Reviews

From the March 1984 issue of Car and Driver.The Mazda people are different. Unlike the powers that be at most car companies, they seem genuinely to like sports cars. What’s more, they like them enough to understand them. They reject the assumption that two seats, a low-slung body, and a strong engine are all it takes to make a sports car. The RX-7 certainly has these features, but it also has that all-important sports-car magic. It sings an irresistible song, begging to be revved to its redline and thrown into corners, and it communicates the joys of the sports-car experience to its driver.The first RX-7, in 1978, had the magic, but we couldn’t help wondering whether Mazda’s intentions were honorable. After all, several companies have sprung exciting new sports cars on us, only to dilute their sporting appeal in search of broader markets once their image-building potential was fully exploited. We’ve watched for such signs of degeneracy from Mazda, but as the RX-7 enters its seventh year of production, our worst fears have yet to be realized.In fact, the RX-7, in its new GSL-SE incarnation, is more sports car than ever. The SE designation heralds the arrival of a long-awaited power increase, provided by a fuel-injected, tuned-induction, six-port version of Mazda’s 13B rotary engine. With its 1.3-liter displacement and new technology, the 13B develops 135 horsepower at 6000 rpm and 133 pound-feet of torque at 2750 rpm, both healthy increases from the 101 horsepower at 6000 rpm and 107 pound-feet at 4000 rpm of the 1.1-liter 12A engine, which is still standard in other RX-7s. Moreover, although the power peaks are identical in both engines, the SE motor’s much lower torque peak represents a considerable flattening of the rotary’s traditionally peaky torque curve. Newfound thrust is present at all rpm. Many manufacturers would have exchanged some of the new engine’s performance potential for better fuel economy by harnessing it to taller gearing, but such thinking is antithetical to the mission of a serious sports car. Mazda’s powertrain engineers kept the faith, leaving the RX-7’s overall gearing essentially unchanged. Fifth gear is a bit taller, but not enough to compensate for the thirstier engine; the new SE returns 18 mpg (EPA city), while the lesser RX-7s are rated at 19. Neither figure is particularly impressive, but the SE’s penalty is modest relative to its power increase. Having chosen not to hamstring the new engine with tall gearing, Mazda wasn’t about to shortchange its potential with weaknesses in the chassis. Four-wheel disc brakes, which have been fitted to all GSLs for the past three years, are upgraded on the SE with rotors that are nearly an inch larger and vented in the rear as well as the front. In addition, a larger master cylinder and a bigger brake booster firm up the braking action. The SE’s clutch is stronger, more heat-resistant, and damped by 10 percent more force to transmit the increased torque reliably. Power steering is offered for the first time in an RX-7, as an option on the SE; the amount of assist decreases with speed. Recognizing the importance of the tire-road interface, Mazda’s chassis engineers fitted the SE with top-­class Pirelli P6 tires, in a generous 205/60VR-14 size, on wheels one inch larger in diameter than before. In addition to these SE-exclusive features, all 1984 RX-7s benefit from several improvements. The chassis mounting points for the rear axle’s lower trailing links have been dropped by 0.8 inch to provide some roll understeer in the rear suspension. New slits in the front air dam increase cooling airflow to the front brakes. Inside, the instrument cluster, the steering wheel, the heater controls, and the minor switches have all been revised, and the storage bins behind the seats now have locking lids and interior illumination. To the serious sports-car buyer these are extraneous details, mere trimmings around the main course, which in the SE’s case is its engine. The special flavor of the big rotary is not readily apparent, however, even to the sports-car gourmet, for the SE doesn’t seem drastically stronger than previous RX-7s. There is no violent kick in the back, no uncontrollable wheelspin, no primeval noises. Nor is there any of the loss in agility or the subtle increases in control efforts that so often accompany substantial power increases. The SE does cover ground quickly, though. Dialing up high speeds on the speedometer requires little effort, the car going about its brisk business with little prodding from the shifter. Top gear suffices easily for most normal driving situations. And legging the throttle through the gears to the 7000-rpm redline quickly produces license-threatening speeds. Despite weighing 110 pounds more than our last RX-7 GSL, our test SE sprinted from a standstill to 60 mph in just 7.8 seconds, 2.6 seconds quicker than the earlier car. Its quarter-mile performance of 15.9 seconds at 86 mph was 1.5 seconds and 7 mph better. It hit 100 mph more than ten seconds sooner, in 23.9 seconds. The SE’s low-rpm muscle was evidenced just as clearly, with times of 10.5 and 11.0 seconds in the 30-to-50-mph and 50-to-70-mph top-gear runs, about three seconds better in each case. Top speed climbed from 118 to 125 mph. Such performance easily puts the SE into the ranks of seriously fast cars, yet it feels hardly quicker than a good four-banger sports sedan. The reason is that Mazda’s engine engineers spread their torque out as flat as frosting on a cake. It’s an engineer’s dream that’s seldom realized: The big rotary produces very nearly the same torque at all engine speeds, so no sudden surge is felt when the torque curve peaks. This even temperament, combined with the rotary’s silky smoothness, kitchen­-blender hum, and consistent throttle response, results in a flow of power so linear that it’s deceptive. The driver need only use the gearbox to dial up the proper rpm between 1000 and 7000 for any desired thrust. Without the response glitches, holes, and rushes common in most other power curves, the SE’s engine is a model of predictability.George Lepp|Car and DriverIt’s a good thing the engine is so forgiving, because it enables you to control the chassis’s traditional penchant for hanging its tail out at the limit. When the car is first pitched into a corner at speed, the tail steps wide and then catches a grip on the pavement. The cornering response is then linear, with a noticeable bias toward oversteer that encourages tail-out driving. Total grip does benefit from such chassis balance, since the cornering effort is quite evenly divided between the front and rear tires. Indeed, with the help of the Pirellis, the SE generated an impressive 0.82 g on the skidpad, balanced on the fine edge of oversteer. This balance is easy for a driver to achieve, because the SE communicates its every move through a suspension biased more toward information than plushness. Small imperfections are absorbed surprisingly well, but medium-size bumps don’t seem to deflect the suspension at all. The new power steering also helps keep the SE pointed in the right direction: It has good feel and a much faster ratio (3.1 turns lock-­to-lock instead of 4.3) than that of previous RX-7s, although on-center precision is still lacking. The upgraded brakes are improved in every respect, with better balance, feel, and fade resistance.These characteristics may not sound like the ultimate in handling sophistication, but the SE is actually a ball to drive hard. The strong engine lets you kick the tail out at will, and the linear throttle response and the predictable chassis behavior let you hold it at any desired attitude without trauma. On wet pavement the SE can make quite a scene, lighting up its tires in the first three gears if you so desire. Entire blocks can be covered sideways. Despite the SE’s sporting orientation, it shares all the luxury amenities introduced in GSLs three years ago. The driver is pampered with cruise control, electric mirrors, electric windows, air conditioning, a good stereo system complete with an equalizer and a joy-stick balance-and­-fader control, and a sunroof. The comfortable driver’s seat now offers a height adjustment; leather is available as an option. The new instruments provide the necessary information in a more logical array than before, the steering wheel is a proper three-spoke unit, the visibility is panoramic, the control layout is admirably handy, and the driving position is excellent in every respect, down to a welcome dead pedal. Our only interior quibble concerns the bright surface finish of the vertical panel in the central console; a matte-black finish would be more appropriate for a car of such sporting persuasion. George Lepp|Car and DriverWith a complaint list so short, it’s clear to us that the RX-7 GSL-SE is the best and sportiest RX-7 ever offered to the American driver. At a base price of $15,095, it’s also the most expensive. That’s a full two grand more than a regular GSL, and quite a sum for a car that made its reputation on exceptional affordability; at this RX-7’s price level, there are now Supras, Starions, 300ZXs, and well-equipped V-8 Mustangs and Camaros to choose from. The GSL­-SE, however, will handily outrun every import in its price class, and it’s much smaller, nimbler, and more economical than its big-­motored American rivals. What makes the GSL-SE so good is that Mazda has kept the sports-car faith. For the money, there still isn’t a better fling-about, redline-hungry, tire-smoking sports car to be had. Technical HighlightsThe RX-7 GSL-SE’s 13B rotary engine is only 14.1 percent larger in displacement than the 12A powerplant (1308 versus 1146 cc), yet it develops 33.6 percent more power and 24.3 percent more torque. Obviously, Mazda has done more than shoehorn wider rotors into the bigger motor.Car and DriverBetter breathing accounts for the additional difference; a rotary’s output, like a piston engine’s, is limited by its airflow. Most of the improvement comes from a new intake system and port fuel injection, a combination that allows great flexibility in manifold design. The proven system of primary and secondary ports controlled by staged throttles is retained, maintaining high port velocities even at part throttle. Primary air is inducted through its own tuned passages, entering the front and rear combustion chambers through the center plate that separates the two rotors. Secondary air goes to the front rotor through the front-end plate and to the rear rotor through the rearmost end plate. In the 13B, the engineers have split the secondary flow path in two, so a total of three (one primary, two secondary) passages deliver air to each rotor. Fuel is sprayed in by one solenoid-type injector in each primary air passage. The new third ports are opened by exhaust back pressure at high rpm. Their additional area and altered timing ensure efficient full-power breathing, allowing the main ports to be optimized for low-rpm performance. Car and DriverIn addition to its three-stage porting, the intake manifold was designed to take maximum advantage of the rotary’s very strong intake pulsations (stronger than a piston engine’s, because the ports open more quickly and are not obstructed by valves). Two different pressure pulses are used to boost intake charging: The first occurs when an intake port has just dosed and the rapidly flowing intake-air column runs into a dead end; the second pulse is generated by the residual pressure escaping from the combustion chamber when an intake port first opens. Careful tuning of the dimensions and configuration of the intake manifold can harness these positive-pressure pulses to force more air into the combustion chambers; in the SE rotary, the tuning was optimized for low-speed breathing. The result is abundant torque, peaking at 2750 rpm in the 13B, far below the 4000-rpm peak of the 12A. Oil is injected into the intake-manifold plenum in conventional Mazda fashion, but the 13B receives additional apex-seal lubrication from oil injected directly into the trochoid chambers. The rotor-housing surfaces are chrome-plated, like the 12A’s, but have a harder finish and improved porosity for better oil retention, giving the 13B durability to match its muscle. —Csaba CsereKenichi Yamamoto: A talk with the stepfather of the rotary engine.”I felt a genuine surprise when I first saw a running prototype of the rotary engine in 1961. It was so compact and turning so smoothly. Like any engineer, I was impressed by the novelty, because there was so little variation in internal-combustion engines at the time. I felt a passionate desire to challenge and perfect the rotary engine.”These days, we hear a lot about the strength of the Japanese character. Kenichi Yamamoto, Mazda’s 61-year-old senior managing director in charge of advanced technology, research, and development, is a living example of what all the talk actually means: commitment to ideals, perseverance, and personal sacrifice for the greater good. Yamamoto may not be the natural father of the rotary engine, but he did act as a loving foster parent in developing Dr. Felix Wankel’s invention to the high level of refinement it enjoys today. Car and DriverLest we forget, the Wankel is this century’s only new automobile engine. The Rankine (steam), Otto cycle, and diesel engines were all patented before 1900; since then, the Wankel is the only new­comer to earn commercial success. It’s equally remarkable that both the rotary engine and Mazda have blossomed in only a quarter of a century. Felix Wankel’s engine first ran in 1957, while Mazda was struggling to regain a footing after the war by manufacturing three-wheeled trucks. The firm’s first four-wheeled vehicle wasn’t rolling until a year later, and its first automobile—a 900-pound, two-seat coupe powered by a 360 cc piston engine—didn’t go on sale until 1960.Yamamoto explains: “Mazda was a latecomer to the passenger-car field. We needed new technologies to challenge some very severe international competition. The late Tsuneji Matsuda, who was Mazda’s president during the birth of our first automobiles, had always been receptive to new ideas, and he saw the rotary engine as an advance investment in Mazda’s future. I was then an assistant manager of automobile design, and, frankly speaking, I was a bit skeptical at first about the engine’s practical potential. My experience had been exclusively with reciprocating engines. I had learned the hard way how complex the mechanical requirements of automotive engines could be.” The “hard way” is an apt description of Yamamoto’s early career. He graduated from Japan’s Imperial University (later renamed Tokyo University) in 1944, with a degree in mechanical engineering, only to be snapped up by the navy to supervise the production of kamikaze aircraft. After World War II, he returned to his hometown, Hiroshima, and found most of it leveled by the atomic bomb. Luckily, his home was spared, along with one major industrial firm: Toyo Kogyo, the company that would later build Mazda automobiles. Jobs were few and far between in Hiroshima, so Yamamoto took what he could get, a laborer’s position on Toyo Kogyo’s assembly line. He bolted together truck transmissions for a year and a half, work that was physically and mentally taxing. Finally, his technical talents were noticed, and he escaped the factory floor for a job in the engine-design department. There Yamamoto quickly filled his portfolio with one successful engine design after another. Mazda began studying the Wankel engine’s potential in 1960 and signed a technical agreement with the patent holders a year later. Believing the engine would help the firm to establish an identity quickly, president Matsuda asked Yamamoto to form a new rotary-engine division at the end of 1962. Out of admiration and respect for his president, Yamamoto pledged his support to the unproven engine. “In the beginning, we experienced lots of difficulties. Some were technical, others were not. Since we had announced to the world that we were undertaking rotary-engine development with the intention of building and selling engines, many people, both inside and outside the company, voiced strong criticism before they saw any results. Therefore, whenever the young engineers were discouraged by technical problems, they were also disappointed by outside criticism. I had to not only spur them with technical ideas, but I also had to keep their morale high and give them hope. Fortunately, Toyo Kogyo management had decided the new technology was indispensable. The challenge was difficult, and I was forced to work more than the young people in my division to stay ahead. In fact, I made a point of placing a notebook beside my pillow at night so that when any new idea dawned on me I could write it down. Almost every evening I woke up and jotted down some note; then the next day I’d call a meeting and challenge the young people with a new or better idea. If the engineers saw an enthusiastic leader, they responded with greater passion. I challenged each one to come up with at least one new idea every day, and I promised that I would do likewise.” Yamamoto also insisted that his staff learn English and use it in group discussions so that every engineer would get the most out of international technical meetings. “In the beginning, the Wankel family was made up of an international group that exchanged information. Our common competitor was not another company, but rather the piston engine. I clearly remember once when the enthusiastic president of NSU, Dr. Ing. von Heydekampf, called out to all of us to band together and create a new engine that would go down in history. While I knew there were difficulties ahead, I was deeply touched in that room of engineers from all over the world, and I felt certain the project would succeed. “As time went on, however, many of the rotary-engine proponents dropped off, and I started to feel lonely and disappointed. Nevertheless, we received many letters from engineers around the world interested in our work. We felt we were being watched. That gave us pleasure and encouragement, and we made up our minds to live up to those expectations.” In 1967, after less than five years of rotary-engine development, Mazda introduced the 110S (a.k.a. Cosmo Sports) two-seater with a 110-hp, two­-rotor powerplant. Since then, 1.3 million rotary engines have been manufactured by Toyo Kogyo. There have been ups and downs. The RX-7 is an unqualified success today, but O-ring-seal failures were common during the early Seventies, and there was a crash program after the first energy crisis to improve the rotary’s fuel efficiency. Yamamoto is now a senior member of the board of directors and as eager as ever for the rotary to prevail against stronger competition from gas and diesel piston engines. “We would like to perfect TISC [timed induction with supercharge] for production. This uses a compact compressor combined with inherent rotary­-engine characteristics to improve low­- and mid-range torque. Of course, we are also engaged in several step-by-step developments: improvements in gas seals, reduction of internal friction, and better cooling, to name three. The rotary is still quite attractive to us, because there is so much potential for improvement. An engineer can maintain his dream of finding out new things.” —Don ShermanSpecificationsSpecifications
1984 Mazda RX-7 GSL-SEVehicle Type: front-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 2-passenger, 3-door coupe
PRICE
Base/As Tested: $15,095/$16,125Options: leather interior, $720; power steering, $310.
ENGINE
2-rotor Wankel, electronic fuel injectionDisplacement: 80 in3, 1308 cm3Power: 135 hp @ 6000 rpmTorque: 133 lb-ft @ 2750 rpm 
TRANSMISSION
X-speed [automated] manual/[dual-clutch] automatic/continuously variable automatic/direct-drive
CHASSIS
Suspension, F/R: struts/rigid axleBrakes, F/R: 9.8-in vented disc/10.1-in vented discTires: Pirelli P6205/60VR-14
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 95.3 inLength: 170.1 inWidth: 65.7 inHeight: 49.6 inPassenger Volume: 46 ft3Trunk Volume: 8 ft3Curb Weight: 2590 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 7.8 sec1/4-Mile: 15.9 sec @ 86 mph100 mph: 23.9 secTop Gear, 30–50 mph: 10.5 secTop Gear, 50–70 mph: 11.0 secTop Speed: 125 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 199 ftRoadholding, 200-ft Skidpad: 0.82 g 
C/D FUEL ECONOMY
Observed: 22 mpg 
EPA FUEL ECONOMY
Combined/City/Highway: 22/18/29 mpg  
C/D TESTING EXPLAINED More

“Aired Down a Porsche 911” has never appeared on any bingo card we’ve ever held, and yet here we are, deflating our 911 Dakar’s tires before play commences on a massive Moroccan sand dune formation called Erg Chebbi. It’s not immediately clear how well we’ll fare in the big dunes, a visit to which normally requires a rented Toyota Land Cruiser Prado or a local camel-caravan outfitter. Thus far, we’ve been traversing desert hardpan and gaping like tourists at the odd meandering single-hump dromedary while attempting to avoid rocks and well-intended cairns hidden behind persistent hanging curtains of choking dust.Earlier, while we cruised through dusty towns that seemed to be the inspiration for Star Wars’s Tatooine, kids sometimes waved (that was a wave, wasn’t it?) as we passed by in our shiny Land Speeders. Then, at the last checkpoint before the open desert, the local constabulary stopped our three-car convoy, whereupon the lead driver was obligated to hand over . . . his Instagram handle. (The next day, on the way back, he would be required to perform . . . a launch control start.)It turns out that the Erg—a dead ringer for Southern California’s Glamis sand dunes (which played the part of Tatooine, come to think of it)—is literally the 911 Dakar’s sandbox. It makes sense, because the 911 Dakar is essentially a quarter-million-dollar dune buggy that’s based on the mighty Carrera 4 GTS instead of a Volkswagen Beetle.Like an OG dune buggy, the Dakar has a rear-mounted engine, a pan-flat floor, and broad rear tires that are proportional to the 911’s inherent rear-biased weight distribution and provide handy flotation in sand. Lightweighting measures mean that its curb weight is only some 20 pounds heavier than a Carrera 4 GTS, so even though it does weigh around 3550 pounds, it makes much less of an impression in the sand than your average SUV and undercuts a base Porsche Macan by some 600 pounds.PorscheFrom there this Porsche takes the dune-buggy format several giant steps forward on account of its wailing 473-hp twin-turbo 3.0-liter flat-six engine from the GTS. This engine’s broad torque peak of 420 pound-feet from 2300 to 5000 rpm is even more critical. In the thick of it, whenever we glanced at the tach, usually while yelling, “I can’t believe I’m doing this in a 911!” the engine was invariably grinding it out between 3000 and 4000 revs, happy as we were in mountains of dry sand.Another incongruous element in all of this is the interior, which, despite tasteful Dakar touches and trim choices, never misses a chance to remind that you’re still in a 911. The microsuede-wrapped steering wheel is one example: The wheel is in so much constant motion as you saw through the sand that the top-center hash mark seems laughably pointless. Ditto the one-piece carbon race buckets, which beat you up like a boxing opponent when you’re bouncing around out there. Pro tip: Opt instead for the (no-cost) heated leather GT Sport steering wheel and ditch the hard-shell buckets for 18-way power-adjustable heated sport seats (another no-cost option). If you hadn’t already guessed, the Carrera 4 GTS also donates its all-wheel-drive system with Porsche Traction Management and Porsche Torque Vectoring Plus. To these, the Dakar adds GTS options such as rear-wheel steering and the Porsche Dynamic Chassis Control system of active anti-roll bars, and the combination of all of that, plus a caravan load of software optimization, gives the added Rallye and Offroad driving modes some real teeth.As the name implies, Rallye shifts the torque bias rearward and sets up the active anti-roll bars and rear-steer systems to promote controllable rally-style oversteer on loose, gravelly surfaces. But these are adaptive systems, so they can reel things in if the pendulum swings too far. Offroad mode delivers a more even front/rear torque split, and it can relax the anti-roll bars and lock the rear differential to maintain forward progress on uneven terrain. Both modes’ baseline torque splits are more like guidelines than actual rules, as the system has the bandwidth to shunt torque anywhere from 88 percent front to 100 percent rear, depending on where the traction is.To this, the Dakar has one final ace up its sleeve: increased static ride height, plus a farther 1.2-inch suspension lift. Automatically deployed in Offroad mode and manually selectable in other modes, the system raises the Dakar’s belly from a healthy 6.3 inches of standard clearance (1.8 inches more than in the GTS) to 7.5 inches of maximum clearance. The 911’s short 96.5-inch wheelbase translates that into a respectable 19.0-degree breakover angle, which is firmly in crossover SUV territory. This proved handy in the dunes, where high-centering was never a concern.PorscheBut let’s not kid ourselves. Even with reprofiled front and rear overhangs, the Dakar’s 16.1-degree approach and 18.2-degree departure angles are too shallow for truly rocky trails. If there’s any doubt, enlist your passenger as a spotter. The standard surround-view camera can only reveal so much, and there are low-hanging turbos in the rear corners. L.A. driveways, however, should be a cinch. You won’t even need to engage the lift to clear them.The lift system employs coil springs resting atop an upgraded version of the hydraulic front-end lift that’s optional on other 911s. A similar lift mechanism is fitted at the rear, and the engineers added an accumulator and a more robust pump so the system can maintain the raised posture indefinitely so long as speed doesn’t exceed 105 mph. To further optimize the suspension for work on rough terrain, the PASM front strut and rear damper bodies are longer and rigged for more travel, and the correspondingly longer springs are softer than their roadgoing counterparts’ by some 50 percent.PorscheNone of this would matter without appropriate tires, and the Dakar’s bespoke Pirelli Scorpion All Terrain Plus knobbies do the work. With 19-inch wheels up front and 20-inchers in back, the Dakar’s wheels are each an inch smaller than the GTS’s. And the 245/45ZR-19 front and 295/40ZR-20 back tires are also about an inch taller from top to bottom, and that combo gives the rims an extra inch of protective sidewall. The enlarged air volume within allows for a lower standard pressure, and that helps the Dakar better cope with rough-textured surfaces. Air them down to 17 psi on sand, as we did, and they provide flotation and traction without digging in.On pavement, the Scorpion A/T tires are not overly noisy, and they also offer good directional stability and secure steering response. In fact, Porsche engineers were so pleased with their performance that they backed away from their original plan to offer them as an option and made them standard instead. The summer tires are the optional ones here, and rightly so. Buyers who are going to spend nearly $225K—for a car within $1800 of a GT3 RS—probably are doing so for the Dakar’s unique capabilities, and this footwear gives them the best chance to use Porsche’s ultimate dune buggy as intended. SpecificationsSpecifications
2023 Porsche 911 DakarVehicle Type: rear-engine, all-wheel-drive, 2-passenger, 2-door coupe
PRICE
Base: $223,450
ENGINEtwin-turbocharged and intercooled DOHC 24-valve flat-6, aluminum block and heads, direct fuel injectionDisplacement: 182 in3, 2981 cm3Power: 473 hp @ 6500 rpmTorque: 420 lb-ft @ 2300 rpm
TRANSMISSION8-speed dual-clutch automatic
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 96.5 inLength: 178.6 inWidth: 73.4 inHeight: 52.7 inPassenger Volume: 49 ft3Cargo Volume, Front: 5 ft3Curb Weight (C/D est): 3550 lb
PERFORMANCE (C/D EST)
60 mph: 3.0 sec100 mph: 7.6 sec1/4-Mile: 11.4 secTop Speed: 149 mph
EPA FUEL ECONOMY (C/D EST)
Combined/City/Highway: 18/16/20 mpg More

Cheap doesn’t mean what it used to. But with the average new car now costing well over $45,000, the 2023 Nissan Versa definitely still qualifies. It starts at $16,825 for the base S trim with a five-speed manual transmission, making it the cheapest new car you can buy in the U.S. for 2023.The Versa you see here is not that Versa. This is the loaded SR model, which looks considerably flashier and costs quite a bit more. Yet it still starts at less than $21,000 and carries a surprising amount of equipment for the price. (Remember, even a base Honda Civic is over $26,000 these days.) A refresh for 2023 improves the Versa’s looks significantly thanks to a cool new grille, reshaped headlights and taillights, and trim-specific 17-inch wheels. Our test car’s new $395 Gray Sky Pearl exterior color doesn’t hurt matters either.Andi Hedrick|Car and DriverHIGHS: Lots of features for the price, well-sorted chassis, snazzy styling.Inside, the Versa is not as low-rent as you might expect. The dashboard features some soft-touch surfaces with orange contrasting stitching, the seat fabric has red accents, and the gauge-cluster and infotainment screens are large and feature modern-enough graphics. We were pleasantly surprised to find automatic climate control, heated front seats, and a push-button start. A full cadre of driver-assistance features includes adaptive cruise control, blind-spot monitoring, and rear parking sensors. Many of these features are not available in the Versa’s only true subcompact competitor, the Kia Rio, which is similarly sized and occupies a similar price range.Despite the spruced-up interior and exterior, the front-wheel-drive Versa sedan’s underpinnings haven’t changed much since this generation was introduced for 2020. But the chassis remains perfectly satisfying for a small car like this, with good body control and a reasonably refined ride on bumpy roads. The steering is overly light and doesn’t offer much feedback, but the 2690-pound Versa feels agile, managing an impressive 0.89 g on our skidpad. It also stops from 70 mph in 173 feet, which beats the 2021 Rio hatchback we tested by 17 feet.More on Cheap CarsThe only real compromise is in the engine room, where a 122-hp 1.6-liter inline-four buzzes loudly to get the Versa up to speed. While many of today’s continuously variable automatic transmissions reduce that rubber-band sensation of delayed acceleration, the Versa’s transmission still suffers from this effect. A 9.5-second sprint to 60 mph makes it one of the slowest cars we’ve tested in recent memory. The Rio beats it to that mark by nearly a second, and the Kia’s CVT feels more responsive. We’re curious if the base Versa’s manual transmission would improve matters, but unfortunately the stick shift can’t be combined with the nicer SV and SR trim levels.The engine works so hard that we weren’t able to match the Versa’s 40-mpg EPA highway-fuel-economy estimate. We managed only 36 mpg on our real-world 75-mph loop. That’s 3 mpg below the Rio, and even many mid-size sedans beat the Versa, such as Nissan’s own Altima, which managed a 41-mpg result in our test despite its extra size, larger engine, and all-wheel drive.LOWS: Buzzy engine, lethargic CVT, disappointing real-world economy.There are many new cars that are more compelling than the Nissan Versa—they just cost a whole lot more. There’s always the argument that you get more bang for your buck from a used car than a new one, but in today’s volatile car market that’s less of a guarantee than it used to be. Sure, the Nissan is cheap, small, and slow, but it provides shoppers with the modern features and contemporary styling that make new cars appealing in the first place. The Versa simply begs the question: What does cheap mean to you?SpecificationsSpecifications
2023 Nissan Versa SRVehicle Type: front-engine, front-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door sedan
PRICE
Base/As Tested: $20,815 /$21,470 Options: Gray Sky Pearl paint, $395; carpeted floor mats and trunk mat, $260
ENGINE
DOHC 16-valve inline-4, aluminum block and head, port fuel injectionDisplacement: 98 in3, 1598 cm3Power: 122 hp @ 6300 rpmTorque: 114 lb-ft @ 4000 rpm
TRANSMISSION
continuously variable automatic
CHASSIS
Suspension, F/R: struts/torsion beamBrakes, F/R: 10.0-in vented disc/8.0-in drumTires: Continental ContiProContact205/50R-17 89V M+S
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 103.1 inLength: 177.0 inWidth: 68.5 inHeight: 57.7 inPassenger Volume, F/R: 54/35 ft3Trunk Volume: 15 ft3Curb Weight: 2690 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 9.5 sec1/4-Mile: 17.3 sec @ 81 mph100 mph: 32.8 secResults above omit 1-ft rollout of 0.3 sec.Rolling Start, 5–60 mph: 10.4 secTop Gear, 30–50 mph: 5.1 secTop Gear, 50–70 mph: 7.1 secTop Speed (C/D est): 115 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 173 ftRoadholding, 300-ft Skidpad: 0.89 g
C/D FUEL ECONOMY
Observed: 28 mpg75-mph Highway Driving: 36 mpg75-mph Highway Range: 380 mi
EPA FUEL ECONOMY
Combined/City/Highway: 35/32/40 mpg
C/D TESTING EXPLAINED More

From the March 1984 issue of Car and Driver.With the Celebrity Eurosport, Chevrolet puts some teeth into its attempts to get younger car buyers into Chevrolet sedans. A fully equipped Eurosport—we cannot bring ourselves to say “Celebrity” any more than we have to—comes within a few ergs of equaling the performance and dy­namic refinement of a Pontiac 6000STE. Unfortunately, the prospective buyer will need the wisdom of Solomon and the pa­tience of Job to lead a Chevrolet salesper­son through the endless maze of a General Motors order form in order to get all the right pieces. Even if that prospective buyer pulls it off, his Eurosport won’t have the STE’s four-wheel disc brakes, electronical­ly controlled automatic leveling feature, ta­chometer, or erotica-zotica Tokyo-by­-night instrument panel—but it won’t cost him quite as much, either.The reason for the difficulty in obtaining a properly equipped Eurosport is rooted in Chevrolet’s marketing approach. Chevro­let has been very badly wounded by GM’s pricing policies. Buick, Olds, and Pontiac share most of the car lines that Chevrolet has to sell, and corporate policy has dictat­ed that they be priced right on top of poor old Chevy. Thus the various Buicks, Olds, and Pontiacs offer the lure of more presti­gious names at very small differences in price. Chevrolet’s most recent manage­ment team has sought to rectify this, in the case of the Eurosport, by making the Eurosport option little more than blackout trim and special shock absorbers, springs, anti-sway bars, bushings, and steering ra­tio, leaving it to the buyer to get the appro­priate engine, wheels, tires, et cetera, as in­dividual options. Thus one can own a Celebrity called Eurosport for as little as $8216, which will be nothing but a Celebri­ty with special trim and an upgraded sus­pension, or he or she can work his or her way through the salesman’s indifference and the wildly complicated order form to get a car like our test car, which had a stick­er price of $12,044. If there are a dozen salesmen in America’s Chevrolet dealer­ships who understand how to do this, barred rock hens lay dark-green perfume bottles and sing light opera. Pontiac makes it easier by including most of the right stuff in the basic STE specification. The bottom line on the window sticker of our latest 6000STE came to $14,437. It must have been painful for Chevrolet’s engineers to watch the growing success of the Pontiac STE over the past eighteen months, knowing that they had a car just like it that they couldn’t seem to get out of conference. We were invited to drive the Chevrolet sports-sedan prototype that ulti­mately became the Eurosport within days of Pontiac’s press introduction of the STE, and we loved the car. It was obvious that the engineers loved it too, but equally obvi­ous that their management wasn’t going to let any sports version fly. Those were dif­ferent times. Now, with Chevrolet’s owner body growing older daily, and performance once again the automotive watchword in Detroit, the appropriateness of the new Eurosport could no longer be denied. Bet­ter eighteen months late than never, we al­ways say. If you were an STE owner, and you were blindfolded and bundled into a new Eurosport, you wouldn’t be able to tell the difference. The sound, the feel, all the sen­sory inputs are the same. There are slim margins of difference in performance num­bers, but they would elude all but the most sensitive seat of the pants. Ba­sically, the Pontiac is faster on acceleration and the Chevy has a tad more top speed, but that’s this time. Next time it could be different. There are correspondingly mi­nor differences in shocks, springs, bush­ings, and the like, but these are so macro-­lens fine as to be insignificant. The engine that powers the Eurosport­ and the STE, as well as some others­, comes straight from the old Chevrolet Citation X-11, virtually unchanged. It fea­tures such startling innovations as a cast-­iron block and cast-iron cylinder heads. Have the Japanese and the Europeans complicated their engines with overhead cams and electronic fuel injection and tur­bochargers? None of that decadent frou­frou for us Americans, no sir; the Eurosport breathes through a Rochester two-barrel carburetor, and the mixture flows from carburetor to manifold unvexed by any little whirling rotors or impellers. Pushrods operate the valves. Hand the av­erage Japanese engineer twelve pushrods and he’ll think you’re asking him to set the table. What’s most amusing about all this antique hardware is the fact that it works as well as most of the fancy overseas stuff. When we hop into a car and fire it up, what we really want is a little entertainment as it struggles to overcome inertia and centrifu­gal force. Horsepower and torque are what provide the giggles, not technology. And the horsepower and torque delivered by the Eurosport’s 2.8-liter 60-degree V-6—130 horsepower at 5400 rpm, and 145 pounds-feet of torque at 2400—propel it down the road in a manner that’s virtually indistinguishable from what you get with more complicated imported machinery. Ingolstadt, please note. Aaron Kiley|Car and DriverThe Eurosport is absolutely solid on the road. The body is tight, isolation from inte­rior and exterior noise is good, and the seats are comfortable—even though they lack the sophisticated adjustments available to the STE driver. The relationship between the steering-wheel rim and the places where the front tires contact the pavement is perfect. The car cuts into cor­ners as well as any front-wheel-drive in our experience, and once in, it sticks like epoxy. It is flat, predictable, and apparently with­out vice, an enormously reassuring car to drive in the enthusiast’s normal six- or sev­en-tenths range of operation. Further­more, it’s almost as good when taken right to the limit—in this case 0.79 g, which is enough side force to slide you right out the door on the other side, if you’re not prop­erly buckled in. Worth noting: for all the emphasis on skidpad numbers as a means of quantifying dynamic performance, it’s important to understand that what’s even more important is how the car behaves within your own range of performance re­quirements. There are cars—Chevrolet has built a couple of them—that generate very high skidpad numbers, yet become al­most unmanageable at 70 mph on a typical country road. Compared, for instance, with a Z51 Corvette or last year’s Z28, the Eurosport sedan is an absolute joy to whip through the hills on a ripply stretch of two-lane blacktop. It should come as joy­ous glad tidings to enthusiasts everywhere to learn that one of the men who contribut­ed so much to the Eurosport’s good man­ners and structural integrity is now assigned to the Corvette. Midst all this praise, we have to say that Chevrolet could have done a nicer job on the Eurosport’s instrument panel. We know costs had to be kept down to give the car its price advantage, and we don’t feel that its dash needs to recreate the emper­or’s fireworks, a la Corvette and STE, but a selection of round black dials with black faces and white numbers, a la Volvo, would have been far superior to the under-infor­mative row of rectangles that confronts the driver of the Eurosport. Detroit’s designers have outsmarted themselves with stuff like this for years. There is no need to reinvent the instrument panel for every new model that comes along. A full set of legible instruments, copied directly, if need be, from some really good example like the Volvo, would be just fine with most of the people in most target markets. No tachometer in­deed. Humph! While on the subject of the instrument panel, we must single out for special atten­tion the excellent Delco AM/FM/cassette sound system contained therein. This sys­tem, option RPO UU6, costs a mere $505. It is probably superior to the sound sys­tems in most people’s homes, and unlike so much of the stuff coming out of Japan these days, it can actually be operated while the car is traveling at 70 miles per hour and the kids have just emptied a jar of maple syrup onto your Old English sheepdog in the back seat. Volume is controlled with a twist knob, as is tuning. One can switch from AM to FM by simply pressing on the tuning knob, and the electronic readout is very helpful when the driver is trying to dial up his favorite classical-music station while si­multaneously steering between the ditches and swatting the two preschoolers, who are now stuck to old dog Tray. Chevrolet’s reputation for bulletproof reliability has slipped some in the past few years of EPA numbers at any price, and the problem first encountered after energy cri­ses one and two still show up in today’s alto­gether more likable cars. We wanted to make a direct comparison between the Celebrity Eurosport and the Pontiac 6000STE, but by the time our STE arrived our Eurosport was only running on five cyl­inders, so the direct comparison misfired (sorry). This particular car was a prototype rushed through Chevrolet engineering pri­or to the start of production just for our testing. We do appreciate the favor but still feel that if Chevrolet is ever to regain its dominance of the U.S. car market, some­thing will have to be done to restore its levels of reliability. The Celebrity Eurosport is a delightful car in every re­spect, a bargain STE, if you will, and a car that anybody could enjoy owning. But only Audis, Mercedes-Benzes, and Volkswagens are supposed to run on five cylinders. CounterpointChevrolet’s big front-drive family se­dan started life in the hole with a dumb name, funky styling, and a very boring assortment of powertrains. Would you like to wheeze around town on four lifeless cylinders or six? Gas or diesel, sir? Then, with a little help from car critics and the engineers at Pontiac, Chevy realized that something was missing. The potent H.O. V-6 was brought to bear, and a four-speed manual was made available (but not, unfortunately, with the most powerful engine). Finally, a low-flash styling-and-trim theme was tooled up around a new “Eurosport” nameplate. Chevrolet kept the price low by making everything but the roof optional, and voila a fine car had sprung from mediocre beginnings.What we have here is a very attractive alternative to the 6000STE original. The Pontiac is the classier ride, thanks to one of Detroit’s most generous stan­dard-equipment lists, but the Celebrity Eurosport is the more remarkable value. A little creative option checking at order time will build a $10,000 Chevrolet capable of matching moves with the $14,000 Pontiac. When the Eurosport gets the rest of the equipment it desperately needs—a tachometer, a decent speedometer, supportive bucket seats, and a five-speed transmission option—it will be ready for foes with even higher price tags. —Don Sherman”Celebrity Eurosport.” Ugh. Ridicu­lous names stand out like engines running on all but one cylinder. A name like this suggests that Chevrolet is running on less than one cylinder. This so-called “Celebrity Eurosport” is, if not a fine car, at least undeserving of such deni­gration. It’s too serious to be called “Celebrity,” and too good to be labeled “Eurosport.” Such tags are signs of a company that sets its sights too low. Today, every car company should boast at least one model that represents the very best of what that company sees in the fu­ture. The “Celebrity Eurosport” drives better than any other A-car except the 6000STE, so it is as welcome as a hot romance after a chilly spell, but the great tingle has yet to be felt. A car held down by bean counters cannot compete with the superlative likes of the Audi 5000, that stunning steel-glass-and-aluminum carving based on the best instincts of fine thinkers. The “Celebrity Eurosport” should compete. Freed from the bean counters, it could compete. For now, it maybe should have been dubbed “Halfway House.” —Larry GriffinThis Chevy impresses me as a truly American sedan. It’s an easy car—laid back, low effort, and quick to make friends. In just a couple of miles, you’ll trust it enough to run with it. All Celeb­ritys ought to be stamped out this way.Unfortunately, as so often happens at GM these days, some wires seem to have gotten crossed between the executive suite and the assembly line. For one thing, this car’s got the wrong name. The Europeans would never build a big sporting sedan without a tachometer, or with a bench seat as flat as Nebraska, or­ with tacky terry-cloth upholstery, or with an anemic four-cylinder as the standard engine. Chevy’s cut-rate, building-block approach misses the point, and I don’t think Chevrolet will snare the kinds of buyers it expects with the Eurosport. Those folks are out looking at a lot of other imported sedans—and probably at the Pontiac 6000STE—because those cars are soup-to-nuts packages for discerning car buyers. No, I think Chevrolet would do better to name this car for just what it is: “Amerisport.” —Rich CepposSpecificationsSpecifications
1984 Chevrolet Celebrity EurosportVehicle Type: front-engine, front-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door sedan
PRICE
Base/As Tested: $7890/$12,044 (est.)Options: air conditioning, $730; Delco AM/FM-stereo, radio/cassette, $505; automatic transmission, $425; H.O. V-6 engine, $400 (est.); aluminum wheels, $306; Eurosport equipment package, $226; custom cloth bench seats, $179; cruise control, $175; power door locks, $175; custom two-tone paint, $148; rear-window defogger, $140; tilt steering wheel, $110; tinted glass, $110; power brakes, $100; twin sport mirrors, $91; reclining front seatbacks, $90; gauge package, $64; P195/70R-14 tires, $28.
ENGINEpushrod V-6, iron block and headsDisplacement: 173 in3, 2837 cm3Power: 130 hp @ 5400 rpmTorque: 145 lb-ft @ 2400 rpm 
TRANSMISSION3-speed automatic
CHASSISSuspension, F/R: struts/torsion beamBrakes, F/R: 10.2-in vented disc/8.9-in drumTires: Goodyear Eagle GTP195/70R-14
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 104.9 inLength: 188.3 inWidth: 69.3 inHeight: 53.9 inPassenger Volume, F/R: 53/45 ft3Trunk Volume: 16 ft3Curb Weight: 2960 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 10.6 sec1/4-Mile: 17.6 sec @ 79 mph100 mph: 43.1 secTop Gear, 30–50 mph: 4.3 secTop Gear, 50–70 mph: 7.0 secTop Speed: 112 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 197 ftRoadholding, 282-ft Skidpad: 0.79 g 
C/D FUEL ECONOMY
Observed: 17 mpg
EPA FUEL ECONOMY
Combined/City/Highway: 25/21/33 mpg 
C/D TESTING EXPLAINED More

From the April 1965 issue of Car and Driver.No contest. This is the Porsche to end all Porsches—or, rather, to start a whole new generation of Porsches. Porsche’s new 911 model is unquestionably the finest Porsche ever built. More than that, it’s one of the best Gran Turismo cars in the world, certainly among the top three or four. Porsche enthusiasts used to insist that the 356 model was as nearly-perfect an automobile as had ever been designed, an immutable classic that couldn’t be im­proved upon. Oh, no? Put a familiar 356 up alongside a 911. Only yesterday, the 356 seemed ahead of its time. Today you realize its time has passed; the 356 leaves you utterly unimpressed and you can’t keep your eyes off the 911. The 911 is a superior car in every respect…the stuff legends are made of. Let it be understood at the outset that the 911 does not replace the 356, according to the factory. In the catalog, it replaces the fussy, little-appreciated Carrera 2 while the 356C (ex-Super) and 356SC (ex-Super 95) still roll off the assembly lines at about their normal rate. However, we can’t believe that Porsche will con­tinue making two entirely different cars, side-by-side, beyond the immediately foreseeable future. And let it also be understood that the 911 is not readily available. The first six month’s production is completely sold out and there’s a line of expectant owners going halfway around almost every Porsche agency in the country. Overview The 911—so-called because it is the 911th design project since Porsche opened its doors in 1931—is also the first all-Porsche Porsche. The 356 was the first car to carry the Porsche name, although when it was con­ceived in 1948 it was little more than a souped-up, special-bodied version of an earlier Porsche design, the Volkswagen. The 911, while true to the 356’s basic configuration, is an entirely new and different car. The engine is again air-cooled, again hung out behind the rear axle, but it’s a single-overhead-cam six-cylinder whereas the 356 was a pushrod four-cylinder (and the Carrera a four-cam four-cylinder). The new body is far more handsome—the work of old Professor Porsche’s grandson, Ferry, Jr. The 9ll’s 5-speed gear­box, already in service in Porsche’s 904 GT racing car, is probably the new car’s best single feature. Even the suspension is new, though tried-and-true torsion bars are retained as the springing medium. Related StoriesThe 911, or 901 as it then was, was introduced at the 1963 Frankfurt Auto Show. It was very much a prototype and its debut may have been premature. More than a year was to pass before it went into pro­duction, during which time the model number was changed (to indicate that it was a later model than the Frankfurt car and also because Peugeot reportedly had a lock on three-digit model numbers with zero in the middle), the price estimate dropped, the performance estimate rose, and a demand built up that the current four-a-day supply won’t be able to satisfy for some time to come. The 901/911 was not the “best” car Porsche could have made. Porsche could have put the storied flat­-eight engine into production, bored out to, say, 2.5 liters and tuned up to 240 horsepower. That would have put the 901/911 into the Ferrari-Corvette-Jaguar performance bracket. It also would have raised the price considerably, and Porsche was understandably nervous about entering the No-Man’s-Land market for $9000 GT cars. On price alone, it would have been beyond the reach of anybody but the Very Rich, and the V.R. are noted for such capricious perversity as preferring a $14,000 car to a $9000 car simply because it costs $5000 more. The four-cam flat-eight also would have had the same kind of maintenance and reliability problems the Carrera engine had; problems that are hopefully nonexistent in the 9ll’s SOHC six-cylinder. Considering what the Stuttgart design office has turned out in the past, Porsche could have come out with a supercharged six-liter 550-hp V-16 GT car to sell for $30,000 and not lose a drag race to anybody but Don Garlits, but their production facilities are hardly geared for that sort of thing, and it would be getting pretty far away from the Porsche image, wouldn’t it? In fact, Porsche had a full four-seater on the drawing boards at one point, but Ferry Porsche felt that his company’s business was not selling super­-duper sedans or ultra-ultra sports/racing cars but optimum-priced, optimum-size, optimum-performance Gran Turismo cars, which is exactly what the 911 is. At $6490 POE East Coast (or $5275 FOB Stuttgart), the 911 isn’t what you’d call cheap—no Porsche ever was—but then, quality never is. Porsche’s kind of quality cannot be had for less, viz. Ferrari 330GT ($14,000) or Mercedes-Benz 230SL ($8000). It’s of more than ordinary interest that the 911 costs a whop­ping thousand dollars less than the Carrera 2 it re­places. A Porsche is either worth it to the prospective buyer or it isn’t; he can’t justify the price tag by the way the body tucks under at the rear or by the way the steering wheel fits in his hands or the way the engine settles in for a drive through a rain-filled afternoon. But let’s see what he gets for his money. Body The 9ll’s eye-catching body is distinctive—slimmer, trimmer, yet obviously Porsche. While not as revolu­tionary as the original 356 design was in its day, the 9ll’s shape is far less controversial and slightly more aerodynamic. Though the frontal area has grown, a lower drag coefficient (0.38 vs 0.398) allows it to reach a top speed of 130 mph with only 148 hp. It ought to weather the years without looking dated. Compared to the cur­rent 356 body, the 911 is five inches longer (on a four-­inch longer wheelbase), three inches narrower (on a one-inch wider track), and just about the same height. The body structure is still unitized, built up of in­numerable, complicated steel stampings welded to­gether (with the exception of the front fenders which are now bolted on for easier repair of minor accidents). The glass area and luggage space have been increased by 58 percent and 186 percent respectively, and the turning circle is a bit tighter. The fully trimmed (with cocoa mats) trunk will hold enough for a week’s vacation for two; additional space is available in the rear seat area. The trunk and engine lids can be opened to any angle and held by counter-springs and telescopic dampers—­a nice touch. These lids, as well as the doors, are larger than the old Porsche’s, making access to the innards much less awkward. The gas filler cap nestles under a trap door in the left fender, and the engine lid release is hidden away in the left door post. The generous expanse of glass area does wonders for rearward vision; all-around visibility is comparable to a normal front-engined car. The bumpers are well­-integrated with the body, though provide barely ade­quate protection from those who park by ear. The standard appointments are lush and extensive: two heater/defrosters, padded sunvisors with vanity mir­ror, map and courtesy lights, 3-speed windshield wipers, 4-nozzle windshield washers, chrome wheels, belted tires, two fog lamps, a back-up light, and a beau­tiful wood-rim steering wheel. About the only options we’d like are seat belts (for which massive, forged eye­ bolts are provided), a radio, and a fender mirror. Fitted luggage and factory-installed air-conditioning will be available shortly, we’re told.Interior The ads tell you a Porsche is “fun” to drive. Fun? A Mini-Minor is fun to drive because it can’t be seri­ous; everything about it is incongruous—it defies all known laws of nature…and marketing…and gets away with it. The Porsche—any Porsche—is no fun at all; Germans aren’t much given to frivolity. Porsches are designed by drivers, for drivers, to be driven very matter-of-factly from Point A to Point B in maximum comfort, speed, and safety. Form soberly follows func­tion, and the cockpit of a Porsche is laid out to achieve just that end. The controls and instruments are effi­ciently positioned, and this economy of effort and mo­tion is why Porsches aren’t tiring to drive. But fun? Porsches are for driving. As befits a driver’s car, the controls are superb. The steering wheel is a special joy; the shallow “X” of the black anodized spokes provides perfect thumbrests without obscuring any of the unusually comprehensive instrumentation. The reach to the wheel is just right, and all the secondary controls are operated by stalks on either side of the wheel. The driver can signal for turns; flash, raise, and dip the headlights; and operate the windshield wipers and washers, all without moving his hands from the wheel. The gearshift lever has less travel than the 356’s, is smoother, and requires no more effort. The pedals are beautifully positioned for long-distance touring or fancy heel-and-toe footwork; there’s even room to rest the left foot between the clutch and the front wheel arch. The seats have the wondrously-comfortable Reutter reclining mechanisms, and are softly sprung and up­holstered in cloth with leather edges. They will adjust to fit anybody under seven feet and 300 pounds. Head-­and hip-room are similarly commodious; shoulder room is about the same as in the 356. The rear seats are a different matter. Though the 911 is occasionally described as a 2+2, the space back there is very cramped. It can hold an adult-sitting sideways with head bent forward—or a child, but neither for very long. It is more properly a luggage area, and for that purpose, the seat backs fold down to form a shelf for a couple of fair-sized suitcases. The dashboard is a magnificent edifice. The instru­mentation is complete even to an oil level gauge (no messy mucking about with a dipstick for the 911 owner). Directly in front of the driver is a huge, 270° electrical tachometer. To its left are gauges for oil and fuel levels, oil pressure and temperatures, and sundry warning lights. On the right are a speedometer, odometer, a clock, and a few more colorfully flashing lights. About the only thing we didn’t like about the dash was the strip of teak running full-width below the instruments. The Porsche people are extremely proud of it, it’s supposed to look elegant. It looks as if someone said, “Let’s put a strip of teak here; it’ll look elegant.” It doesn’t. If we owned a 911 (dare we dream…?), we’d paint it flat black to match the rest of the leatherette-covered dash. The normal heater, which draws heat from the en­gine, is supplemented by a gasoline-powered device hidden away under the floor of the trunk compartment. The normal heater, controlled by a small lever just forward of the gearshift, has outlets ahead of each door (which can be closed—or adjusted—by sliding covers), at the base of the windshield, and at the rear window. The auxiliary heater, primarily a defroster, draws air from a grille behind the front seats and pro­vides instant heat. It exudes a faint odor of gasoline but is only used in slow traffic or until the engine warms up. A variable-speed fan circulates air from either heater. Draft-free ventilation with the windows rolled up is possible at any time of year; fresh air is picked up from the high-pressure area ahead of the wind­shield, controlled by a lever on the dash, and exhausted through the headliner material and out nearly-invisible slots just above the rear window. The handbrake is between the front seats, whence it migrated from under the 356’s dash. The doors and dash abound with armrests, grab handles, door pulls, push-button door openers and locks, map pockets, a cigarette lighter, an ashtray, and a lockable glove box. Engine Details The 911’s engine is Porsche’s first at­tempt at a six-cylinder; the two extra cylinders were added for smoother, less-highly-stressed oper­ation. The prototype we drove at the factory had twin exhausts and sounded uncomfortably like a Cor­vair. The production cars have a single exhaust and a sound all their own. It’s rated at 148 SAE horsepower. The engine idles somewhat uncer­tainly at 800 rpm but is smooth as a turbine from 1000 rpm on up to the 6800 rpm redline. It revs quickly and freely, like a competition engine with a light flywheel. Around town, the 911 can be driven in first and third (up to 93 mph) alone; on the highway, it will pull from 2000 rpm in fifth. Sixty mph is less than 3000 rpm (100 mph is only 4900 rpm), making turnpike cruising relatively quiet and effortless on the engine. During the 911’s gestation period, a lot of attention was given to the carburetion, but it still isn’t perfect. The 911 has six individual single­-throat Solex PIs, “floatless” car­buretors in which the fuel level is maintained in a separate reservoir and recirculated by a second fuel pump (mechanical, like the primary pump). All this is supposed to elim­inate flat spots, hesitation, and the like. Not quite—they’re still sorting it out in Stuttgart. After meticulous adjustment by Wolfgang Rietzel, Porsche of America’s service repre­sentative, one of our otherwise-­stock test cars clocked 0–60 mph in 6.8 seconds—substantially better than the average 911 fresh off the showroom floor. Hopefully, the prob­lem will be solved in Germany and not require tedious fine-tuning at local Porsche agencies. On the plus side, the new Solexes are injection­-like in their freedom from varia­tions due to lateral or vertical ac­celerations. The crankcase is composed of two light-alloy castings bolted together on the crank centerline. The crank itself is a beautifully counter­weighted forging running in eight main bearings (the “usual” seven plus one outboard of the accessory drive gears), the first time Porsche has put a main bearing on either side of each rod journal.The distributor, fan, valve train, alternator, and oil pumps are driven from the rear of the crankshaft. Dry sump lubrication (a la Carrera) is employed, with two whole gallons of oil circulated, by a scavenger and a pressure pump, through a thermo­statically-controlled oil cooler and full-flow filter. The overhead valves are driven by a pair of chains (one per cylinder bank; each tensioned hydraulically) via short rocker arms. The rockers allow the valves to be disposed at an angle to each other rather than in-line. Six individual cylinder heads are clamped between the cylinder bar­rels and camshaft housings. The fully-machined combustion cham­bers are hemispherical with fairly large valves (1.54-inch intake, 1.50 inch exhaust). The ports look restrict­ed for 333 cc displacement per cylin­der, the valve timing and lifts are conservative and the compression ratio is only 9: 1, indicating that Porsche is holding quite a bit in re­serve. We would estimate that 180 horsepower is within reach, either by the factory for a super street ma­chine or by individuals for amateur racing in the SCCA’s class D Pro­duction. The upper limit for GT racing, either in a lightweight 911 or the six-cylinder versions of the 904 must be in excess of 200 horses. The barrels have alloy cooling fins and shrunk-in “Biral” (a spe­cial cast iron) liners. The bore and stroke, at 3.15 x 2.60 inches (80 x 66 mm) are fashionably oversquare, with a ratio of .825 (vs. .895 for the pushrod engines and .804 for the 2.0 liter four-cam engine). The pistons are sharply domed with healthy valve recesses. The axial fan is fiberglass, sur­rounds the alternator, and is driven from the crank by a V-belt. Single ignition is used in conjunction with 12-volt electrics, replacing the old 6-volt system. Porsche has indi­cated its confidence in the new en­gine by extending the warranty from six months/6000 miles to a full year and/or 10,000 miles.Transmission and Clutch As mentioned, the five-speed, all­-synchro gearbox is the 911’s best single feature. Actually, the torque and flexibility of this engine are such that a three-speed would suffice, but it was Porsche’s aim to be much more than merely sufficient. There is, in effect, a gear for every occa­sion: one for starting, one for cruis­ing, and three for passing. It is to Porsche’s everlasting credit that it didn’t make first gear superfluous by having second an alternative start­ing gear—you must start in first, and it’s a pretty long gear at that. In fact, 6800 rpm through the gears gives 44, 65, 93, 118, and 138 mph. All the gears are indirect, with the famous—and flawless—Porsche servo-ring synchromesh. Fourth and fifth gear are actually overdrives, but pulling power is not lost as the upper three ratios are close in an already close-ratio gearbox. Operating the shift lever is con­fusing at first. First gear is to the left and back, with the other four gears in the normal H-pattern. Re­verse is to the left and forward, but to go from first to second, you just push forward—toward reverse—not forward and right. You half expect it to go into reverse, but it won’t—scout’s honor. Everything else is a piece of cake (the linkage is not as remote as other Porsches’), in­cluding changing down to first gear for those mountain-pass hairpins. Clutch diameter is up to 8.5 inches, and the mechanism should prove more robust than older Porsche clutches. Steering, Suspension, and Brakes Porsche is also trying rack-and­-pinion steering in a production car for the first time on the 911. It’s fast, precise, incredibly direct, and—like the carburetion—a little late in being perfected. The prototype we drove was subject to torque steer, i.e., changing the throttle position would change the car’s direction. This had been eliminated on the pro­duction car, but a new bug had cropped up: The steering felt too direct, like a racing Ferrari—you could feel every ripple in the road. Revised front-end parts are coming through on the latest cars, but it’s almost impossible to make a rack­-and-pinion system completely free of kickback. Doubtless, Porsche will work out an honorable compromise between damping action and road feel that will satisfy most customers. Incidentally, the steering column contains two U-joints, not to clear any obstacle (the steering box is on the car’s centerline), but so that it will collapse toward the dash in case of a crash, a good safety measure.The 911’s suspension is a depar­ture for Porsche. A damper strut system is used at the front with longitudinal torsion bars. This lay­out takes much less trunk space than the transverse bars of the 356. It also improves control and reduces roll (by raising the front roll cen­ter), and has the odd effect of bank­ing the wheels into a turn, like a motorcycle rider. To avoid oversteer, a link-type rear suspension with semi-trailing arms (and transverse torsion bars) was adopted. There is very little camber change on jounce and rebound, so the cornering power is not as variable on an undulating surface as the 356. Koni telescopic shocks are fitted all around, but no “camber compensator” is used, as the new suspension makes it unneces­sary. Body roll is moderate, pitch and harshness seem well under con­trol, and the ride is surprisingly soft. In all, it’s a great improvement over the 356 suspension. The 911 uses 15-inch wheels. A 14-inch wheel would be more aes­thetically pleasing (and add to the available interior room) but would have restricted brake size, so we’re not complaining. We will complain about the wheel width, however. The rims are only 4.5 inches wide­—what’s happened to all that racing experience? Porsche does have 5.0 x 15 and 5.5 x 15 wheels (from the 904) that will fit; substituting these wheels would yield greater corner­ing power (and less tire wear) at the penalty of a slightly stiffer ride. We recommend them, and also the ZF­-made, U.S.-design limited-slip dif­ferential—if you can get them.The brakes are virtually the same as the four-wheel discs of the 356C. In the 1965 Car and Driver Year­book we said: “There’s nothing like four-wheel discs…that halfway business with discs at the front and drums at the rear doesn’t even come close. In an emergency, good brakes are probably the single most im­portant factor in avoiding an acci­dent.” The Porsche’s brakes are without peer; smooth, positive, un­affected by water, and absolutely fade-free. PerformanceThe performance figures on the specifications page speak for them­selves, but while we’re on the sub­ject of quotes, David Phipps, our European Editor, had this to say about the 911’s handling: “Both di­rectional stability and cornering are far better than they have any right to be in a car which has the engine in the extreme rear. In corners, you can forget all the things you have been told about the sudden, vicious oversteer of rear-engine cars. The 911’s handling characteristics are basically neutral, progressing to slight understeer. It takes a ham­-fisted clot to upset the back end in the dry, and even in the wet you will only get the tail out by using lots of revs in the lower gears.” The 911 performs better than any previous street Porsche, including the two-liter Carrera. It’s kind of a pocket battleship: What it can’t out­-accelerate it can out-handle, and what it can’t out-handle it can out­-accelerate. There probably aren’t five comparable sports/touring cars in the whole spectrum that could lap a road course faster than the 911. And—back to the pocket battleship analogy—those that could probably would fall by the wayside long before the Porsche expired. The best gas mileage we could re­cord flat-out on the Autobahn was 24 mpg, but oil consumption was minimal. The oil change interval is up to 3000 miles, and the number of grease fittings has been reduced to zero. There are no other surprises in the 911 for any driver familiar with Porsches. The fan noise and growl of an air-cooled engine are typically Porsche. Getting in and out—despite the wider doors—still requires a supple spine, and so on. What Porsche has wrought in the 911 is a worthy replacement for all the models that preceded it. Race breeding and engineering refinement ooze from the 911’s every pore. The whole package, especially the powertrain, is designed to be more reliable and less difficult to service, thus all the better suited to the factory’s concept of the Porsche as a sealed machine for ground transportation. Although the 911 costs a lot less than the Carrera—and a lot more than the current C and SC—it’s worth the price of all the old Porsches put together. Most importantly, the 911’s appeal should be considerably wider than the earlier models—which, in truth, you had to be some­thing of a nut to own. Any­body who ever felt a flicker of desire for a Porsche before will be pas­sionately stirred about the 911.SpecificationsSpecifications
1965 Porsche 911Vehicle Type: mid-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 2+2-passenger, coupe
PRICEAs Tested: $6490
ENGINESOHC inline-6, aluminum blockDisplacement: 122 in3, 1991 cm3Power: 148 hp @ 6100 rpmTorque: 140 lb-ft @ 4200 rpm
TRANSMISSION5-speed manual
CHASSIS
Suspension, F/R: struts/semi-trailing armsBrakes, F/R: 10.8-in disc/11.3-in discTires: Dunlop SP
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 87.1 inLength: 164.0 inWidth: 63.4 inHeight: 51.9 inCurb Weight: 2376 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 7.0 sec1/4-Mile: 15.6 sec @ 90 mph100 mph: 20.0 secTop speed: 130 mph
FUEL ECONOMYEPA city/highway: 16/24 mpg
C/D TESTING EXPLAINED More

From the June 1979 issue of Car and Driver.Wall Street’s investment advisers are sounding the inflation warnings again. They’re telling us to dig in, forget our passbook savings accounts, put our money in something that will ride the crest of inflation like a surfer hanging ten at Malibu. They tout Krugerrands and South African gold-mining stocks and platinum futures. They say people are making it big in Louis XVI roll-top desks and colonial-American stamp col­lections and hand-carved Eskimo walrus tusks. So why have they completely overlooked Fiat’s X1/9?Fiat X1/9s are the high fliers of the car equities. Your stock portfolio should do so well. The last example we tested, at the start of the 1978 model year, list­ed for $5195. The following May it jumped to $5545, then closed out the year at $5700. The opening quote for 1979 was $6690 and just recently that has been revised upward, to $7115. That’s a rise of $1920, a juicy 37 per­cent appreciation, in the space of one and a half model years. And it will prob­ably go higher. We hate to mouth the same lines used by investment advisers, but sometimes it’s appropriate. So here goes. We thought the X1/9 was a good value at $5195 and we continue to recommend it for fun-oriented accounts seeking a maximum of style and agility with a minimum of fuel cost. This model has cornered the ultrasophisticated branch of the small-sports-car market, and we see nothing on the horizon that will give it any competition. In other words, the X1/9 is the only game in town. If you want it, you’ll have to pay the going rate. It’s a seller’s market. We realize that a base price of $7115 is enough to make a lot of people’s checkbooks suck air. But then $5545 seemed like a big number a year ago. Now we’re all kicking ourselves for not buying sooner. Those who gritted their teeth those 1570 short dollars ago and signed the order forms are ahead of the game now, riding that inflation wave just as the Wall Streeters recommend. First, they have the nifty little sports car they want­ed, and, second, the rise in the new­-model price has given them a solid hedge against depreciation. Bigger and better bumpers mean that the X1/9 can be just as nasty as the next car when push comes t0 shove.Depreciation is by far the largest cost of new-car ownership (with the possible exception of insurance if you’re really young or if your driving record is be­coming a legend). The usual driver is hard-pressed to use more than $400 worth of gasoline a year; the average de­preciation for the first several years can easily be twice that. Unless, of course, you were lucky enough to get in on the ground floor of a high flier like the X1/9. The rapid rise in the price of the new model automati­cally lifts the value of good used ones. A 1977 or an early-1978 X1/9 should still bring relatively close to what it sold for new, certainly much closer than the general run of cars of the same age. This is not to say that this sporty Fiat is the only automobile to enjoy such an anti-depreciation feature. Most special-­interest cars, particularly those of Ger­man origin, have had the same protection in the last five years, a time when certain foreign currencies (notably the d-mark) were rising rapidly with respect to the dollar. Nonetheless, such a price trend has in fact made the X1/9 a cheaper car to own than its swelling new-car price would at first suggest.More Archive ReviewsOne more caveat. Wall Streeters know well the fickle nature of trends and how suicidal it can be to assume that the future will continue the pattern of the past. So a word to the wise here. Don’t buy an X1/9 solely on some nth-­order extrapolation of past perform­ance. Buy it because you like it. There’s very little risk that way. Particularly when it’s even easier to like the 1979 model than those which have gone before. The X1/9 has more improvements this year than at any time since its introduction in 1974. The best news is the enlarged engine, 1498cc and 67 horsepower (66 in California), up 208cc and 6 horsepower from last year. As you probably suspect, this power­plant is borrowed from the new Strada sedan. It’s still an in-line four-cylinder with an aluminum cylinder head and a belt-driven overhead camshaft, but the stroke has been increased to 63.9mm from 55.5mm. Apparently, there has been a slight increase in the overall height of the powerplant too, because the engine cover has been raised slight­ly for more clearance. Breakerless igni­tion is now standard equipment, and for the first time there is a catalytic convert­er for exhaust cleanup. Naturally, along with the Strada en­gine comes the Strada gearbox, a slick little five-speeder to replace the old four-speed. The ratios in first, second, and third are identical to those of the old model, but fourth in the new one is a bit closer to third, and fifth is added as an overdrive. Beyond this, the final-drive ratio is reduced to 4.08 from 4.42. The result of the new engine and gearbox is very pleasant indeed: finally, the X1/9 has torque. Step on the accel­erator at 2500 rpm, even in fifth, and something happens. The engine is much more flexible. You needn’t keep shuffling through the gearbox for a more favorable ratio every time you see an opening in traffic. The engine has brawn to it now and it pulls noticeably stronger. Moreover, the pace of the car is dif­ferent—slower, more relaxed. You had to buzz the old one to keep it moving, but the new one has enough energy that most in-traffic thrusts can be made one gear higher and the long final-drive ra­tio keeps the revs down when you cruise. The net effect is a bit less like the flight of the bumblebee. Most of the other new-model revi­sions are more easily seen. Once again the bumpers have been overhauled, this time with an effort toward blending them into the bodywork. You’ll notice that soft valance panels now fill in the space between the actual bumper and the body. Still, the design is awkward; the X1/9 wears its bumpers with less grace than any other new car we can think of.The new dash has a locking glove box, so your Kleenex gets the same protection it would enjoy in a Buick.More appealing are the new wheels and tires. The old, skinny-section 145/SR-13s have been replaced by healthy-­looking 165/70SR-13s on rims in­creased to 5.0 inches in width from 4.5. The car takes a solid stance now, and it looks more substantial. Roadholding should be better too, though we have not verified that likelihood with a skid­pad test. Of course, the most conspicuous visu­al changes are right in the cockpit. The only firm link with the past is the steer­ing wheel, which continues its old shape—a wonderful, supermodern, four-spoke dish—but now is black in­stead of bright metal. The dash is all new, though the instrument cluster has very much the same layout as before—and the same complement of speedom­eter, tachometer, and electrical-system, water-temperature, and fuel-level gaug­es. Frankly, we have mixed emotions about this particular revision. It looks fine, and there is now a lockable com­partment on the passenger side. But the old dash was formed into broad trays on both sides of the center radio module, and they were terrifically handy for holding toll money, sunglasses, ciga­rettes, and the like. Now, all those ne­cessities of travel must be poked into a narrow pigeonhole on the console, just forward of the shifter. Still, the X1/9’s interior is impressive, particularly for its appearance of quali­ty. Expensive-looking materials are used everywhere, and all the bits fit together solidly. The carpet of the test car was trying to pull itself out from under the bezel surrounding the brake lever, but apart from that, the assembly was flaw­less. From inside, we’d say the car defi­nitely looks its price. Certain aspects of the driver’s accom­modations have gone slightly wrong, however. We don’t fit in quite as well as before. The seats are exceptionally comfortable, very deeply bucketed, and adjustable for backrest angle. They ac­tually feel as good as they look. But somehow, they seem puffed up a bit more than before, and thigh clearance is tighter under the steering wheel. Worse yet, as a result of some subtle reposi­tioning, the steering-wheel rim mows everything above 2800 rpm off the ta­chometer face. While the problem is greatest for tall drivers, anyone whose head is high enough to see over the top of the wheel is likely to miss at least part of the tach. The puffy seats also seem to reduce legroom slightly—not a painful encroachment, because the X1/9 was not critically short before, but anytime you make a small car smaller, the squeeze is noticeable. In fact, one of the X1/9’s greatest at­tributes, in our opinion, is that it is ex­ceptionally roomy and comfortable for a sports car of this size. It’s uncommonly wide inside, so your shifting arm doesn’t get tangled up in your passen­ger’s elbow. Moreover, there is a great deal of cargo space: a large, irregularly shaped compartment in front and a full­-width rectangular volume in the tail. In the past, this rear trunk tended to be a hot box, because of the position of the engine just in front and the exhaust sys­tem just below. Some extra insulation has been added in the new model, but we still suspect it’s the right place to carry home the pizza. Another aspect of the X1/9’s charm is the ease with which it takes to fresh-air motoring. The lightweight roof panel is no problem for one person to lift off, and it can be stowed in the front trunk just under the lid, still leaving room for a fair amount of cargo beneath. Because this is a targa-style convertible, you’re left with sheetmetal pillars in the rear corners of the cockpit and a glass wall behind, both of which are barriers to close communion with nature. But on the plus side is an uncommonly draft­-free cockpit. And if you put the side windows up, leaving only the roof off, there is very little more turbulence in­side than with most sunroofs. But even if you don’t like sun on your head, the X1/9 is still fun. Every time we drive one of these little sweethearts, we’re reminded of how exhilarating it is to fling around a low-mass car. No pon­derous bulk. No grunts and groans. Just put your fingertips on the controls and express your wishes. You feel as though you can go anywhere—straightening curves, around plodders, into half-size parking slots. You’re not limited to the moves that normal cars can make. Driv­ing the X1/9 is more like running sit­ting down. Realistically, of course, it is a car, and we car critics must attempt to distill its behavior down to normal road tester’s terms. Like almost every car in the world, the X1/9 understeers, yet it is much more amusing than most because it’s one of the few road cars alive these days in which you can definitely sense the rear tires building up slip angles. You have the feeling that the tail is try­ing to hang out back there—not get away and whack the fence, but just get a little drift angle going. We regard this as a genuine bonus. For the experi­enced driver, it’s a little extra activity to play with. For the novice, it’s a warning of what might happen, long before he’s even close to the soup. We do have a few mild criticisms of the X1/9’s responses. The test car had very little self-centering in the steering. You have to consciously crank the wheel back ahead again after every turn­—probably a quirk of this particular exam­ple since it hasn’t been a problem on others we’ve driven. Also, the new five­-speed shifter is spring-loaded toward the center of the pattern—the three­-four slot—so you must pull hard left to keep from getting hung up in the cross­bar on the one-two shift. If the spring is really necessary, which we doubt, it should be a little less pushy. Finally, the test car had a vapor-lock problem when we restarted a warm en­gine—not enough to prevent the start, but enough to make running very rag­ged for a minute or two. Fiat has a fix, and a factory spokesman thought it had been applied to this car. If it had, the engine was not impressed. So there you have it, a couple of warts on what remains an engaging little sports car. We agree that the price in­creases of the past two years are large to the point of being alarming, but we think the X1/9 is still the leader in the bite-size sports-car class. That has to be worth something. Besides, there’s one thing we all know about new-car prices: there is no sense in waiting for them to go down.CounterpointForget drinking. If your spirits are in need of uplifting, I suggest taking a large dose of X1/9, especially on sunny days. That way you can peel back the top and let the sun warm your body while the roadster’s fancy footwork warms your careworn heart.I can overlook the fact that the X1/9’s engine thrashes incessantly, that the cen­ter console puts a dent in my right shin, and that the beer-tap shift lever only co­operates part of the time, simply because this car is so playful. The X1/9 may be an up-to-the-minute sports car, but it’s bursting with old-style fun. There’s com­munion among you, the car, the road, and the elements. It shadows your every move as if you were wired to it, and it’s so nim­ble it could probably do the hustle. If you’re car-shopping with serious ideas about Interstate capability, trunk space, or people room, walk on by. But if you’re up for a runabout that’s perfect for mad dashes to the liquor store or for rushing through the mountains to Elsi­nore for lunch, then form up at your local Fiat dealer. And be ready to smile. —Rich CepposI get a warm feeling when I run across something good that has been made better. Like this new X1/9. The little dear has always been a particular favorite of mine. I’ve always liked its looks, its handling, and its high fun-to-drive rating. My only complaint has been the absence of power and a five­-speed gearbox. The new car takes care of that, thank you. Now, something happens when you put your foot to the floor. No more waiting—yawn—for the tach needle to creep its way toward the red zone. And the ratios in the new box have the right numbers—no untoward gaps to reduce your forward momentum. I am not very fond of the Fiat Strada–style rocker switches, and the only thing I can say about the strange shift knob is that it certainly is a strange shift knob. Yessir, in this case, good has definitely gotten better. —Mike KnepperAddiction is the scourge of car fanatics. Yesterday, I spent five hours at the wheel of the X1/9 just because it gives me the simply uncontrollable urge to stretch out the wonderful moments until just about forever. The X1/9 is intoxicating. Once I discovered how to dislocate my right knee in order to slip in under the wheel, little could have dislodged me short of a bomb under the seat. Put the car on and it feels like a Gucci loafer: snug, but pliant and comfortable. Put it in gear and it feels like a junior Ferrari: noisy, but firm and di­rect. It goes, handles, and stops with an energy level that raises yours so high you feel you may never come down. Like all addictions, however, this one has its bad sides, and they detract from the joys of this otherwise rambunctious and efficient little whippet. Unless your right ankle is just naturally built funny and hooked to a foot the size of a Frisbee, you won’t be able to heel-and-toe the pedals without creative orthopedic surgery. And the shift linkage has all the obstinate qualities of a spoiled brat, badly in need of a solid course in remedial manners. But . . . par­don me, I have to go drive it again. —Larry GriffinSpecificationsSpecifications
1979 Fiat X1/9Vehicle Type: mid-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 2-passenger, 2-door coupe
PRICE
Base/As Tested: $7115/$7330Options: AM/FM stereo, $215.
ENGINESOHC 16-valve inline-4, iron block and aluminum headDisplacement: 91 in3, 1498 cm3Power: 67 hp @ 5250 rpmTorque: 76 lb-ft @ 3000 rpm 
TRANSMISSION5-speed manual
CHASSIS
Suspension, F/R: struts/strutsBrakes, F/R: 8.9-in disc/8.9-in discTires: Pirelli Cinturato P3165/70SR-13
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 86.7 inLength: 156.2 inWidth: 61.8 inHeight: 46.5 inCurb Weight: 2050 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS30 mph: 3.3 sec60 mph: 11.8 sec1/4-Mile: 18.7 sec @ 72 mph90 mph: 42.1 secTop Speed: 97 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 183 ft  
EPA FUEL ECONOMYCity: 26 mpg 
C/D TESTING EXPLAINED More

From the May 1999 issue of Car and Driver.The Neon’s replacement, which arrives as a 2000 model, is called the Neon. Pause to absorb this electrifying news, then note that this is the first time in more than three decades that the Dodge and Plymouth compacts have been redesigned without their names being changed. It’s a sign of an automaker’s confidence in its current product when it elects to carry over a nameplate for that product’s replace­ment. In the Neon’s case, we understand this decision. The cutesy Neon drew thousands of sought-after Gen X cus­tomers into Dodge and Plymouth show­rooms for the first time ever. In recent years, DaimlerChrysler says the Neon has been one of the company’s best-built and most reliable domestic cars, too. So it’s no surprise that the new Neon isn’t a radical change from the original model. It’s just 2.6 inches longer, 0.2 inch wider, and an inch longer in wheel­base than the 1999 model. The DOHC 2.0-liter four-cylinder that produced 150 horsepower is gone, however, leaving only the 132-horsepower single-cam version, mated to the same five-speed manual or three-speed automatic trans­mission. (An R/T version arrives for 2001 with a 150-hp SOHC engine.) The two-door has been dropped (it accounted for just 23 percent of Neon sales last year anyway), as the four-door has passed through a kind of design puberty. The happy-face front fascia has grown a more prominent chin, and a new chrome mustache has sprouted on the grille. HIGHS: Inviting, roomy, and less·plasticky interior; let’s-go-play handling; sleek new flanks; terrific brakes with ABS package.Baby fat has disappeared from the all-new body, which stretches tightly around the wheel wells, giving the Neon a family resemblance to the rest of DaimlerChrysler’s domestic-car lineup. It reflects a more grown-up and serious image for the Neon. Our first look at the 2000 (C/D, February 1999) documented these changes in detail. Since then, we’ve spent a lot of time behind the wheel, on the road as well as at the track. What we’ve learned suggests a glowing future for the Neon. A lack of refinement was a problem with the first design. And that’s the area where the new model has made the most significant strides. Wind whispers rather than whistles around the windows now. Bumps pass underneath more quietly, and the four-cylinder hums more dis­tantly. The decibel-level drops measured by our sound meter are five at idle, four at full-throttle, and two while cruising at 70 mph, when compared with our last SOHC Neon (C/D, December 1995). Many factors are at work here—a stiffer body, a redesigned four-strut suspen­sion, and full-frame doors with triple seals that replace the frameless-glass door design of before. On the engine, revised covers, manifolds, and a new mounting system reduce the hollow, whiny noises that plagued last year’s four-cylinder. Note that we said reduce, not eliminate. Bury the throttle all the way to the 6500-rpm redline, and a familiar booming sound greets the ear—­it’s just less annoying now. LOWS: Residual engine boominess, more likely to get lost in a crowded parking lot.The interior has taken a significant step forward. It’s slightly roomier front and rear. Even better is the execution of its components. The hard interior plastic is still there, but it’s better hidden behind soft-to-the-touch and faux-metal surfaces. Chrome latch handles with beefy-looking lock buttons dress up the doors. The LX models (and ES models at Dodge) have adjustable headrests for outboard rear-seat passengers, and the trunk carpeting extends beneath the spare tire. After we spent some time in it, this Neon felt a half­-class above rivals such as the Ford Escort and Chevy Cavalier. Jim Caiozzo|Car and DriverWith its stiffer body, revised shock valving, and increased suspension travel, the 2000 Neon is even more fun to throw around curves than the previous model. The steering is sharp and accurate. Controllable four-wheel drifts are a flick of the steering wheel away, and gross body motions are tightly controlled. The ride is noticeably firm—this is no Hyundai cush­mobile—but it never felt harsh. The brakes, though, have really been improved. Tromp on the pedal at 70 mph, and our four-wheel-disc and ABS-­equipped test car clawed itself to a stop in 175 feet. That’s five less than it took the Ford SVT Contour we tested, and it’s within a couple of feet of the stop­ping distances of a Mazda Miata or Chevy Corvette. The optional anti-lock system has been granted electronic brake propor­tioning and traction control, and improve­ments were made to fade resistance and pedal feel, but we didn’t expect this. Some credit goes to the optional Goodyear Eagle LS tires, which could summon 0.82 g of grip in curves, matching the skidpad number of a BMW 328i. This is excep­tional cornering and braking for a $15,000 econocar. The possibilities of the up­coming R/T and ACR racing models make us itchy with anticipation. At 2644 pounds, the 2000 Neon is 148 pounds heavier than the last four-door Neon we tested. That car could run to 60 mph in 7.9 seconds; the new one needs 8.7. That’s merely average for this class—a Mazda Protege ES requires 8.4 seconds, and a Saturn SL2 needs 7.6-but our test car was quite green, with just 400 miles on the odometer. We think a broken-in Neon would be 0.3 to 0.4 second quicker. VERDICT: It’s a less-distinctive car to look at but a far more competitive car underneath. Slower acceleration is about the only letdown in an otherwise comprehensively improved car. Surprisingly, the price hasn’t changed much at all—base prices stay below $13,000, with the LX and ES versions coming in at less than $15,000. If reliability is respectable on early-produc­tion cars, that will mark another welcome change from the previous model. If we can snag a long-term Neon soon, we’ll be the first to let you know if that’s the case. CounterpointThe original Neon reminded me of Opie Taylor. Now Opie’s deep into puberty and has apparently attended a finishing school: The brassy, buzzy engine note has been largely subdued. Interior surfaces are more tasteful and upscale. This new Neon rides like a bigger car. And its clutch is light, with Honda-smooth takeup. (Too bad the shift linkage remains as clunky as Barney’s cruiser’s.) I sure hope this Neon is better built than our long-termer (December 1995), which was awash in loose trim bits, failed latches, and mysterious squeaks. What’s more, I had a girlfriend whose ’95 Neon shed mechanical debris around the planet faster than the Mir space station. —John PhilipsThe Neon and I took some 15-mph “speed tables” in a nearby subdivision at 30 mph, and the Neon’s buttoned-up-for-’00 suspension was barely challenged. Had the roads not been so twisty and the speed tables so close together, my Neon friend and I would have pushed that little envelope. You can feel and see the refinement in this second-generation Neon: The fit and finish is well executed in the new taupe interior. However, the shifter is notchy; trying to engage reverse is a joke. The turn-signal noise is loud and agricultural. And why the key-release button? Have we no faith in our Gen Xers’ intelligence? —Patti MakiFrom its vastly richer-looking dashboard to its softer, quieter ride to the cushy surfaces that my elbows touch on the door panels, this Neon has moved up the automotive food chain. Yet while losing the old car’s go-kart ride, the new Neon maintains the quick reflexes and sharp handling that made the old one so charismatic and entertaining. Of course, the multifariously massaged engine still emits some 4000-rpm boominess, the rear seat is too low, and automatic transmissions with only three cogs have no place in the Western world, but on balance, the new Neon remains one of the more interesting small sedans on the market. —Csaba CsereSpecificationsSpecifications
2000 Plymouth Neon LXVehicle Type: front-engine, front-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door sedan
PRICE
Base/As Tested: $14,650/$15,955Options: Anti-Lock Brake Group (includes traction control), $595; alloy wheels, $355; cruise control, $225; Light Group, $130
ENGINEDOHC 16-valve inline-4, iron block and aluminum head, port fuel injectionDisplacement: 122 in3, 1996 cm3Power: 132 hp @ 5600 rpmTorque: 130 lb-ft @ 4600 rpm 
TRANSMISSION5-speed manual
CHASSIS
Suspension, F/R: struts/strutsBrakes, F/R: 10.1-in vented disc/10.6-in discTires: Goodyear Eagle LSF: 185/60TR-15
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 105.0 inLength: 174.4 inWidth: 67.4 inHeight: 56.0 inPassenger Volume, F/R: 51/39 ft3Trunk Volume: 13 ft3Curb Weight: 2644 lb
C/D TEST RESULTS
60 mph: 8.7 sec1/4-Mile: 16.6 sec @ 83 mph100 mph: 28.7 secRolling Start, 5–60 mph: 9.0 secTop Gear, 30–50 mph: 13.1 secTop Gear, 50–70 mph: 12.4 secTop Speed (gov ltd): 119 mphBraking, 70–0 mph: 175 ftRoadholding, 300-ft Skidpad: 0.82 g 
C/D FUEL ECONOMY
Observed: 24 mpg 
EPA FUEL ECONOMYCity/Highway: 28/35 mpg 
C/D TESTING EXPLAINED More

Broken Arrow Trail outside Sedona, Arizona, is like an off-road theme-park ride. Spanning 2.8 miles in and out, it rises over 400 feet and features the region’s iconic red-rock formations as a breathtaking backdrop. It’s also the birthplace of Pink Jeep Tours, which has hauled people up and down Broken Arrow since 1960. While the company’s jacked-up pink-painted Wranglers are an everyday sight, it’s not every day that they share the trail with a caravan of mid-size three-row SUVs, specifically the 2023 Honda Pilot TrailSport.It costs a family of four more than $500 to take the Jeep tour on the same route where we drove the new fourth-generation Pilot. We couldn’t help but chuckle at the surprised looks on people’s faces as they passed what probably looked to them like the SUVs they’d arrived in. Some passengers smiled and snapped photos with their phones; others sat slack-jawed inside the open-air Jeeps, perhaps wondering whether they could have driven their own vehicle instead of paying for the tour.A moderately difficult trail such as Broken Arrow can’t be conquered in most family SUVs—at least not without damaging something. Honda hopes to change that with the improved Pilot TrailSport, and our first experience at the wheel of a prototype showed it to be more capable than the faux off-roaders so popular in this space (including the previous Pilot TrailSport). By making a model that’s as capable as advertised, Honda hopes the new Pilot will stand out in a hotly contested segment.The Outdoorsy PilotThe TrailSport, which starts at $49,695, is the poster child for the fourth-gen Pilot. Its ruggedness encapsulates the redesigned Pilot’s boxier appearance and grander proportions. Compared with its predecessor, the new TrailSport is 3.7 inches longer overall—making it Honda’s biggest SUV ever—with front and rear tracks that are wider by 1.1 and 1.3 inches, respectively. Unlike before, the Pilot also won’t be mistaken for a minivan, mostly due to its square-jawed face and longer dash-to-axle ratio.Although every 2023 Pilot looks brawnier and benefits from a new platform that Honda says is the most rigid ever, the TrailSport stands out with exclusive off-road hardware. That includes a 1.0-inch lift that adds ground clearance (for a total of 8.3 inches) and a trim-specific suspension with retuned dampers with different valving, unique spring rates, and a thinner front anti-roll bar for improved flexibility. The new TrailSport is the first Pilot the factory fit with all-terrain tires, which are mounted on dark 18-inch rims with an inset spoke design and a unique wheel flange to prevent damage. It’s also the only model with a full-size matching spare. Happily, we never needed to fix a flat on Broken Arrow Trail, nor did we have to use the TrailSport’s front and rear recovery points.Related StoriesThe TrailSport’s Continental TerrainContact A/T all-terrain tires and torque-vectoring all-wheel drive worked together to maintain maximum traction. The 30.5-inch tires securely clung to Broken Arrow’s rocky red terrain, which was slippery from snowfall the day before. The all-wheel-drive system can send up to 70 percent of the available torque to the rear axle, and 100 percent of that can be sent to a single wheel. As the Pilot clawed over the toughest obstacles in the new Trail mode, we could feel Honda’s Trail Torque Logic working while we relaxed in the front seats, which are now more supportive.Our comfy reverie was occasionally interrupted by teeth-clenching scraping when hard objects met the steel skid plates protecting the engine, transmission, and fuel tank. Still, no real harm was done, and our convoy of Pilots confidently marched along. Our confidence was enhanced by the TrailSport’s useful TrailWatch camera system, which has front, side, and 360-degree views that are quickly accessed through a button on the tip of the windshield-wiper stalk. The front view was particularly useful on steep hills when the view over the hood showed nothing but sky. Improved On-Road RefinementWhile the TrailSport model attracts the most attention, the regular Pilot is significantly better too. We spent time in a top-of-the-line Elite, whose fancy features explain its $53,375 starting price. Apart from the TrailSport’s enhanced off-road chops, the Pilot’s newfound refinement is the 2023 model’s most compelling update. The structure is stiffer, there are myriad sound-deadening measures, and Honda redesigned the suspension to improve ride comfort and stability. The chassis also features bigger front brake rotors (13.8 versus 12.6 inches) and shorter overall brake-pedal motion. The steering is quicker, and the wheel is slightly wider and wrapped in nicer materials.Not only do the enhancements help make the Pilot much quieter inside, but driving this Honda SUV is also no longer a total snoozefest. Granted, the Pilot doesn’t corner or stop like a Civic Type R, but it doesn’t feel like a wobbly barge anymore either. The direct feel of the steering is a big leap over the old lifeless rudder, and it combines with improved body control and more responsive brakes for a driving experience that’s far better than its predecessor’s.HondaEvery Pilot has Honda’s new double-overhead-cam 3.5-liter V-6, which has the same displacement as the venerable single-overhead-cam V-6 it replaces with notable improvements to the fuel-delivery system, internals, and packaging. The new engine still makes 262 lb-ft of torque, but horsepower rises from 280 to 285. The powerplant pairs with a new 10-speed automatic transmission instead of a nine-speed unit, and front- or all-wheel drive. The new powertrain doesn’t make the Pilot feel discernibly quicker, but the throttle is more responsive at low speeds, and gearchanges mostly go unnoticed. Towing capacity remains 5000 pounds. EPA-estimated fuel economy for front-wheel-drive models is 22 mpg combined, while all-wheel-drive versions earn 21 mpg combined (20 mpg for the TrailSport). Those combined figures all are 1 mpg lower than the outgoing Pilot’s.Breaking the Old MoldAlthough the 2023 Pilot doesn’t have its predecessor’s obvious visual ties to the Honda Odyssey minivan, the new SUV’s larger dimensions and 2.8-inch-longer wheelbase make it a more practical people mover than before. The Pilot can comfortably fit seven or eight people, even if maneuvering around the cabin is easier in its sliding-door sibling. Still, second-row seats are highly flexible, and some models have a removable middle seat that can be stored under the rear cargo floor. However, the seat weighs more than 30 pounds, so stowing it requires some muscle. When the underfloor storage isn’t occupied, it offers 3 cubic feet of space. The removable load floor panel is also reversible, with carpet on one side and rubber on the other. The Pilot’s roomier third row has a USB port on each side and four cupholders (of the 14 total). The cargo area is bigger too, now with 49 cubic feet behind the second row and 19 cubes behind the third, in both cases a gain of two. Folding all the rear seats creates a flat floor and opens up 87 cubic feet of space. There’s also extra storage up front via a larger center-center console bin and a useful parcel shelf built into the dashboard.Only the top-tier Pilot Elite features a 10.2-inch digital gauge cluster and a head-up display. All versions except the LX and Sport trims have a 9.0-inch touchscreen infotainment system with wireless Apple CarPlay and Android Auto. It’s all part of a compelling package that includes standard driver assists such as automated emergency braking, automatic high-beams, adaptive cruise control, and lane-keeping assist. We’re impressed by the 2023 model’s improvements. It breaks the mold of the old generation, blossoming from forgettable to desirable—especially to everyone who saw the TrailSport keep up with the pink Jeeps on Broken Arrow Trail.SpecificationsSpecifications
2023 Honda PilotVehicle Type: front-engine, front- or all-wheel-drive, 7- or 8-passenger, 4-door wagon
PRICE
Base: LX, $37,295; LX AWD, $39,395; Sport, $40,495; Sport AWD, $42,595; EX-L, $43,295; EX-L AWD, $45,395; Touring, $47,795; Touring AWD, $49,895; TrailSport, $49,695; Elite, $53,375
ENGINE
DOHC 24-valve V-6, aluminum block and heads, direct fuel injectionDisplacement: 212 in3, 3471 cm3Power: 285 hp @ 6100 rpmTorque: 262 lb-ft @ 5000 rpm
TRANSMISSION10-speed automatic
DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 113.8 inLength: 199.9–200.2 inWidth: 78.5 inHeight: 70.9–72.0 inPassenger Volume, F/M/R: 57–59/57–59/40 ft3Cargo Volume, Behind F/M/R: 87/49/19 ft3Curb Weight (C/D est): 4050–4700 lb
PERFORMANCE (C/D EST)
60 mph: 6.0–6.5 sec1/4-Mile: 14.5–15.1 secTop Speed: 115 mph
EPA FUEL ECONOMY
Combined/City/Highway: 20–22/18–19/23–27 mpg More