Reviews

The SUV has evolved toward the ordinary car and spawned the crossover. But the regular hatchback has also moved in the other direction. The Audi A3 only comes to the United States as a dinky, slow-selling sedan. But in Europe a mid-cycle facelift is being accompanied by the launch of the A3 Allstreet, a four-door wagon with raised ride height and crossover-inspired plastic body cladding. Audi says it is designed to deliver an “SUV-like driving experience combined with high functionality”—a claim that, frankly, sounds closer to a threat than a promise. It’s also one we were curious to examine, naturally. Audi says that the A3 Allstreet will not come to the States, so this is definitely forbidden-fruit territory. We can also report that the Allstreet does indeed deliver a slightly taller and marginally less precise driving experience than that of the regular A3. The Allstreet’s name and chunky design cues are clearly inspired by Audi’s long-running A4 Allroad and A6 Allroad dynasties. But as the Allstreet moniker hints, this is designed for the urban jungle rather than the actual wilderness. A suspension lift of a mere 0.6 inch, paired with larger wheels, grants the Audi a not-exactly-Jeep-worthy 1.2 inches of ground clearance over the standard A3 hatchback, and it only comes with front-wheel drive. Two powertrains are available in Europe: a gasoline-fed turbocharged 1.5-liter inline-four and a 2.0-liter inline-four turbodiesel, both rated at an identical 148 horsepower. A six-speed manual is standard with the gas engine, a seven-speed dual-clutch automatic optional. The diesel is automatic only.We drove the 1.5-liter equipped with the dual-clutch automatic, its power output earning it 35 TFSI branding, on a route around Munich that included country roads, a dirt track, and also a stretch of derestricted autobahn. American buyers definitely should not feel sad that they’re missing the chance to buy the smaller gasoline engine. Refinement is limited, with a level of vibration at idle that made the Allstreet feel as if it had three cylinders rather than four. Despite what Audi claims to be smarter gearbox software, the automatic often felt hesitant when starting off from rest, something we’ve noticed in other Volkswagen Group dual-clutch products, although shifts once on the move are smooth and rapid. The 1.5-liter engine’s low-end torque is strong, helped by a 48-volt hybrid system using a starter-generator that can add up to 12 horsepower and 36 pound-feet of assistance, with the claimed peak of 184 pound-feet coming at just 1500 rpm. This is good, because the engine quickly becomes loud and gruff when pushed toward its 6000-rpm redline. We didn’t confirm Audi’s claimed 8.4-second 62-mph time, nor did the Allstreet encourage us to.Other parts of the dynamic experience impressed more. The Allstreet’s higher suspension features softer springs and dampers than the regular A3, changes that have taken the edge off the standard car’s busy ride over rougher surfaces. Over the few really big bumps we could find on Bavaria’s generally smooth road network, the Allstreet felt a little underdamped, especially if asked to change direction at the same time. But it coped well with urban speed bumps and also a dirt track, and cruising refinement felt pretty much identical to that of the regular A3, even when legally pushing past 100 mph on the autobahn. Some steering precision has been lost with the raised suspension, but response is still keen and grip levels are more than suited for the performance on offer. The Allstreet also previews some changes we can expect to be applied to the U.S.-market A3. Digital instruments are now standard on all European versions, along with a 10.1-inch touchscreen. Audi has responded to criticism of the grayness and gloominess of the A3’s cabin with a colorful makeover that brings adjustable cabin lighting with 30-color LED strips on the doors and across the top of the dashboard, plus the option of matching backlit door panels. It certainly feels more cheerful, although there are still some hard, cheap-feeling plastics lower down in the cabin. The A3’s center console has also been redesigned with a new gear selector for the automatic gearbox—an EV-style direction switch—along with what will be, in Europe, a standard wireless charging pad with two USB-C charging ports. There are two more USB-Cs in back, where space still feels tight for adults. The A3 also marks a new departure for Audi in Europe, with the arrival of what are described as “function on demand” subscription options. Cars are built to one hardware specification, with owners then able to pay extra to unlock functionality, either for a limited period or permanently. Controversially, one of these will be smartphone integration to allow for Android Auto or Apple CarPlay to run on the Audi’s operating system, a function that—in Europe as in the States—is pretty much universal on every car with a touchscreen display. Audi will charge $12 to unlock this for a month or $114 for a year—Audi wouldn’t give a price for permanent activation. Other functions kept under a digital lock include Audi’s built-in navigation system, adaptive cruise control, automatic high-beam headlights, and two-zone climate control (with single zone standard for misers). Another strange option, one that doesn’t appear to cost extra, is a configurable pattern for the A3’s daytime running lights. The 24 LED panels above the headlights can be switched between four different configurations, reducing the risk of the social embarrassment that would come from turning up at an event to find another A3 owner wearing the same pattern. We were delighted to see that one of these makes the A3 look as if it is wearing a set of evil cartoon eyebrows, something we are taking as proof of the existence of the German sense of humor. More on the A3 AllstreetThe A3 Allstreet starts at $29,750 before sales tax in Germany—with the need to pay more, of course, if you want it to talk to your phone. We’ll find out which revisions will make it to the U.S.-market A3 and S3 sedans later in the year—here’s hoping the pay-as-you-go features aren’t among them.Our man on the other side of the pond, Mike Duff lives in Britain but reports from across Europe, sometimes beyond. He has previously held staff roles on U.K. titles including CAR, Autocar, and evo, but his own automotive tastes tend toward the Germanic: he owns both a troublesome 987-generation Porsche Cayman S and a Mercedes 190E 2.5-16. More

From the April 1987 issue of Car and Driver.The Lincoln Town Car may be a brontosaurus in today’s car market, but as recent­ly as ten years ago it was the quintessential expression of the modern American car. Of course, not all American cars of the pe­riod were as expensive as the Lincoln, but most of them were designed and built very much like it. Their immense steel bodies were mounted with rubber isolators on steel-girder frames. Their front wheels were independently suspended by un­equal-length control arms, while their rear wheels were attached to and driven by heavy live axles located by angled links. Their motive energy was supplied by big American V-8s, churning through three-­speed automatic transmissions. At 219 inches long, 78 inches wide, and 4110 pounds heavy, the Town Car is a di­nosaur by current measures, but in the heyday of the big American car, it barely qualified as full-size. Back then, a real lux­ury car was at least a foot longer, a couple inches wider, and half a ton heavier. When the big Lincoln was downsized to its cur­rent incarnation in 1980, Ford planners considered the move necessary but risky. As if the Town Car weren’t big enough, it’s deliberately styled to look even bigger than it is. Its sharply chiseled edges and stem-to-stern character lines convey an impression of rolling majesty. A slight rounding of its corners two years ago did little to soften its land-yacht look. If you think a car so far out of step with the automotive trends of the moment can’t be much longer for this world, you’re dead wrong—as was nearly every­one just a few years ago, when the demise of traditional American iron was expected imminently. All the doomsaying, of course, was based on the steadily rising price of gasoline, which our most respect­ed economists projected would cost somewhere between three and five dollars a gallon by now. Had their forecasts been accurate, we could talk about automobiles of the Town Car’s stripe only in the past tense. But gas costs only about 90 cents a gallon these days, and many cars that burn lots of it are thriving. Big old rear-drive cruisers like the Town Car and the Cadil­lac Brougham, along with such lower-rent variants as the Ford LTD Crown Victoria, the Mercury Grand Marquis, and the Chevrolet Caprice, are selling better than anyone dared predict at the turn of the decade. The Town Car’s sales have risen from 31,000 in the dark days of 1981 to a record of more than 119,000 last year. That’s enough to keep the Town Car factories running at capacity, and Ford has no plans to mess with the big Lincoln’s surprising current success. Although the Continental is being redesigned for 1988, Ford is expected to let the Town Car con­tinue in its present form for several more years. Ford would be foolish to do other­wise, for the Town Car puts a great deal of money into the corporate till. It has been estimated that Ford makes a profit of $5000 on every Town Car it sells. If that’s true, the Town Car netted Ford about $600 million last year—about a quarter of the corporation’s earnings in its last fiscal year. Car enthusiasts also benefit from the Town Car’s strong sales, for it’s such con­tributions to the corporate treasury that pay the freight for the development of Tauruses, Mustang GTs, and Thunder­bird Turbo Coupes. Think about that the next time you’re inclined to dismiss the Town Car as a throwback. One reason for the Town Car’s popu­larity is that, despite its traditional design, it’s less flagrantly wasteful than its prede­cessors were. To begin with, it’s powered by a 4.9-liter V-8 with computer-con­trolled port fuel injection and ignition timing, not a 7.5-liter monster that slurps fuel through a huge four-barrel carbure­tor. In addition, it has a four-speed auto­matic transmission with a lockup torque converter, low-rolling-resistance tires, a drag coefficient of less than 0.50, and nearly 1000 pounds less road-hugging weight than its forebears. The Town Car is still no fuel miser, but for a luxury car its efficiency is at least respectable. Indeed, with an EPA city fuel-economy figure of 17 mpg, the Town Car is on par with the much smaller, front-drive Cadillac Sedan de Ville and not substantially thirstier than any luxomobile. Performance, of course, is a different matter. The Town Car is no hot-rod Lin­coln. The achievement of 60 mph from a stop takes 11.2 seconds, the quarter-mile requires 18.2 seconds, and no more than 104 mph is available at the top end. These figures compare favorably with those of the current big Cadillacs, front- and rear­-drive alike, but most imported luxo­cruisers can easily put the Town Car’s per­formance to shame. In its favor, the Lincoln does provide impeccable drivabil­ity. Even after a cold start, the engine de­livers a perfectly smooth stream of power, and the transmission never hiccups. Another virtue of the Town Car is its cavernous interior. According to the SAE’s interior-volume measurements, it’s the most capacious sedan on the market. Three-abreast seating, front and rear, is reasonably comfortable, and both bench­es offer so much legroom that we found ourselves checking to see whether Ford had slipped us a stretched model by mis­take. The Lincoln’s trunk is also enormous, though its irregular shape and full-­size spare tire make it less useful than its 22-cubic-foot volume implies. If you think luxury is directly proportional to size, the Town Car was built for you.That goes double if you want your car to isolate you from road imperfections and other real-world annoyances. Be­cause of the Town Car’s antiquated body­-on-frame design, road impacts are soft­ened both by suspension bushings and by rubber body mounts. Consequently, less ride noise gets into the passenger com­partment than is generally the case with contemporary unitized designs. And the Town Car’s extensive sound insulation keeps other outside noises at low levels. The road seems a faraway place from the Town Car’s interior. Unfortunately, the big Lincoln’s steer­ing seems equally removed from the pave­ment. It offers virtually no on-center feel. Move the wheel an eighth of a turn from straight ahead and it will just stay there if you remove your hand. Further, the effort at the steering wheel bears no relation to the cornering exertions of the front tires. Progress on a highway requires a never-ending series of small corrections to herd the Town Car between the boundaries of a single lane. Otherwise, however, the big Lincoln’s road manners are not bad at all. We ex­pected it to bob and weave over large bumps, but its shock absorbers are firm enough to inhibit extraneous movement. The Town Car isn’t exactly snubbed down, but neither is it like the wallowing wonders of yesteryear, which should have been supplied with Dramamine as stan­dard equipment. The Town Car even behaves surpris­ingly well when pushed in corners. Its self-sealing Uniroyal Tiger Paw Plus white­walls don’t have much grip, and the car lists like a torpedoed ocean liner, but the suspension’s neutral balance keeps the front tires from peeling off of their rims. In turns the Lincoln actually responds to commands from the helm reasonably well; certainly no normal maneuvers will tax its capabilities. But such considerations are beside the point for most luxury-car buyers. The Town Car sells not because it offers a lot of room and drives fairly well but because it’s the classic American luxury cruiser. Its status is conferred not by any hidden tech­nical excellence or particularly elaborate construction but by its high price tag and the sheer lavishness of its design. It’s big and conspicuously fancy. It’s a rolling symbol of its owner’s financial success and high station in life. Inside as well, the Town Car reflects its owner’s self-image. Our full-boat test car, a Cartier Designer Series edition, was adorned with special Oxford Gray cloth upholstery with gray leather trim, superplush 30-ounce carpeting, acres of fake wood veneer, several Cartier emblems, and extravagantly styled door pulls, buttons, and switches. Subtlety is not part of the look. Lincoln’s designers want no one to mistake the Town Car’s mission.More Luxocruiser Reviews From the ArchiveIn addition to its expensive surface treatments, the Town Car is equipped with every automotive labor-saving device imaginable. Electronic helpers automati­cally release the parking brake and lock the doors when you put the car into gear, turn your headlights on and off at dusk and dawn, switch between high and low beams in response to traffic conditions, and dim your inside rear-view mirror when traffic approaches from behind. The driver has to do little more than sit back and bask in the opulent surroundings. All this luxury costs a pretty penny. In a world of $50,000 German imports, how­ever, paying 30 grand for a fully outfitted Town Car doesn’t seem unreasonable, es­pecially if you want a big hunk of car for your cash. If it were our money, numerous other cars would put the Lincoln far down our shopping list, but we’re pleased that not everyone shares our priorities. Thanks to the many Americans whose conceptions of automotive grandeur are well satisfied by the Town Car, Ford can design and build the cars that the rest of us dream about. CounterpointWe at C/D don’t drive cars like the Town Car very often. That’s probably because there aren’t very many left. For one thing, I know of no other car that runs without an engine. Even when the Town Car’s radio is turned way down, you can’t hear a thing from its engine compartment; the car just moves with an eerie quietness. Another thing it doesn’t have is steering—though if you turn that big round thing that sticks out from the dashboard, the car will eventu­ally follow the motion of your index fin­ger, more or less. The Town Car’s supersilky ride makes the experience even worse. Sitting at the wheel of a Town Car is like spending time in an isolation ward.There are buttons on the dash to call up all sorts of useless data, but helpful information, like engine rpm, is no­where in sight (you see, I told you there was no engine!). The buttons must be there to entertain the driver as the car drives itself down the road. There are still plenty of buyers who love the Town Car’s comfiness, but I’m one of those people who think it’s crazy to drive 60 mph in your easy chair. —Arthur St. AntoineI, for one, am glad that the Ford Motor Company is still making a car such as this big Lincoln. This relic from the past, which oozes over the road like so much prehistoric lava, and with about as much control over its direction, brings me the deepest of joy in reminding me that it represents the last of its kind—because there aren’t any others like it waiting on tomorrow’s produc­tion on-ramp to come mincing down the pike. Ford has outgrown its over­grown past.The Town Car is all the bad things that Ford itself no longer is: obtuse, un­gainly, and unsure of its footing. No other current Ford product behaves with such imprecision. No other would dare to. This car is meant for those whose roadgoing expectations are low because they don’t know or don’t care that even a luxury automobile can pro­vide a genuine sense of coordination. Some say that coordination doesn’t count in a luxury car. I say, seek the tru­er luxury of roadgoing control, which exists in infinitely greater measure in even the meanest of Ford’s Escorts. —Larry GriffinThe Town Car is a holdover from the old days, all right, and that’s just why I like it. It’s the last gasp of an America that once was and never will be again. This is the way we used to build them when we could do anything better than anyone else—when we put a man on the moon first, when “made in Japan” meant “junk,” when bigger was always better, and when Detroit really was the automotive capital of the world. The Town Car is as American as a six-foot­-four Texan in a ten-gallon hat, and I smile every time I slide behind the im­posing wall of the dashboard in its cav­ernous interior. Surprise of surprises, the latest Town Car isn’t a bad car to drive. Yes, its hood stretches past the horizon, but maneu­vering in tight quarters is half the fun of this car. Its ride is surprisingly taut—no more wallowing, waddling, or carom­ing, even at faster than grandma speed. But its steering, ugh. I didn’t know they still make cars with steering more limp than a Regis Philbin joke. This is one bit of nostalgia I could do without. Even so, I hope Ford keeps making the Town Car for a good, long time. I’d hate to lose the perfect ride for trips down memory lane. —Rich CepposSpecificationsSpecifications
1987 Lincoln Town CarVehicle Type: front-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 6-passenger, 4-door sedan
PRICE
Base/As Tested: $27,550/$29,369Options: electronic instrument cluster and trip computer, $822; JBL sound system, $506; automatic load leveling, $202; self-sealing tires, $200; automatically dimming inside mirror, $89
ENGINEpushrod V-8, iron block and heads, port fuel injectionDisplacement: 302 in3, 4942 cm3Power: 150 hp @ 3200 rpmTorque: 270 lb-ft @ 2000 rpm 
TRANSMISSION4-speed automatic
CHASSIS
Suspension, F/R: control arms/rigid axleBrakes, F/R: 11.1-in vented disc/10.0-in drumTires: Uniroyal Tiger Paw Plus Royal Seal M+S215/70R-15
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 117.3 inLength: 219.0 inWidth: 78.1 inHeight: 55.9 inPassenger Volume, F/R: 60/56 ft3Trunk Volume: 22 ft3Curb Weight: 4110 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS30 mph: 3.5 sec60 mph: 11.2 sec1/4-Mile: 18.2 sec @ 76 mph90 mph: 28.9 secTop Gear, 30–50 mph: 5.2 secTop Gear, 50–70 mph: 8.0 secTop Speed: 104 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 209 ftRoadholding, 300-ft Skidpad: 0.68 g 
C/D FUEL ECONOMY
Observed: 15 mpg
EPA FUEL ECONOMY
Combined/City/Highway: 17/27 mpg 
C/D TESTING EXPLAINEDCsaba 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 WRL racing, as well as ministering to his 1965 Jaguar E-type, 2017 Porsche 911, 2009 Mercedes SL550, 2013 Porsche Cayenne S, and four motorcycles—when not skiing or hiking near his home in Colorado.  More

From the June 1989 issue of Car and Driver.The charge in this case is aggravated cuteness with intent to commit market domination. Disturbingly frequent in to­day’s sport-utility market, this offense can be blamed in large part on the Suzuki Sam­urai. When it first wheezed its way onto the scene, the Samurai single-handedly rein­vented its class. Who could have predicted that a stiffly sprung, underpowered, em­bryonic Jeep clone would survive more than a year in the sport-utility niche—let alone set a new sales record every 10-day reporting period? Of course, the Consum­er Reports hoo-ha [the magazine deemed the Samurai “not acceptable”] temporarily slammed the brakes on the Samurai’s rising sales curve, but by then the damage was already done. The market had realized that cute­ness, with a dash of macho thrown in to cut the sweet taste in your mouth, sells. And sells big.This phenomenon, it seems, is only a reflection of a national shift in conscious­ness. The traditional macho image has been torpedoed and replaced by a non­threatening, idealized “nice” persona. Consider one of our nation’s biggest moneymaking role models: Tom Hanks, the lovable geek who couldn’t (or wouldn’t want to) punch his way out of a kin­dergarten brawl. Even Arnold Schwarz­enegger has quit ripping people’s hearts out with his bare hands and is doing com­edy with a four-foot-tall sidekick. What’s going on here, anyway? It seems that we are in the dawn of the age of “nice.” What exactly is “nice,” you ask? Well, a Ford F-350 dualie pickup is not nice. It’s brutal. A Range Rover, on the other hand, is very nice. A Lambor­ghini LM002 is not at all nice, but a Suzuki Sidekick with a candy-striped can­vas top and a surf rack is exquisitely nice. In other words, a “nice” truck is the equivalent of a guy who never misses a date with his Soloflex machine but does origami to relax. Look at the name of this new Isuzu sport-utility vehicle: “Amigo.” It’s a nice, friendly name, isn’t it? That should tell you something right off. Isuzu didn’t decide to call its new off-roader “the Eviscerator,” did it? Nor did it choose something along the lines of Sturm Pan­zer, Wild Hog, Dirt Ruler, Desert De­stroyer, Dune Whacker, Killer Drone, or anything else that could possibly be construed as not being nice. But take a look at the Amigo’s shape. This is not the body of a 98-pound weak­ling. It’s got what weight lifters call a “ripped” look—lots of clearly defined bulges. The Amigo has huge fender flares and chunky B-pil­lars that are about 50 percent wider than they need to be. One of the Amigos we drove even had humongous, yard-high Bridgestone Desert Dueler off-road tires. Okay, “Desert Dueler” may not sound all that nice, but it’s a smoke­screen. Deep down, this is a nice truck.By now you should realize that the Amigo is the truck equivalent of Tom Selleck, a big hunk of a guy who could take you apart without breaking a sweat but who’d rather barbecue or take a med­itative walk on the beach. This is the age of muscle and fitness, and looks are everything. You don’t have to play the part, but you sure have to look it. The Amigo certainly looks the part. True to the doctrine of brawny exteri­ors and Twinkie fillings, however, the Amigo is only an average performer. The base engine for the two-wheel-drive model is a carbureted 2.3-liter four-cylin­der rated at 96 hp. Optional in the two-­wheel-driver and standard in the four­wheel-drive edition is a port-injected 2.6-liter four-banger that puts out 120 hp. Neither of these powerplants will dispel the notion that this is a nice truck for nice people. Our test Amigo was a four-­wheel-drive version with the 2.6-liter four-cylin­der engine and a five-speed manual transmission (the only gearbox available on any Amigo). So equipped, it acceler­ated from 0 to 60 mph in a leisurely 15.3 seconds and reached a top speed of only 89 mph. But that’s okay: nice buyers don’t go rat-racing around the neighbor­hood or squeal rubber or set a blistering pace on the highway. The Amigo comes with two front seats and an optional rear bench seat that ups the passenger capacity to four. It also of­fers several neat rear-hatch configura­tions. And this brings us to a point that requires some clarification. As delivered, the Amigo is considered a pickup truck by the feds and the import-tax collectors. And, in fact, the Amigo lacks a cover for its rear hatch when it arrives at the dealer. Without a cover, of course, the Amigo would turn into a wading pool during the first rainstorm, so Isuzu sells a canvas top and a hard-plastic hatch cover as dealer options—mandatory options unless you’re fond of wading pools. The two-seater’s Hatchgate option in­cludes a plastic lid that covers what would normally be the pickup bed. The lid has a lock to secure whatever you stow back there. The storage area is plenty roomy, though like a pickup-truck bed it’s devoid of carpeting or other padding. The storage area is double-walled, how­ever: loose bowling balls will prang the hell out of the inner skin, but the dents won’t show on the outside. That’s nice. The four-seater, which Isuzu consid­ers an option package and not a separate model, can be equipped only with the re­movable canvas-nylon top. (The soft top also fits the two-seater.) So outfitted, the Amigo transforms itself into a nice, nifty­-looking convertible.To us, the four-seat, soft-top Amigo is the hot setup. The extra passenger-car­rying capacity is a big bonus, and the soft top is easy to snap on and off. (The two­-door’s plastic Hatchgate can only be re­moved with tools.) Unfortunately, the rear bench seat isn’t the quick-detaching kind. The seat bolts into place, and re­moving it requires time, tools, and sweat. We think any vehicle that purports to be as nice as the Amigo should have a plug-in rear seat. That would be really nice. The Amigo is available in two trim lev­els: S and XS. The S package includes re­clining bucket seats, tinted glass, and a full-size spare mounted on the tailgate. The XS package includes those items and also adds a spare-tire cover, a ta­chometer, an adjustable steering column, and in­termittent wipers.The interior, which is available only in black with gray trim, is a pleasant place. It’s dressed in honest-looking plastic, it looks clean, and it’s comfortable. The seats are handsome and supportive, the instrument panel is neat and logical, and the thick steering wheel is, well, nice. Spend some time in the cabin and the word “civilized” will keep coming into your mind. Our only major complaint is that the billboard-sized B-pillars consid­erably restrict rear-quarter visibility. Compared with its closest competitors in the macho-cute sport-utility niche, the Suzuki Sidekick/Geo Tracker twins, the Amigo is a monster. It’s 5.9 inches wider and 21.7 inches longer (25.6 inches for the XS 4WD model), and it sits on a wheelbase that’s 5.1 inches longer. The Amigo also offers an extra inch and a half of ground clearance. The wider stance and longer wheel­base mean that the Amigo’s ride and handling are more carlike than the Side­kick/Tracker’s. The Amigo’s ride is sup­ple over all but seriously choppy pave­ment, and the suspension handles most paved surfaces with ease. With only anemic engine choices avail­able, the Amigo doesn’t offer many per­formance giggles per mile—but there are compensations. The ability to enjoy open-air touring is one of the biggest pluses. And with its 9.5-inch ground clearance, four-wheel-drive system, and 21.9-gallon fuel tank, the Amigo XS 4WD can reach places where the search par­ties will never find you. More on the Isuzu AmigoAlthough we aren’t experts at dune booming, our off-road experience with the Amigo was positive. The 146 pound­-feet of torque produced by the 2.6-liter four may not seem like much, but com­bined with the torque multiplication of the two-speed transfer case it’s enough to float the Amigo over medium-to-large hills, trample over rocky washes, and clamber up serious grades. The manually locking front hubs are only a minor inconvenience. Isuzu has done a masterful job packag­ing and marketing the Amigo. As a fun sport-utility vehicle, this brawny-looking machine clearly ranks as the standard-bearer in its class. Granted, the Amigo is down on power. But for the money ($8999 for the base 2wd edition, $12,969 for the full-tilt XS 4WD), it offers much more room and heft than the Tracker or the Sidekick. The Amigo has the looks, the versatility, and the price to make it one of the most attractive sport-utility ve­hicles on the market. To put it another way, it’s really, really nice. SpecificationsSpecifications
1989 Isuzu Amigo XS 4WDVehicle Type: front-engine, rear/4-wheel-drive, 2-passenger, 2-door pickup
PRICE
Base/As Tested: $13,228/$14,653Options: air conditioning, $750; sound system, $385; manual sunroof, $250; floor mats, $40
ENGINE SOHC inline-4, iron block and aluminum head, port fuel injectionDisplacement: 156 in3, 2559 cm3Power: 120 hp @ 5000 rpmTorque: 146 lb-ft @ 2600 rpm 
TRANSMISSION5-speed manual
CHASSIS
Suspension, F/R: control arms/rigid axleBrakes, F/R: 10.4-in vented disc/10.4-in discTires: Michelin XC All terrain M+S
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 91.7 inLength: 168.1 inWidth: 70.1 inHeight: 65.7 inPassenger Volume, F/R: 54 ft3Cargo Volume: 31 ft3Curb Weight: 3440 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS30 mph: 4.0 sec60 mph: 15.3 sec80 mph: 37.8 sec1/4-Mile: 19.6 sec @ 68 mphTop Gear, 30–50 mph: 18.8 secTop Gear, 50–70 mph: 28.4 secTop Speed: 89 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 216 ftRoadholding, 300-ft Skidpad: 0.69 g 
C/D FUEL ECONOMY
Observed: 16 mpg
EPA FUEL ECONOMYCity/Highway: 16/19 mpg 
C/D TESTING EXPLAINED More

“We’re going to pump—[clap!]—you up!” One imagines Hans, Franz, and all their pals at AMG reacting thusly to the new Mercedes-Benz CLE coupe, which debuted last summer in four-cylinder CLE300 and six-cylinder CLE450 form. After a muscle-building regimen at AMG HQ in Affalterbach, the result is the Mercedes-AMG CLE53. The vertical-slat grille may be the first-noticed telltale that this is the AMG version, but the more transformative elements are the swollen front and rear fenders that accommodate similarly wider tracks, by 2.3 inches in front and 3.0 in back, compared to the regular CLE coupe. Additionally, the AMG-specific front fenders allowed the CLE53’s front wheels to move 0.4 inch forward, giving the car a fractionally longer wheelbase. The lower front air intake also grows larger, the reshaped hood incorporates a functional vent, sill extensions protrude from the lower body, there are quad exhaust outlets, and the decklid sprouts a small ducktail spoiler. The optional AMG Performance Studio package adds a rear diffuser, a larger rear spoiler, and tweaks to the front fascia. The sum total of the changes gives this car some visual menace, and the available matte paint finish really helps that vibe.What Motivates the CLE53The CLE53 doesn’t follow the lead of the Mercedes-AMG C63 sedan, which employs a highly complex turbocharged four-cylinder plug-in-hybrid powertrain. Instead, it sticks with a turbocharged and supercharged 3.0-liter inline-six. As in the CLE450, the turbo six is aided by a 48-volt hybrid system, but the AMG version kicks things up a notch. In the CLE53, it’s energized with 443 horsepower and 413 pound-feet of torque—with an overboost function adding another 30 pound-feet for up to 10 seconds. Those are hearty increases over the Benz variant (375 horses, 369 pound-feet) and also represent a bump of 14 horses over the previous “53” models. The extra output comes courtesy of a new electrically driven turbocharger that increases boost pressure and provides the overboost function. Additional changes include new piston rings and revamped inlet and outlet channels.While the rival BMW M4 offers a manual transmission, AMG has no interest in manuals, and there isn’t one here. Shifting duties are handled by an AMG-modified nine-speed automatic that, unusually for AMG, retains a torque converter. Even without a clutch pack, however, it still incorporates a Race Start function, which is accessible in Sport mode and above, simply by holding the brake and mashing the gas. All-wheel drive is standard, as it is in all CLE models, and AMG’s rear-biased system can decouple the front axle and send 100 percent of the grunt rearward. Spec the AMG Dynamic Plus package, and you get a Race drive mode in addition to Comfort, Sport, Sport+, Individual, and Slippery. Within Race, a Drift function can be unlocked, though it’s a multistep procedure. The package also includes adaptive engine mounts and red brake calipers. All CLE53s have the same brake hardware, however, with 14.6-inch vented front discs squeezed by four-piston calipers and 14.2-inch vented rear discs. An AMG Driver’s package available in other markets raises the speed limiter from 155 mph to 168 mph, but it won’t be offered in the U.S.Driving the CLE53The boosted six fires up without the throat-clearing of AMG’s V-8s, and even with the active exhaust switched into its more vocal program, there’s only the faintest burble when lifting off the throttle. Still, the engine sounds great as it climbs the tach, and we don’t miss the theatricality—although some might. The powertrain is plenty strong, with AMG quoting a 4.2-second zero-to-60-mph time and 4.0 seconds with Race Start. That strikes us as conservative; we expect a number in the high threes. Related StoriesWe drive a nearly endless series of curves climbing up and down the mountains in Tenerife, Spain, with zero runoff and only occasional guardrails, and the CLE53’s helm provides a welcome measure of feedback, more notably in Sport and Sport+. This marks a real improvement over the standard CLE coupe. We’d wish only for a greater buildup of effort when winding on more lock. Powering out of slow corners, the more rearward torque bias in the sportier drive modes also can be felt, and the standard rear-wheel steering, which turns the rear wheels opposite the fronts by up to 2.5 degrees at speeds up to 60 mph, sharpens cornering response. AMG fits the CLE53 with steel springs and adaptive dampers, which vary in stiffness based on the drive mode. Firm body control is to be expected in an AMG product, and you’ll find that here. Stray from Comfort mode, however, and you’ll also feel some ride harshness.The car we drove had the optional AMG Performance Seats, which are firmly padded and narrow at the hips, but they do hold you in place—and without the sadism of the most extreme BMW M chairs. The driver looks out over an AMG-specific hood with twin raised bulges. In tight corners, you find yourself peering around the beefy A-pillars, and as you might expect, rearward visibility through the dramatically sloping back glass is not great. The AMG-specific steering wheel includes two dials to switch among the overall drive modes or individual parameters (exhaust, suspension, etc.). The CLE53’s 12.3-inch instrument screen allows the driver to keep tabs on additional performance metrics compared to the regular CLE, but the 11.9-inch center touchscreen with the third-gen MBUX system is essentially the same as in the Benz coupe and C-class sedan. This infotainment can’t match the ease of use of BMW’s 4-series, and the touch-sensitive buttons and sliders are not ideal during high-intensity driving.Currently, this is the sole Mercedes-AMG two-door other than the SL and AMG GT sports cars. Looking at competing coupes, the CLE53 lines up nicely against the Audi RS5 but isn’t as powerful as the BMW M4, nor is it as hardcore as the M4’s CS and Competition variants. However, while this is the first time AMG laid its hands on the new coupe, it may not be the last—we anticipate a CLE63 variant will join at some point. A more steroidal AMG CLE may be in the offing, but the gym-toned CLE53 successfully brings a dose of the brand’s characteristic swagger to Benz’s mid-size two-door.SpecificationsSpecifications
2024 Mercedes-AMG CLE53Vehicle Type: front-engine, all-wheel-drive, 4-passenger, 2-door coupe
PRICE (C/D EST)
Base: $80,000
ENGINE
supercharged, turbocharged, and intercooled DOHC 24-valve inline-6, aluminum block and head, direct fuel injectionDisplacement: 183 in3, 2999 cm3Power: 443 hp @ 6100 rpmTorque: 443 lb-ft @ 2200 rpm
TRANSMISSION
9-speed automatic
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 113.2 inLength: 191.0 inWidth: 74.2 inHeight: 56.5 inPassenger Volume, F/R: 55/37 ft3Trunk Volume: 15 ft3Curb Weight (C/D est): 4400 lb
PERFORMANCE (C/D EST)
60 mph: 3.8 sec100 mph: 9.8 sec1/4-Mile: 12.2 secTop Speed: 155 mph
EPA FUEL ECONOMY (C/D EST)
Combined/City/Highway: 23/20/28 mpgJoe Lorio has been obsessed with cars since his Matchbox days, and he got his first subscription to Car and Driver at age 11. Joe started his career at Automobile Magazine under David E. Davis Jr., and his work has also appeared on websites including Amazon Autos, Autoblog, AutoTrader, Hagerty, Hemmings, KBB, and TrueCar. More

From the May/June issue of Car and Driver.To all our beloved readers who’ve written to kvetch that we don’t cover affordable cars or vehicles that real people buy, this one’s for you.It doesn’t get any more mainstream than this group right here. The word “automobile” once conjured images of bestselling mid-size sedans such as the Toyota Camry, the Honda Accord, and the Ford Taurus, but now this is what we see on the road. The Toyota RAV4 overtook the Camry as the bestselling Toyota in 2017, one year after the Honda CR-V passed the Accord, and the Taurus quit the U.S. market in 2019. Today, Americans buy more compact SUVs than any other type of vehicle.The segment’s volume leader, the Toyota RAV4, is represented here by the tough-looking TRD Off-Road model. Next in ubiquity, as you probably could have guessed, is the Honda CR-V. We requested an EX-L, which is the highest trim with the turbocharged 1.5-liter inline-four, rather than the more powerful hybrid powertrain that enlivens the CR-V’s top trim levels. The Nissan Rogue also populates highways and byways just about everywhere, and here, it’s dolled up in the top Platinum trim. Rather than compare the sort-of-off-roader Bronco Sport, we requested the considerably more popular Escape, which arrived equipped to go after our fun-to-drive score with a 250-hp engine in the ST-Line Elite trim. The recently redesigned Kia Sportage seemingly couldn’t decide what to wear, so it combined rugged and fancy with its X-Pro Prestige duds. The Volkswagen Tiguan arrived carrying just a whiff of sportiness in the form of the SEL R-Line model. Mazda is represented by the newer CX-50 rather than the smaller CX-5, and it was a nattily attired Premium Plus, packing the turbocharged 2.5-liter inline-four under the hood. Finally, the relative newcomer Dodge Hornet appeared with its base powertrain (rather than the available plug-in hybrid) but with the Blacktop and Track Pack options bringing the signature Dodge ‘tude. Taking a lesson from the warmhearted television fare of our youth, we stopped at eight, because eight is enough. We realize some players in this vast field are missing, most notably the Chevrolet Equinox/GMC Terrain, the Hyundai Tucson, and the Subaru Forester. All are on the eve of redesigns or refreshes, so they sat out this round. And Mitsubishi wasn’t able to rustle up a non-plug-in Outlander. Excepting the mid-spec Honda, at $37,965, the vehicles on hand ended up in a fairly tight price range of $40,030 to $44,844—just below the most recent new-car average of $47,401. That’s keepin’ it real, people. Our herd assembled, we headed to the South of France. Ha! No. We went to the most real state we could think of: Ohio. Part of America’s Heartland, it also happens to be right next to Michigan. This is the true story . . . of what happened . . . when eight normcore SUVs . . . were let loose . . . in the real world.8th Place: Nissan RogueClimb into the Nissan Rogue Platinum for the first time, and you may be wowed. Caramel-colored leather—real and synthetic—appears on the instrument panel, the doors, and the sides of the center console. The seats have a quilted stitch pattern, and there’s an attractive mix of trim materials. Ultrawide-opening doors aid access to the roomy rear seat, which had the most amenities, with seat heaters, climate controls, A/C vents, and window shades. The infotainment looks good, retains a few buttons, and nestles into the dash, providing a padded rest for your hand.HIGHS: Interior looks like luxury, welcoming rear seat, lots of equipment.LOWS: Resistant to having fun, numb and aloof steering, falls far short of its EPA numbers.VERDICT: First impressions aren’t everything.We wish Nissan had put the same level of effort into the Rogue’s major controls. Several drivers called out the numb, woolly steering, and more objected to the spongy brake pedal. The comfort-biased suspension makes for smooth highway sailing, but don’t ask much more of this chassis. The Nissan suffers from significant body roll in faster corners and brake dive in hard stops, and it just seemed easily discombobulated. Then there’s the powertrain, where Nissan strays from the established formula, but the novel approach doesn’t bring much payoff. Nissan boldly employs only three cylinders, whereas the others in this contest rely on four. Granted, the Rogue’s turbocharged engine is no smaller than the Honda CR-V’s turbo at 1.5 liters, and it features Nissan’s variable-compression-ratio technology (it ranges from 8.0 to 14.0:1). The resulting output is 201 horsepower and 225 pound-feet of torque. When it comes to powertrains, this test was bifurcated into the fast group (Dodge, Ford, Mazda) and the slow group (everyone else). Of the latter, Nissan’s turbo three and CVT combo was—just barely—the quickest to 60 mph at 8.0 seconds. But once you’re cruising along at a steady speed, the turbo three suffers from sluggish throttle response—note the Rogue’s last-place showing in the 30-to-50-mph and 50-to-70-mph acceleration tests (the latter tied with the Sportage). At least this engine is well muted when giving its all—it’s the quietest of the group, in fact, so there’s no offensive droning.Andi Hedrick|Car and DriverWith the fewest cylinders to feed, the Nissan boasts the best EPA numbers, which look good on the window sticker. But this hardworking triple fell 5 mpg short of its EPA combined estimate in our hands, landing midpack at 26 mpg.Overall, the Rogue is just fine if you don’t look past the surface, but others here have more depth.2024 Nissan Rogue Platinum AWD201-hp turbocharged inline-3, continuously variable automatic, 3729 lbBase/As-Tested: $41,590/$43,375C/D TEST RESULTS60 mph: 8.0 sec1/4-Mile: 16.1 sec @ 87 mphBraking, 70­–0 mph: 177 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.83 g75-mph Highway Driving: 31 mpg7th Place: Kia SportageWill it surprise you to learn that, aside from the mid-trim Honda, this top-spec Kia had the lowest as-tested price? Or that it came with a raft of features and amenities? Those include heated and ventilated front seats, a heated steering wheel, a panoramic sunroof, a 360-degree camera, blind-spot monitoring, and Kia’s Highway Driving Assist—a luxury-grade haul for just a hair over $40,000.HIGHS: Wallet-friendly price, all the bells and whistles, quiet cruising.LOWS: Oh so slow, middling fuel economy, longest stopping distance.VERDICT: How slow can you go?The exterior is edgy, if polarizing, while the screentastic dash conveys a note of modernity inside. Once you get past the pointless home screen on the center display, you’ll find a pleasing array of audio and navigation information. But no one liked the ridiculous dual-mode haptic buttons and dial (also found in other Kias) that switch between controlling climate and audio functions, all but guaranteeing you’re always in the wrong mode. We did appreciate the plentiful stowage, and the sliding and reclining rear seats offer an extra measure of versatility. Splashes of piano black and the seats’ novel stitch pattern divert attention from the liberal use of hard and cheap-looking plastic elsewhere—perhaps the reason why this cabin smells like a dime-store shower curtain.None of us were overly impressed with the Sportage dynamically, with drivers calling it out for excessive body roll and brake dive. The X-Pro trim’s 17-inch wheels and 65-series all-terrain tires smother bad pavement, but they also cling to the skidpad with only 0.81 g and contribute to a 182-foot stop from 70 mph, the longest in this comparison test.The biggest issue, though, is in the engine room. Our Sportage had the base engine, and the naturally aspirated 2.5-liter four-cylinder struggled like an air-cooled VW bus on uphill grades. The gutless powertrain also requires a lot of planning for passes. Although the 187 horsepower and 178 pound-feet of torque are only three horsepower and one pound-foot in arrears of the CR-V’s engine, the Kia’s 9.1-second 60-mph time is a full second slower than the Honda’s. And since you have to work the engine so hard, there’s no payoff in fuel economy, with the Kia’s 25-mpg observed average trailing all, save for the much-quicker Mazda and Dodge. Relief for this biggest pain point, however, isn’t far away. We’d invite you to check out the quicker and more economical hybrid and plug-in-hybrid Sportage models.2024 Kia Sportage X-Pro Prestige AWD187-hp inline-4, 8-speed automatic, 3737 lbBase/As-Tested: $39,365/$40,030C/D TEST RESULTS60 mph: 9.1 sec1/4-Mile: 16.9 sec @ 84 mphBraking, 70­–0 mph: 182 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.81 g75-mph Highway Driving: 31 mpg6th Place: Toyota RAV4With a portfolio of off-road favorites such as the Tacoma, the 4Runner, and the Land Cruiser, it’s no wonder Toyota would want to spread some of that rugged image to the RAV4. Our test example was decked out in TRD Off-Road trim, which, in addition to a slightly tougher appearance, brought softer suspension tuning (springs and dampers), 18-inch wheels with Falken Wildpeak A/T Trail 01A tires, roof rails, and a front skid plate. HIGHS: 4Runner-wannabe rugged looks, plenty of space for people and their stuff, observed fuel economy tops the field.LOWS: Engine strains and sounds coarse doing so, off-road kit is a hindrance on-road, interior is more practical than pretty. VERDICT: A Toyota that will please people who like Toyotas.That equipment would likely give the RAV4 greater off-pavement capability than the rest of this bunch, a boon for those who go off-road. But most drivers don’t, and we didn’t either. And on asphalt, the all-terrain tires do the handling no favors, as steering feel is largely AWOL, and the Toyota posted the lowest skidpad grip at just 0.79 g. The tall sidewalls provide an extra measure of cushion over potholes, however, and the RAV4 also exhibits good body control, considering the TRD Off-Road setup. Superfluous running boards, $620 for the pair, were an obstacle to step over on each entry and exit (the TRD Off-Road’s ride height isn’t nearly great enough to require them, and they’d just be a hindrance on the trail). Inside, the rubberized vinyl, chunky HVAC knobs, and thick door pulls set the style tone. Copious storage space enhances the practical vibe, as does the straightforward switchgear. Our testers deemed the driver’s chair to be about average, while a low cushion hurt rear-seat comfort, although space is more than adequate.”Just adequate” describes the RAV4’s 2.5-liter engine, at least in city and suburban traffic. The farther you push the pedal, though, the more gutless the four-banger feels, as it makes more noise than thrust. At 78 decibels, the RAV4 tied the Mazda for loudest under acceleration, but its engine note is far more irritating. At least this engine is paired with an eight-speed automatic rather than a CVT. The Toyota’s 60-mph time (8.3 seconds) and quarter-mile effort (16.5 seconds at 87 mph) were slower than all but the Kia’s. Despite working hard, this naturally aspirated four-banger squeezes a lot of miles out of each tank of gas. At 29 mpg, the RAV4’s observed fuel economy led the field, and its 32 mpg in our 75-mph highway test was also the most efficient, tied with the Escape.Top-drawer fuel economy is historically a Toyota trait, as is a practical interior, and the trail-ready getup doesn’t seem like an artifice. Add presumed reliability, and the RAV4’s combination of virtues explains its popularity but doesn’t push it to the front of this pack.2024 Toyota RAV4 TRD Off-Road203-hp inline-4, 8-speed automatic, 3719 lbBase/As-Tested: $39,645/$44,844C/D TEST RESULTS60 mph: 8.3 sec1/4-Mile: 16.5 sec @ 87 mphBraking, 70­–0 mph: 176 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.79 g75-mph Highway Driving: 32 mpg5th Place: Dodge HornetStarting our drive on the cratered roads of southeast Michigan put the Hornet in the worst possible light. We hadn’t gone 1000 yards before slamming into a pothole that we feared might’ve bent a rim. All the way to our first driver-change point outside Toledo, the Dodge was repeatedly racked by broken pavement. Flicking through the stupefying amount of information available in the digital instrument cluster and the center display (which includes peak g, turbo psi, and torque output), we thought we might have found the cause: tire pressures that were 43–44 psi. It turns out that the recommended cold pressure is 42 psi, so we concluded that the Hornet is supposed to drive this way. HIGHS: Hemi-like acceleration, sporty interior environs, hot-hatch persona. LOWS: Hemi-like fuel consumption, painful over potholes, cramped back seat.VERDICT: The small crossover for those who really want a Challenger.It’s also supposed to drive lively, affecting the persona of a racy hot hatch rather than a workaday SUV. And it does. Look no further than its 268-hp turbo four, the most powerful here—and that’s the base engine. The Hornet took the checkered flag in the 60-mph sprint with a time of 5.7 seconds, and it also hustled through the quarter-mile in 14.5 seconds (just a tick behind the Escape) at 95 mph. Power delivery isn’t perfectly linear at low speeds, but that’s perhaps to be expected, as is the snarling exhaust note. It contributed to a 73-decibel din on the highway, where the speedy Dodge also had a greater-than-average thirst for unleaded.The steering is hyperresponsive, and the Hornet wants to dive through corners. Even with its dampers in Sport mode, the Hornet feels taller than a real hot hatch when the road gets twisty, but its 0.85 g of grip is the best here, aided by the most athletic footwear in the test (Z-rated Michelin Pilot Sport All Season 4 tires). The red-accented cabin features heavily bolstered, body-hugging seats that hold you in place for all the action. Most drivers praised them, although some found they had to adjust the seating position awkwardly high to see the gauges, putting their noggin close to the ceiling. There was unanimous agreement about the rear seat, which is seriously cramped. And the luggage compartment is the smallest in the test. The highly configurable infotainment looks great but can be laggy, and the tiny touchpoints are too small a target to hit when on the move. The cabin also has some ergonomic oddities, like an audio volume roller tucked behind the shifter and a wiper stalk whose logic is inscrutable. The Hornet, though, is unbothered by such mundane concerns. 2024 Dodge Hornet GT Plus AWD268-hp turbocharged inline-4, 9-speed automatic, 3844 lbBase/As-Tested: $37,995/$44,725C/D TEST RESULTS60 mph: 5.7 sec1/4-Mile: 14.5 sec @ 95 mphBraking, 70­–0 mph: 177 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.85 g75-mph Highway Driving: 28 mpgCar and Driver4th Place: Ford EscapeIn the 1973 film White Lightning, bootlegger Gator McKlusky (played by Burt Reynolds) pilots a specially prepared Ford Custom 500 whose plain brown wrapper conceals a hotted-up engine within. Our Ford Escape wore a similar cloak of anonymity with its almost intentionally anodyne styling, but it too was packing under the hood.HIGHS: Overachieving powertrain, surprising fuel economy, well-laid-out infotainment.LOWS: Depressing interior environs, wonky brake-pedal action, exterior is a style-free zone. VERDICT: All ate up with motor.Boasting the model’s top-of-the-food-chain engine, a turbocharged 2.0-liter inline-four, this Ford has 250 horsepower and 280 pound-feet of torque. That was enough to vie with the high-strung Dodge in acceleration: The Escape was the quickest off the line (to 30 mph) and the quickest to triple digits—in between, its 5.8-second time to 60 is just 0.1 second in arrears of the Hornet. From 30 to 50 mph and again from 50 to 70 mph, the Ford is in front, besting all comers. Away from the drag strip, the Escape has plenty of easy oomph, and throttle response and power delivery are more linear here than in the Hornet. There is a Sport mode (buried three layers into the touchscreen), but it seemed only to lock out top gear, so it’s not something you’ll want to access anyway.Despite the powertrain’s hustle, the Ford is a suburban softy at heart, as it showed on the winding, diving, roller-coaster-like two-lanes in southern Ohio, where it gamely went along with the crowd but did so with a grimace and gritted teeth. Or maybe that was the driver. Either way, blame the weirdly springy steering effort and brakes that suffered from both a squishy pedal and grabby response. The convex-feeling seat cushion adds to the awkwardness.The Escape is far more at home in the suburban slog or motoring along bombed-out urban freeways. Its comfortable-riding suspension shrugged off the slings and arrows of northern Ohio’s and southeast Michigan’s most battered pavement. Oh, and over the course of our test, the Escape also posted the second-best gas mileage, just 1 mpg behind the far-slower RAV4.This generation of Escape has been around since 2020 but boasts plenty of screen acreage inside, part of a 2023 update. The digital instrument cluster is a basic affair with limited configurability, but the well-designed central infotainment display is able to show multiple functions on its home screen. Look away from glowing displays, however, and the Escape cabin could be something from the Big Three bankruptcy era, as Ford appears to have wrung every nickel of cost from this black-grained-plastic interior. The materials are starkly below the rest of the field, and this isn’t exactly a field of Bentleys. But call us Gator, because if we were chasing moonshiners in Arkansas, this low-key Ford might be our first choice.2023 Ford Escape ST-Line Elite AWD250-hp turbocharged inline-4, 8-speed automatic, 3697 lbBase/As-Tested (2024 model): $39,455/$43,355 C/D TEST RESULTS60 mph: 5.8 sec1/4-Mile: 14.4 sec @ 97 mphBraking, 70­–0 mph: 166 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.82 g75-mph Highway Driving: 32 mpg3rd Place: Honda CR-VSitting in the Honda CR-V, there’s lots to like. Thin pillars and large windows enhance visibility and overall well-being. The driver’s seat earned the best score for comfort, and the rear seat took top honors for space and was judged the most comfortable. Additionally, the CR-V has the roomiest cargo hold with rear seats up or folded. Although our EX-L was far from top spec, the door panels and dash look rich, with interesting details. The steering wheel feels great, although the thinly padded door armrests do not. Three knurled-edge knobs look and feel like quality, but the Honda was not immune from minor fit issues. We don’t ding the CR-V for its physical gauges—we actually kind of prefer them—but there’s no charm in the puny infotainment screen and its small touchpoints. HIGHS: The ace of space, pleasing cabin, charming chassis. LOWS: The lack of pace, missing features, smallish infotainment display.VERDICT: Much of what we love about the Accord, in SUV form.Steering that’s absurdly light at parking-lot speeds quickly firms up once you’re on the move. When the road gets twisty, the helm’s natural feel makes guiding the Honda an almost unconscious exercise. The CR-V feels unflappable, even though its 0.82-g skidpad result was unremarkable. The brake pedal is similarly well tuned, and the brakes hauled the CR-V down from 70 mph in just 163 feet, the best in this test. The contrast with the Escape (from which our drivers migrated as we moved through the cars in alphabetical order) was striking.Accelerating onto the freeway, however, cues the sad trombone. A 5-to-60-mph charge down the on-ramp takes 9.0 seconds. Honda’s pint-size 1.5-liter musters 190 horsepower and 179 pound-feet of torque and is lashed to a CVT. The CVT’s faux shifts mitigate elastic throttle response somewhat, but this droning powertrain underserves this nicely tuned chassis. However, observed fuel economy, at 28 mpg, was just 1 mpg shy of the top-ranking Toyota.Honda doesn’t offer its top-drawer model with a nonhybrid powertrain, and that held the CR-V back a bit in the final tally, as the Honda’s missing features outweighed the $2065 savings compared to the richly equipped Kia.Of course, the CR-V offers more expensive models that are better equipped, and they feature a higher-achieving hybrid powertrain that both accelerates quicker and returns better fuel economy. But we wanted this test to focus on nonhybrids, so that’s not what we had here.2024 Honda CR-V EX-L AWD190-hp turbocharged inline-4, continuously variable automatic, 3614 lbBase/As-Tested (2024 model): $37,510/$37,965C/D TEST RESULTS60 mph: 8.1 sec1/4-Mile: 16.3 sec @ 89 mphBraking, 70­–0 mph: 163 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.82 g75-mph Highway Driving: 31 mpg2nd Place: Volkswagen TiguanTired of flailing in the U.S. market, Volkswagen finally decided to give the people what they want. And VW figured that what Americans want is really big SUVs. Therefore, the Tiguan—measured from nose to tail—is the biggest SUV here (just as the Atlas is among the biggest in its segment and the Taos in its). It’s big enough to squeeze in a third row; without that option, our test example swallowed 11 carry-on-sized boxes with the seats up (just one less than the CR-V) and 25 with the rear seats folded (tying the Rogue for third place behind the CR-V and the Sportage). Certainly, the cabin feels roomy, an impression bolstered by expansive glass. VW has also learned that Americans don’t always demand the finest materials, so there are lots of hard-edged surfaces in here, although the SEL does get real cowhide on the seats. VW has gone all in on screens, and while the central display works well, the new haptic climate controls are a step back ergonomically. There are more haptic buttons on the steering wheel. What we really wish, though, is that someone could snap Wolfsburg out of its obsession with touch sliders.HIGHS: American-size interior, Korean-level value, German-correct suspension tuning.LOWS: The lowest horsepower meets the highest curb weight, fussy touch controls. VERDICT: Designed for America, with just a hint of the Old World.The Tiguan is the only member of our octet to weigh in on the high side of two tons, against which Volkswagen’s turbo four brings the fewest ponies to bear (184). Its 221 pound-feet of torque, however, arrives at a low 1600 rpm. That helps the Tiguan move easily through traffic, albeit with some turbo lag. Still, an 8.2-second 60-mph time is the result of too many pounds and not enough horses. Despite its heft, the Volkswagen slightly overachieved in fuel economy, returning 30 mpg in our 75-mph test (against a 29-mg EPA highway rating) and 26 mpg overall (beating its EPA combined estimate by 2 mpg).If the Tiguan shows any evidence of VW’s roots, it’s in the chassis tuning. The suspension is taut and well controlled—dare we say Germanic? A vestige of old VW. And the Tiguan’s 0.84 g of skidpad grip tied the CX-50 for second place. Good sightlines and a chair with enough lateral support to hold you in place help the driver pilot this SUV confidently on winding roads. It’s too bad about the overboosted steering, which feels like another sop to our market.VW has also learned that we love a good bargain. The Tiguan’s as-tested price is within a few hundred dollars of the Kia’s, and that’s with a similarly deep roster of equipment. All of this combines for a well-rounded package, enough to give the Tiguan a podium finish.2024 Volkswagen Tiguan SEL R-Line AWD184-hp turbocharged inline-4, 8-speed automatic, 4003 lbBase/As-Tested: $40,305/$40,700C/D TEST RESULTS60 mph: 8.2 sec1/4-Mile: 16.3 sec @ 85 mphBraking, 70­–0 mph: 181 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.84 g75-mph Highway Driving: 30 mpg1st Place: Mazda CX-50The compact SUV isn’t typically a species that gets by on its looks, but the Mazda CX-50 almost could. Longer, lower, and wider than its CX-5 sibling, the CX-50 is model handsome with its scowling visage and long-hood profile that convincingly ape an upscale, rear-wheel-drive layout (it’s a ruse; the CX-50 has a transverse engine, just like the others here). Only the fake rear fascia vents and the thick band of black plastic along the lower body torpedo its invitation to the Museum of Modern Art. HIGHS: Fetchingly wagon-like proportions, robust turbo four, ride and handling in harmony. LOWS: Cavelike rear seat, not-so-great gas mileage, infotainment struggles. VERDICT: A top-tier powertrain meets a top-tier chassis.Whereas the others serve up a new-car smell that’s a mix of off-gassing plastics and glue, the smooth-grained hides on the CX-50’s dash and door panels give the Mazda’s high-design interior the aroma of a fine-shoe store. We’re also charmed by the physical switchgear and the real gearshift, but we just can’t follow the obtuse logic of Mazda’s rotary controller for the infotainment system. And despite being more than five inches longer than the CX-5, the Mazda’s dark rear seat was deemed cavelike and not particularly comfortable, and its luggage compartment was smaller than the group average.Start driving, though, and the CX-50 quickly elbows its way back to the front of the pack. The steering’s heft seems like an artificial concoction, but the three-spoke wheel is deliciously precise and the responses predictable. Skidpad grip, at 0.84 g, is just 0.01 g behind the Dodge. The tightly wound suspension manages to rein in body motions effectively without transmitting undue harshness over broken pavement. This is the best-realized chassis in the group, and it lends the Mazda an air of upmarket refinement that’s missing among the rest.With a relatively large 2.5-liter inline-four, the Mazda doesn’t rely heavily on turbo boost. Throttle response and power delivery are smooth and linear. Despite 256 horsepower and a best-in-test 320 pound-feet of torque, the Mazda trailed the Ford and the Dodge in most acceleration tests but was solidly in the upper echelon. Although they worked harmoniously together, the biggest-displacement engine and the transmission with the fewest ratios were not a winning pair at the gas pump; the CX-50’s 23-mpg average brought up the rear in this measure.Despite falling short in some practical measures, the Mazda’s combination of a solid powertrain and winning chassis made it the vehicle we most wanted to drive and live with. And the plush, high-quality interior is a fine place to spend time, even when sitting in traffic. The real world can often be unglamorous, but the Mazda proves that the right compact SUV can elevate the mundane.2024 Mazda CX-50 Turbo Premium Plus256-hp turbocharged inline-4, 6-speed automatic, 3864 lbBase/As-Tested: $44,675/$44,675C/D TEST RESULTS60 mph: 6.4 sec1/4-Mile: 14.9 sec @ 92 mphBraking, 70­–0 mph: 167 ftRoadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.84 g75-mph Highway Driving: 29 mpgCar and DriverJoe Lorio has been obsessed with cars since his Matchbox days, and he got his first subscription to Car and Driver at age 11. Joe started his career at Automobile Magazine under David E. Davis Jr., and his work has also appeared on websites including Amazon Autos, Autoblog, AutoTrader, Hagerty, Hemmings, KBB, and TrueCar. More

Ultra-high-performance SUVs have never been more popular—think Aston Martin DBX (697 horsepower), Cadillac Escalade V (682 horses), Dodge Durango SRT Hellcat (710 horsepower), BMW XM Label Red (738 horses), and Ferrari Purosangue (715 horsepower), not to mention fully electric entrants such as the Rivian R1S (835 horses), Lotus Eletre R (905 horsepower), and the Tesla Model X Plaid (1020 horses). The latest addition to this elite group is the 789-hp Lamborghini Urus SE. This new plug-in-hybrid variant of the freshly facelifted Urus fuses a 612-hp twin-turbocharged 4.0-liter V-8 and a 189-hp electric motor sandwiched between it and the transmission. Maximum torque is restricted to 701 pound-feet in order to preserve the eight-speed automatic gearbox. This awesome punch of torque is spread evenly from 1750 rpm all the way to 5750 rpm.The PHEV drivetrain is closely related to the 729-hp Porsche Cayenne Turbo E-Hybrid, which costs $148,550 before options. For about $90K more, Lambo used to sell us the base 657-hp Urus S, but as of May, both the S and the even pricier, harder-core Performante will be replaced by the SE hybrid, which is expected to cost around $275,000. That’s a lot of coin, but bear in mind the V-12-engine rival from the other side of the Italian motor valley carries an even more outrageous $398,350 sticker.We drove the PHEV Lamborghini in minus-13-degree temperatures in Lapland, where pre-heating the battery overnight was a necessity. Due to space limitations, the lithium-ion battery sandwiched between the cargo floor and the electronically controlled limited-slip rear differential delivers a Car and Driver–estimated 21.8 kilowatt-hours, which should amount to roughly 30 miles of zero-emission driving range—in normal temperatures. (In contrast, the 31.8-kWh battery in the Range Rover Sport P550e should amount to a more useful 50 miles.)”The e-motor transforms the character of the car,” states chief project engineer Stefano Cossalter. “It speeds up the throttle response, and it provides that wow-effect immediate kick in the back we know from potent EVs.” Pumping up the action at the word go are 356 pound-feet of torque from the e-motor. A moment later, the feisty V-8 muscles in with even stronger dynamic empathy. Although the SE version carries a claimed substantial 661-pound weight burden, it can storm from zero to 62 mph in a claimed 3.4 seconds—gaining one-tenth over the Urus S but losing one-tenth to the Performante. The top speed is 194 mph. According to the Sant’Agata grapevine, in a couple of years, we can expect an even brawnier, more aggressively tuned, and allegedly marginally lighter 900-hp Urus Superveloce. This last-hurrah version should crack the 200-mph mark and shave a couple more tenths off the acceleration time. The fully electric Urus replacement based on the group’s same components set as the 2028 Lanzador was recently pushed back to late 2029.Since the Swedes don’t grit or salt their roads except on steep inclines, from October to April the whole country is a white and gray drifter’s paradise. Although traction control, stability control, and all-wheel drive have taken the edge off traditional lurid oversteer antics, cornering grip still is a tricky variable on winding roads glazed with black ice or dusted with fresh snow. Lock the Urus’s Tamburo drive-mode selector in EV Drive, and the e-motor integrated in the transmission will power the Urus quietly at up to 81 mph, operating both axles when required. “The SE is not a dedicated track weapon like the Performante,” says the chief technical officer, Rouven Mohr. “Instead, this vehicle is all about the flow. The smooth and seamless integration of mechanical and electric torque makes it easy to drive fast, easy to drift, and easy to control at all times.”Out of the grand total of 789 horsepower, more than 20 percent is generated by the e-motor. Although the mix keeps changing, every step on the loud pedal summons the underlying extra e-power, which is diligently vectored side to side and front to rear, depending on the drive mode. Flick the toggle to Corsa, and the most radical of four new Electric Performance Strategies will duly light up the rear tires while diverting just enough grunt to the fronts to help straighten the line past the apex. At least that’s the theory. On the curvy test track milled onto a frozen lake near Arvidsjaur, the longest slide would invariably turn into an even longer counterslide because when stability control is sound asleep, all four 23-inch Pirelli Sottozeros are free to spin ferociously on the freshly roughened ice, while torque vectoring and the four-wheel steering are working overtime. Although we’re doing between 50 and 90 mph depending on radius, surface, and confidence, there is not a trace of angst bubbling under because the Urus SE keeps its balance with uncanny poise, panache, and precision.Structured like a Rolodex, the Tamburo in-dash selector now offers 10 dynamic modes. The new additions are the aforementioned EV Drive, along with Hybrid, Performance, and Recharge. Active in Strada, Sports, Corsa, and Neve, the latter pumps fresh energy into the battery until it is 80 percent full. There is, however, no boost button or downshift paddle. All it takes to tack your passenger to the backrest of the bucket seat is a hard hit on the accelerator in Performance or Corsa. Trying not to grin ain’t easy, because the effect is sensationally surreal and accompanied by the quad-tailpipe monster’s bellowing roar. First, the e-torque kicks butt without warning, then the V-8 takes over, spiraling past its 6000-rpm power peak to the 7000-rpm rev cut. Paddle-shifting through the gears is a lot of fun, but for maximum effect, check out the claimed 11.4-second time-warp launch-control-to-125-mph stunt. There is no doubt about it: This highly physical electro-mechanical go-faster SUV would deserve a 10 on the emotional-climax scale if it weren’t for that spoilsport overdose of mass and momentum.To mark the occasion, the Urus also receives its first facelift, which includes a redesigned cockpit. The most significant functional improvement concerns the addition of overdue adaptive matrix LED headlamps, which make a huge difference—we know, because Swedish winter nights stretch from 3:30 pm to 9:30 am. Also new are the power-dome hood, the available 23-inch Galanthus wheels shod with 285/35 and 325/30 Pirelli summer tires, a restyled liftgate sporting a pronounced center crease, more prominent hexagon-mesh diffusors front and rear, restyled bumpers, plenty more Y-pattern graphics, and a choice of over 100 different paint colors. “The Urus SE looks decidedly fresher and more modern,” claims chief designer Mitja Borkert, adding, “but it also is a notably more functional piece of kit. For instance, brake cooling was improved by 30 percent; bigger spoilers and air curtains increase the rear downforce by 35 percent; and the overall aerodynamic efficiency is up 15 percent.”The dashboard looks vaguely familiar, but the layout and most of the content are actually new. The bigger 12.3-inch touchscreen is now more intuitive to use, voice control is improved, new driver-assistance systems have been added, and while parent-company Audi has virtually banned knobs and buttons, Lamborghini remains loyal to its row of prominent toggle switches and caged starter button. The enlarged climate-control tableau looks rather busy and generic, but the center stack complete with the supportive handrail that runs below the main high-resolution interface is ergonomically a step in the right direction. Still present are the multicolored instruments, the hexagonal air vents, and the omnipresent matching graphics that are more than ever part of the brand’s DNA.More Lambo Hybrid ContentLike the Revuelto and the Huracán Sterrato, which were also part of our three-day, six-car epic journey close to the Arctic Circle, the Urus SE was a hoot to drive on the slippery Scandinavian turf. It takes off like a rocket before reeling in the horizon at warp speed, is enormously powerful yet always nicely controllable, and feels reassuringly stable and commendably compliant. Against that is the hefty extra mass and the limited EV driving range. Still, we’d welcome the chance to further explore the talents of this power hybrid in normal temperatures and on normal dry or wet roads, preferably in combination with a few extra corners and gradients. Although I was born the only son of an ornithologist and a postal clerk, it was clear from the beginning that birdwatching and stamp collecting were not my thing. Had I known that God wanted me to grow to 6’8”, I also would have ruled out anything to do with cars, which are to blame for a couple of slipped discs, a torn ligament, and that stupid stooped posture behind the wheel. While working as a keeper in the Aberdeen Zoo, smuggling cheap cigarettes from Yugoslavia to Germany, and an embarrassing interlude with an amateur drama group also failed to yield fulfillment, driving and writing about cars became a much better option. And it still is now, many years later, as I approach my 70th birthday. I love every aspect of my job except long-haul travel on lousy airlines, and I hope it shows. More

From the May/June issue of Car and Driver.For most of us, scoring a good deal means snagging a two-for-one coupon on Cinnamon Toast Crunch at the grocery store or receiving a random check for $2.84 from a class-action lawsuit you forgot you joined. But for other people, a good deal looks like the Mercedes-Maybach S680 4Matic—a quarter-million-dollar V-12 limo that offers silver champagne flutes and a back-seat fridge. Step away from the guillotine for a moment, and we’ll explain.In the world of ultraluxury automobiles, as with mainstream vehicles, SUVs are the chic thing and command premium prices. The last V-8 Bentley Bentayga S we tested cost $302,910, and a V-12 Rolls-Royce Cullinan can easily cross the half-million-dollar mark. Against those yardsticks, the Maybach we drove looks like a steal. Consider what $245,650 gets you: a 621-hp twin-turbocharged 6.0-liter V-12, rear seats to shame the ones you might find on a private jet (complete with tray tables), and power rear doors you can control with hand gestures. Enjoy your glass of Louis Roederer, Jedi, as you use the Force to close your door.HIGHS: Truly decadent back seats, unexpected sports-sedan reflexes, actually a good value.Meanwhile, the high-dollar SUVs—even Mercedes-Maybach’s own GLS—tend to blend in with all the other body-on-frame behemoths on American roads. But a sedan the size of a giant SUV? Now we’re talking street presence, and the S680’s 133.7-inch wheelbase is within a half-inch of a Chevy Suburban’s. The effect is one of extravagant menace—like you want to meet whoever climbs out of the back, but also, maybe you don’t. And even though the S680 is a mutated strain of S-class, nobody mistakes it for an off-the-rack Benz. Should you need to teach onlookers how to pronounce it, here’s a handy mnemonic tool: It’s not your-bach, it’s my-bach. While the S680’s $6000 Executive Rear Seat Plus package brings two of the most luxurious chairs in a modern automobile, your chauffeur will have a pretty great time up front too. That V-12, with its 664 pound-feet of torque, simply shrugs off the S680’s 5301 pounds and rips this land yacht to 60 mph in 3.7 seconds. The S680 blows past the quarter-mile in 11.9 seconds at 120 mph, figures that put it roughly door to door with a C7 Corvette Stingray. Benz’s four-door leviathan serves up more body roll than a racing sloop but still posts an impressive 0.92 g of stick on the skidpad. A car this large doesn’t seem like it should move like this, but that’s part of the appeal—a few dozen layers beneath the genteel limousine, there’s a sports sedan awaiting an imprudent prod of the throttle. Rear-axle steering helps enable lively responses, with as much as 10.0 degrees of countersteer with the 19-inch wheels (Mercedes relegates the 21-inchers and staggered 20-inchers to 4.5 degrees).LOWS: Soft brake pedal, 14-mpg EPA combined rating, having to correct the hoi polloi’s mispronunciation of “Maybach.”So, back to price. The S680’s $232,750 base sticker puts it in rare air. Yet it seems like a bargain for a car offering so much luxury, performance, and V-12 star quality. Maybach exists in a weird space, a premium variation of an already upper-crust marque, but without quite the badge snobbery of a venerated stand-alone like Bentley or Rolls (the two companies Mercedes-Maybach overtly identifies as competitors). In other words, this nearly $250K car feels like it could justifiably cost $100K more. If you can write that check, the S680 is sedan writ large.View PhotosJames Lipman|Car and DriverThis supreme S-class would be suitable transport for the illuminati.SpecificationsSpecifications
2023 Mercedes-Maybach S680Vehicle Type: front-engine, all-wheel-drive, 4-passenger, 4-door sedan
PRICE
Base/As Tested: $232,750/$245,650Options: Executive Rear Seat Package Plus (includes First Class 4-seat configuration, folding rear tables), $6000; Maybach champagne flutes, $3200; Piano Lacquer Flowing Lines trim, $1300; 21-inch multispoke Champagne Flute wheels, $1300; rear refrigerator, $1100 
ENGINE
twin-turbocharged and intercooled SOHC 36-valve V-12, aluminum block and head, port fuel injectionDisplacement: 365 in3, 5980 cm3Power: 621 hp @ 5500 rpmTorque: 664 lb-ft @ 2000 rpm
TRANSMISSION
9-speed automatic
CHASSIS
Suspension, F/R: multilink/multilinkBrakes, F/R: 15.4-in vented disc/14.4-in vented discTires: Pirelli P Zero PZ4F: 265/35R-21 101Y Extra Load MO-S PNCSR: 265/35R-21 101Y Extra Load MO-S PNCS
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 133.7 inLength: 215.3 inWidth: 75.6 inHeight: 59.4 inTrunk Volume: 12 ft3Curb Weight: 5301 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 3.7 sec100 mph: 8.3 sec1/4-Mile: 11.9 sec @ 120 mphResults above omit 1-ft rollout of 0.3 sec.Rolling Start, 5–60 mph: 5.2 secTop Gear, 30–50 mph: 2.6 secTop Gear, 50–70 mph: 3.2 secTop Speed (gov ltd): 129 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 165 ftBraking, 100–0 mph: 331 ftRoadholding, 300-ft Skidpad: 0.92 g
C/D FUEL ECONOMY
Observed: 17 mpg
EPA FUEL ECONOMY
Combined/City/Highway: 14/12/20 mpg
C/D TESTING EXPLAINEDEzra Dyer is a Car and Driver senior editor and columnist. He’s now based in North Carolina but still remembers how to turn right. He owns a 2009 GEM e4 and once drove 206 mph. Those facts are mutually exclusive. More

Porsche’s second electric car is aimed squarely at the jugular of the market. Be it affordable or luxurious, the compact SUV is stealing hearts and stealing sales from every vehicle segment. Since everyone seems to want to park one in their garage, it makes sense that Porsche’s second electric offering is a version of its compact SUV, the Macan. Product planners are probably still kicking themselves for sending out the Taycan as the leadoff hitter. Unimpressed with some of the decisions that were handed down on the shared platform of the original Macan—the height of the front seats for one—Porsche claims to have led the engineering and design of the hardware for the new electric Macan’s Premium Platform Electric (PPE) architecture. This is the sort of decision-making power that comes from having sold more than 850,000 Macans over the past 10 years. Porsche probably could have sold even more, but the Macan’s factory in Leipzig, Germany, has been banging against its three-shift redline for years. While we never found much wrong with the seating position of the gas-powered Macan, the electric versions, the Macan 4 and the Macan Turbo, sit 1.1 inches lower in front and 0.6 inch lower in the rear seat. Anyone familiar with the gas-powered Macan is unlikely to notice the seating-position difference, but they will likely suspect that they’re in an updated Macan. The gauge cluster is now a 12.6-inch screen, and there’s a 10.9-inch touchscreen in the middle of the instrument panel. For those who want more screens, another 10.9-inch unit in front of the passenger is a $1570 option that will keep your shotgun rider entertained if not carsick. As with all of these passenger-facing screens, the driver’s view of it is blacked out when the Macan is out of park, making it impossible to watch “Window Shop with Car and Driver” on YouTube while driving.There’s a simplicity to the rest of the interior, but, thankfully, a volume knob remains and there are physical HVAC controls below the touchscreen. The leather-wrapped dashboard is a rich touch, but the plainness of the design doesn’t look expensive, a view perhaps made worse by the black interior of our sample cars. A 3.4-inch wheelbase increase over the old Macan doesn’t add up to a vastly larger interior here. Rear-seat room is spacious enough for a six-footer and certainly won’t trigger claustrophobics, but the rear seat isn’t a cross-your-legs situation if you sit behind an average driver. Just like on a 911, there’s a front trunk (or frunk). There’s only three cubic feet of space up there, but it checks an electric-car box that the Germans had largely ignored. Most of your stuff will go under the hatch, where there’s up to 18 cubic feet of space. Some electric-car facts: The new platform has a 95.0-kWh battery pack living under the floor and provides a Car and Driver–estimated 250 to 300 miles of range. Like the Taycan, the electric Macan has an 800-volt architecture that enables fast-charging. Porsche says it’ll run from 10 to 80 percent charge in the time it takes to watch an episode of Seinfeld without commercials—actually, Porsche said about 21 minutes. On a slower AC connection, the onboard charger can take in as much as 11.0 kW, so figure on about 10 hours from empty to full.Those numbers out of the way, let’s discuss what a Macan without an engine is like to drive. First off, it’s quiet. The Macan 4 and the Macan Turbo we drove both were fitted with optional thermal and acoustic glass ($920), which helped keep sound levels low. For $490, you can select Electric Sport Sound, which offers a louder buzzy, wooshy soundtrack for the driving experience. We tried it, started to get a headache, took a couple of Advil, then switched it off. Save your money.Both the 402-hp Macan 4 and the Turbo share their 234-hp front motors. While the 4 gets by with a 375-hp rear motor, Porsche bolts in a more powerful 630-hp rear unit into the Turbo that confusingly never makes 630 horsepower on its own, but combined with the front unit makes 630 horsepower. Getting maximum power from either requires engaging launch control, which can be done only from a stop. Do so and you get 10 seconds of overboost. In normal driving, the 4 makes 382 horsepower with Turbo making 576 horses. Instant torque—479 lb-ft in the 4 and 811 in the Turbo—gives an immediate response to the slap of the accelerator, but the 4 doesn’t impress off the line. Porsche says the 4 is good for a 4.9-second time to 60 mph, and in a world of very quick EVs, that doesn’t feel very quick. The Turbo will snap necks with a claimed 3.1-second 60-mph time. Electric cars that accelerate as hard as sports cars or even supercars aren’t surprising anymore. What the Macan does that few, if any, other battery-powered SUVs can do is handle. Bend it into a corner, and, despite a curb weight on the wrong side of 5000 pounds, the 5.5-inch-lower center of gravity helps mitigate the mass. Both models have eager steering (electric Macans have a 15 percent quicker steering ratio) with natural weighting, and both try their best to unbend corners. Rear-axle steering is optional on both models, and the system works to stabilize the rear end at speed. At low speeds it cuts the turning circle down to a carlike 36.4 feet. Both the 4 and the Turbo will have adaptive dampers and adjustable air springs as standard. Body control is taut and contributes to the driver’s confidence to push toward the cornering limits. An active rear differential that allows for torque vectoring is standard on the Turbo.Ride quality is supple but not cushy. If you’re seeking isolation and a delicate ride, the much-larger BMW i7 will make you smile. If you’re about to comment that the i7 isn’t a direct competitor, well, what is? When it arrives at this fall, the electric Macan won’t face much competition. Mercedes’s EQE SUV perhaps comes closest in size and price, but it seems to have been designed to isolate rather than engage. A Tesla Model Y or even a Model X are the same shape, but again, they lack the driving joy that makes the Macan entertaining. Acura’s ZDX promises to challenge the battery-powered Macan, but we’re still a few weeks away from experiencing it. And then there’s BMW’s new iX3, which is still months away. For the first time, Porsche might find a direct competitor from Hyundai and its 641-hp Ioniq 5 N. More on the Macan EVIn Europe, the gas-powered Macan will no longer be sold, but U.S. customers will continue to have a choice of gas or electric Macans. The gas-fired ones will continue on the old platform, virtually unchanged. Anyone deciding between the two will look at the prices and notice that the electric Macan appears to command a major premium, but if you compare the Macan 4 to its gas equivalent, the 375-hp Macan S, the difference works out to be $6500. The 630-hp Turbo doesn’t line up with any of the gas versions and would be $18,500 more than the 434-hp V-6-powered GTS. We still love the sound and the experience of accelerating with a gas-engine Macan, but the new Macan works well as an electric. It looks more modern inside and out, and, like the Taycan, the Macan 4 and Turbo have more than just acceleration to make you smile. And that’s rare in today’s electric-car world.SpecificationsSpecifications
2024 Porsche Macan EVVehicle Type: front- and rear-motor, all-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door wagon
PRICE
Base: Macan 4, $80,450; Macan Turbo, $106,950
POWERTRAIN
Front Motor: permanent-magnet synchronous AC, 234 hp, 229 lb-ft Rear Motor: permanent-magnet synchronous AC, 375 or 630 hp, 428 or 605 lb-ft Combined Power: 402 or 630 hpCombined Torque: 479 or 833 lb-ftBattery Pack: liquid-cooled lithium-ion, 95.0 kWhOnboard Charger: 11.0 kWPeak DC Fast-Charge Rate: 270 kWTransmissions: direct-drive
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 113.9 inLength: 188.4 inWidth: 76.3 inHeight: 63.8 inCargo Volume, behind F/R: 44–47/16–18 ft3Front-Trunk Volume: 3 ft3Curb Weight (C/D est): 5250–5400 lb
PERFORMANCE (C/D EST)
60 mph: 2.9–4.7 sec100 mph: 10.6–12.4 sec1/4-Mile: 11.2–13.5 secTop Speed: 136–161 mph
EPA FUEL ECONOMY (C/D EST)
Combined: 75–90 MPGeRange: 250–300 miTony Quiroga is a 20-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