-market-friendly tone. However, the additional sound-deadening material in the floor and firewall pretty much canceled out that extra verve; we whipped out the microphones and recorded an identical 73 decibels at 70 mph in both cars. At idle, the Integra and Civic are within a single decibel of each other.More on the Integra Type SOn the style front, most of us preferred the Acura’s aesthetics. The appliqué-style fender flares and sharply styled front fascia pick up some of the aggression that the 10th-generation Civic lost in the transition to the 11th, although Acura skipped a giant wing at home in favor of a more subtle lip spoiler. But at $51,995 to start, against the Honda’s $44,890, the Acura commands a $7105 premium that’s hard to swallow. As effusive as the praise was for the first hopped-up Integra we’ve seen in decades, nearly every entry in the logbook mentioned how five horsepower and a few creature-comfort upgrades did not justify the price delta. 1st Place: 2023 Honda Civic Type RAs good as we believe the Integra Type S is, we think the Civic Type R is just a hair better. It may be down on horsepower, it may have a big ol’ wing in the back, and it may leave our tuchuses a bit chillier in winter, but a big value play and a little on-paper dominance give the Civic the crown.Let’s hit the subjective points first. The Civic Type R’s aft half is just a bit taller, affording additional rear headroom and a slightly more usable rear glass. As with its predecessor, the new Type R’s wing is tall enough to avoid gumming up the driver’s rearview. The bright-red cloth front seats aren’t just a sloppy vampire’s dream; they’re far better suited to holding a driver in place during spirited maneuvers. We prefer the Integra’s shift knob, though, as the Honda’s all-metal affair can get mighty hot on a bright summer day.HIGHS: Several thousand dollars more affordable, S2000-style digital tach, better throttle response helps juice the numbers.LOWS: Doesn’t sound as good as the Integra, no heated seats, aluminum shift knob can overheat.VERDICT: A small edge in performance and a big edge in value give the Type R the nod.While nobody expressed a preference for the Civic’s less dramatic exhaust note, many preferred the Type R’s gauge cluster, which offers a cool S2000-style tachometer in +R mode (and Individual mode, if configured as such). Hit the sportiest mode in the Integra, and . . . the needles turn yellow. Most drivers didn’t mind the mildly stiffer Comfort mode, since performance is the whole point of the Type R badge. Besides, anyone can buy the Integra’s suspension control module (the retail cost is under $300) and swap it in for some extra softness if preferred. Regardless of which is cushier, when pushed to their limits, both cars held exactly 1.02 g’s on our 300-foot skidpad. The vehicles exhibit nearly the same braking power as well, requiring 153 feet to stop from 70 mph. At 100 mph, slamming on the center pedal brought the Type R to a stop in 308 feet, practically a rounding error away from the Type S’s 305-foot effort.Despite its very tiny power deficit, we believe the Civic’s mildly peppier throttle response gave it the edge during our testing. At 4.9 seconds to 60 mph, it’s two-tenths of a second quicker than the Integra, a difference that remains through the quarter-mile, where the Civic achieved a 13.5-second run at 106 mph. However, the Civic was the clear champion in passing; the Honda needed just 9.4 seconds to go from 30 to 50 mph, trouncing the Integra’s 10.7-second result. In our 75-mph highway fuel-economy evaluation, the Civic returned 30 mpg, just behind the Integra but 2 mpg better than the EPA highway estimate.More on the Civic Type RAnd there you have it. When it comes to front-wheel-drive performance cars, an extra dash of power and a few more points in livability make the Integra Type S an extremely compelling option. But we don’t think those things necessarily make it better than the Honda Civic Type R, especially when the Honda has a slight edge in performance and a big edge in value.SpecificationsSpecifications
2024 Acura Integra Type SVehicle Type: front-engine, front-wheel-drive, 4-passenger, 4-door hatchback
PRICE
Base/As Tested: $51,995/$53,785Options: carbon-fiber spoiler, $950; Platinum White Pearl paint, $600; premium carpet floor-mat set, $240
ENGINE
turbocharged and intercooled DOHC 16-valve inline-4, aluminum block and head, direct fuel injectionDisplacement: 122 in3, 1996 cm3Power: 320 hp @ 6500 rpmTorque: 310 lb-ft @ 2600 rpm
TRANSMISSION
6-speed manual
CHASSIS
Suspension, F/R: struts/multilinkBrakes, F/R: 13.8-in vented disc/12.0-in discMichelin Pilot Sport 4S265/30ZR-19 (93Y) DT1
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 107.7 inLength: 186.0 inWidth: 74.8 inHeight: 55.4 inPassenger Volume, F/R: 54/43 ft3Cargo Volume: 24 ft3Curb Weight: 3212 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 5.1 sec100 mph: 12.3 sec1/4-Mile: 13.7 sec @ 105 mph130 mph: 22.8 secResults above omit 1-ft rollout of 0.3 sec.Rolling Start, 5–60 mph: 6.0 secTop Gear, 30–50 mph: 10.7 secTop Gear, 50–70 mph: 6.9 secTop Speed (mfr’s claim): 167 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 153 ftBraking, 100–0 mph: 305 ftRoadholding, 300-ft Skidpad: 1.02 g
C/D FUEL ECONOMY
Observed: 23 mpg75-mph Highway Driving: 31 mpg75-mph Highway Range: 380 mi
EPA FUEL ECONOMY
Combined/City/Highway: 24/21/28 mpg
—

2023 Honda Civic Type RVehicle Type: front-engine, front-wheel-drive, 4-passenger, 4-door hatchback
PRICE
Base/As Tested: $44,890/$45,345Options: Championship White paint, $455
ENGINE
turbocharged and intercooled DOHC 16-valve inline-4, aluminum block and head, direct fuel injectionDisplacement: 122 in3, 1996 cm3Power: 315 hp @ 6500 rpmTorque: 310 lb-ft @ 2600 rpm
TRANSMISSION
6-speed manual
CHASSIS
Suspension, F/R: struts/multilinkBrakes, F/R: 13.8-in vented disc/12.0-in discMichelin Pilot Sport 4S265/30ZR-19 (93Y) DT1
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 107.7 inLength: 180.9 inWidth: 74.4 inHeight: 55.4 inPassenger Volume, F/R: 55/44 ft3Cargo Volume: 25 ft3Curb Weight: 3183 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 4.9 sec100 mph: 12.1 sec1/4-Mile: 13.5 sec @ 106 mph130 mph: 22.6 secResults above omit 1-ft rollout of 0.3 sec.Rolling Start, 5–60 mph: 5.9 secTop Gear, 30–50 mph: 9.4 secTop Gear, 50–70 mph: 6.4 secTop Speed (mfr’s claim): 169 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 153 ftBraking, 100–0 mph: 308 ftRoadholding, 300-ft Skidpad: 1.02 g
C/D FUEL ECONOMY
Observed: 20 mpg75-mph Highway Driving: 30 mpg75-mph Highway Range: 370 mi
EPA FUEL ECONOMY
Combined/City/Highway: 24/22/28 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

The Concours d’Elegance in Monterey, California, has seen more unveilings than the dressing room of a bridal shop, and as the 2023 Monterey Car Week recedes in the rearview, we thought we’d look even further back at a notable launch of the past. In 2007, Callaway Cars revealed the C16 Speedster, a uniquely styled, 700-hp variation on a C6 Corvette. The Speedster’s $350,000 list price when new (over $515,000 in today’s money), not to mention its roofless, fair-weather mission, go some way toward explaining its unintended rarity: only one sold, ever. The coupe and roadster versions went on to sell in the predicted double-digit volumes. But their creator, Ely Reeves Callaway III—speaking only weeks before his recent death—described the Speedster to its new owner as a certified money loser for the company. Still, it nevertheless remained, in his estimation, “the coolest car” his crackerjack outfit ever built. Michael Aaron|Car and DriverBased in Old Lyme, Connecticut, Callaway first caught the public’s eye in the late 1970s by selling atypically well-engineered turbocharger kits for the E21 BMW 3-series, followed in 1983 by a batch of twin-turbo Alfa Romeo GTV6s authorized by the factory. His fledgling firm most famously grew its business by amping up Corvettes and other GM hardware. It made headlines in 1987 with twin-turbo Corvettes, including a Sledgehammer model that could—in 1988, mind you—top 250 mph. Astounding performance figures aside, the firm’s enduring commitment to quality and attention to detail was so great that, for a time, General Motors authorized the sale of Callaways at selected Chevy dealers, honoring in full the factory warranty on the modified cars. By 1994, Callaway-constructed SuperNatural Corvette race cars were achieving podium finishes at LeMans, while GT3 racing versions of the C7 Corvette raced competitively into the 2020s.Named after his trailblazing father, Ely Reeves Callaway Jr.—a successful textile executive and vintner who, late in life, launched the world’s best-selling line of golf clubs—Callaway III would become one of America’s most successful aftermarket tuners, though he’d never cotton to the term. “We don’t call ourselves a tuner,” he told Road & Track. “A tuner takes an aggregate of parts that already exist, bolts them on the automobile, and calls it a customization. Everything we make is made specifically for the car. And we manufacture it ourselves.”Michael Aaron|Car and DriverThe C16 is perhaps one of the greatest proofs of this self-assessment, for it is far removed from any regular production Corvette. When it was purchased new by Ken Lingenfelter, a wealthy collector who that same year acquired his distant cousin John’s Lingenfelter Performance Engineering (another sophisticated and well-regarded not-a-tuner of GM iron), the C16 had seen but 600 miles pass beneath its bespoke carbon-fiber/magnesium wheels, carbon ceramic brakes, and adjustable coil-over Eibach suspension when it was put up for auction on Bring a Trailer in 2022. Failing to sell at a high bid of $252,000, it returned to Lingenfelter’s collection. The following year, a well-heeled collector who chooses to remain anonymous but whose Euro-centric garage residents tend to wear Porsche and Ferrari badges, found himself strangely beguiled by the Speedster. This despite his wryly noting that “It’s as practical as a chocolate teacup.” A deal was struck, details of which he preferred not to disclose. The car went to Connecticut’s Miller Motorcars for a light reconditioning, and two weeks before Callaway’s unfortunate passing, the Speedster’s current owner dined with the maestro, where he learned of the affection its creator still held for the car. Designed by Callaway’s de facto in-house designer, Montreal-based and U.K.-trained Paul Deutschman, every one of the Speedster’s fiberglass body panels was new. Still in mint condition—finished in azure blue, with a contrasting silver hood bulge and seats covered in high-grade dark blue German leather with contrasting Alcantara inserts—the vehicle reads as elegant and tasteful despite an inherent extrovert swagger highlighted by its conspicuous lack of side glass and a proper windshield. The current owner added this stick-on mirror, the original design assuming that at 210 mph, it didn’t matter what was behind you. Jamie Kitman|Car and DriverThe Corvette origins of its dash and switchgear are at once obvious yet easily forgotten, with every interior panel flawlessly trimmed in matching leather and reassembled for minimum squeaking and creaking, which it’s fair to say marks a change from most Corvettes of that era. The view under the hood is similarly clean, neatly plumbed, and professional.In place of a windshield, low Lexan “wind deflectors”—sourced from a period BMW motorcycle—provide the faintest modicum of protection from passing stones and birds, while fairings behind driver and passenger house a pair of custom carbon-fiber helmets. Though the wind deflectors are acceptable at low speed, Callaway recommended helmets “for more spirited motoring.” Sitting motionless in the C16, which now sports a hair over 800 miles on its odometer, we are enchanted. It’s exceedingly pleasant, open yet somehow cosseting, and as we pause before taking off, one can’t help admiring again the fit and finish. At 40 mph down a country lane, such thoughts recede as the intoxicating whine of the supercharger begins to make itself known, along with the massive supply of torque (660 pound-feet at 4750 rpm) and, again surprising us, the complete absence of rattles and squeaks. Coupled with a ride quality of supreme suppleness, this is a speedster that does not seem to want to beat up its occupants. However, this perception doesn’t last long.Built-in helmets are a brilliant addition to a car with no windshield. Unfortunately, we didn’t know how to release them from their holders. Jamie Kitman|Car and DriverPicking up the tempo, we experiment further with the well-weighted, six-speed manual gearbox (with this much torque and 700 supercharged and intercooled horsepower from its 378-cubic-inch V-8, any gear will do), though the wind is quickly becoming a factor. Pleasant at low speeds and not unbearable at modest ones, it gets steadily more punishing. And as we approach highway speeds, it becomes way more brutalizing than you’re likely used to. At 60 mph, we want to reach for a helmet, but as the new owner hadn’t yet figured out how to open the rear clamshell to release the noggin protectors from their semi-exposed cubbies, we find ourselves forced to obey the local speed limit. Not exactly what one has in mind with a car that ran 212 mph from the factory, but not unwise given its rarity and value. We conclude that the Callaway C16 Speedster is a machine whose appeal was, like its essence, simultaneously great and minimal, with a promise both finite and unlimited. We reckon that these are paradoxes that, had a worldwide economic meltdown not occurred at the time of its launch, surely more than one person would have liked to ponder. Preferably while wearing a full-face helmet. Contributing EditorJamie Kitman is a lawyer, rock band manager (They Might Be Giants, Violent Femmes, Meat Puppets, OK Go, Pere Ubu, among his clients past and present), and veteran automotive journalist whose work has appeared in publications including _Automobile Magazine, Road & Track, Autoweek, Jalopnik, New York Times, Washington Post, Politico, The Nation, Harpers, and Vanity Fair as well as England’s Car, Top Gear, Guardian, Private Eye, and The Road Rat. Winner of a National Magazine Award and the IRE Medal for Investigative Magazine Journalism for his reporting on the history of leaded gasoline, in his copious spare time he runs a picture-car company, Octane Film Cars, which has supplied cars to TV shows including The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel, The Americans, Halston, and The Deuce and movies including Respect and The Post. A judge on the concours circuit, he has his own collection with a “friend of the friendless” theme that includes less-than-concours examples of the Mk 1 Lotus-Ford Cortina, Hillman Imp, and Lancia Fulvia, as well as more Peugeots than he is willing to publicly disclose. More