2019 Ford Mustang GT Performance Pack Level 2 vs. 2019 Ford Mustang Shelby GT350: Which Is the Better?

2019 Ford Mustang GT Performance Pack Level 2 vs. 2019 Ford Mustang Shelby GT350: Which Is the Better?

By   16:19

It may seem crazy to compare the Ford Mustang to a Porsche 911—until you consider the growing size of the Mustang lineup. Like the 911, there's seemingly a Mustang for every buyer. There's an entry-level turbocharged four-cylinder all the way up to the 760-hp Shelby GT500 and even an EV with the Mustang name is coming soon. Right in the middle of that range are the GT and the Shelby GT350. Both bring impressive yet still relatively affordable performance and track-ready handling. But which is the better value? Is the GT350 worth the extra cash? We took these two pony cars to the track to find out. 

Face Off

On paper, both the GT and the GT350 are very similar. Both have a naturally aspirated V-8, a six-speed manual transmission, rear-wheel drive, and are within three pounds of each other on our scales. But a closer look reveals some major differences. Under the GT's hood is the Coyote 5.0-liter V-8 with a conventional cross-plane crankshaft and a 7400-rpm redline. Output is a glassy smooth 460 horsepower and 420 lb-ft of torque. The Shelby GT350, however, has Ford's Voodoo V-8, one the most special engines of the decade: a rev-happy and gritty 5.2-liter V-8 with a flat-plane crank and a hair-raising 8250-rpm redline. The GT350 delivers 526 horses and 429 lb-ft of twist. The GT's six-speed is a Getrag unit, while the GT350's stouter gearbox comes from Tremec, with each transmission having unique gear sets tailored to the very different engines.

 
To even up this matchup, we selected a GT coupe with the optional Performance Package Level 2 (PPL2), which, for $6500, adds magnetorheological dampers and larger front and rear brake rotors with six-piston Brembo calipers in front. Additional goodies include extra chassis bracing, additional cooling capacity, aerodynamic enhancements, a Torsen limited-slip differential, and super-gooey 305-section-width Michelin Pilot Sport Cup 2 summer tires at all four corners. An active exhaust system is $895, leather-wrapped Recaro buckets are $1595, and our test car came with $2200 in creature comforts that pushed our test car's bottom line to $51,640.

In addition to its unique and more powerful V-8, the Mustang Shelby GT350 justifies its higher asking price with additional chassis updates that sharpen its already honed reflexes. For 2019, Ford recalibrated the standard magnetorheological dampers, stiffened the front springs by 10 percent, softened the rears by six percent, and fitted a stiffer rear anti-roll bar. Like the GT PPL2, the GT350 now rolls on standard 19-inch Michelin Pilot Sport Cup 2 tires, albeit in a staggered setup with 295s up front and 305s in the rear. Our test car was fitted with the optional $850 Handling package, which adds a Gurney flap to the rear wing and adjustable camber plates for a more aggressive setup. Add in-dash navigation, an upgraded stereo, and some driver-assist features for $2000, as well as vinyl stripes for $475, and the total came to $64,860.

 

 

At the Track

To see how the GT fared against the GT350, we headed to the 2.2-mile road course in nearby Grattan, Michigan. Both the GT and the Shelby GT350 thunder down the track's long front straight and make ferocious noises. The GT's 5.0-liter emits a deeper and more guttural exhaust note versus the menacing high-rpm wail of the Shelby's 5.2-liter. Both cars arrive to the Turn 1 braking zone at speeds above 130 mph, but how each reacts to the big braking event reveals some differences. The GT PPL2's slightly wider front tires bring plenty of stopping grip—stops from 100 mph require 281 feet to the GT350's 289—but the PPL2 squirms and dives onto its nose in a way that unsettles it. Do the same thing in the GT350, and it remains relatively level and planted, which helps its pilot focus on not blowing the corner entry.

The PPL2 has more grip than the GT350—1.13 g versus the GT350's 1.09 g. That advantage aside, we prefer the way the GT350 rotates and responds to weight transfer. The GT350's loss of grip is more fluid and easier to predict. Both Mustangs have minimal body roll, but the GT350 is more composed in quick left-right-left transitions. The PPL2 isn't as responsive and feels a bit skittish as a result. There's more boost and lighter efforts through the GT's steering wheel, and, at times, it can feel a bit nervous. It's a good setup for track work, but the GT350's steering is even better, more alive, communicative, and better at placing the car within an inch of where you want it. Perhaps it's the additional camber provided by the Shelby's camber plates that allow it to change direction more assertively, but it's clear that the recent refinements to the GT350's track-tuned chassis have resulted in very special handling.

You get what you pay for in the GT350 when it comes to what's under the hood. Not only is the Voodoo V-8 more powerful, but the 5.2-liter's sky-high redline keeps it churning away after the GT has to shift. The GT PPL2 does have a rev-matching-downshift function that the GT350 lacks, but it's slow to call up the right rpm on really quick gear changes. You're better off blipping the throttle with your foot. We also prefer the greater accuracy and lighter effort of the Tremec TR-3160's shifter in the GT350 to the GT's Getrag 'box. As a result of the additional power and superior handling, the GT350 turned laps that were nearly two seconds quicker around Grattan than the GT PPL2. 

Conclusion
 

Even at the well-optioned $51,640 as-tested price, we can't deny the GT PPL2's price advantage. It becomes an even better value if you consider the PPL2's $44,950 entry point. For those looking for a Mustang that'll tackle a track, the PPL2 will never fail to impress and delight, but consider investing some of the savings into a differential cooler. In other track tests we've managed to overheat the GT PPL2's differential in just a few laps. You might also want to put $1800 of the savings aside to replace the sticky and relatively short-lived Michelin tires. The GT350's narrower front tires will save you $400 when it comes time to buy a new set. While both of these Mustangs boast serious performance chops, as our last comparison test of $60K sports cars showed, the Mustang Shelby GT350 is a very special car. The bigger price on the window sticker is commensurate with its added benefits.

Specifications

2019 Ford Mustang GT Performance Pack Level 2

VEHICLE TYPE
front-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 4-passenger, 2-door coupe

PRICE AS TESTED
$51,640 (base price: $49,150)

ENGINE TYPE
DOHC 32-valve V-8, aluminum block and heads, port and direct fuel injection
Displacement
307 cu in, 5038 cc
Power
460 hp @ 7000 rpm
Torque
420 lb-ft @ 4600 rpm

TRANSMISSION
6-speed manual

CHASSIS
Suspension (F/R): struts/multilink
Brakes (F/R): 15.0-in vented disc/13.0-in vented disc
Tires: Michelin Pilot Sport Cup 2, 305/30R-19 (98Y)

DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 107.1 in
Length: 188.5 in
Width: 75.4 in
Height: 54.9 in
Passenger volume: 85 cu ft
Trunk volume: 14 cu ft
Curb weight: 3821 lb

C/D
TEST RESULTS
Rollout, 1 ft: 0.4 sec
60 mph: 4.1 sec
100 mph: 9.4 sec
130 mph: 16.3 sec
Rolling start, 5–60 mph: 5.0 sec
Top gear, 30–50 mph: 9.8 sec
Top gear, 50–70 mph: 9.2 sec
¼-mile: 12.5 sec @ 114 mph
Top speed (governor limited): 154 mph
Braking, 70–0 mph: 139 ft
Braking, 100–0 mph: 281 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 1.13 g

EPA FUEL ECONOMY
Combined/city/highway: 18/15/24 mpg

  

2019 Ford Mustang Shelby GT350

VEHICLE TYPE
front-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 4-passenger, 2-door coupe

PRICE AS TESTED
$64,860 (base price: $61,535)

ENGINE TYPE
DOHC 32-valve V-8, aluminum block and heads, port fuel injection
Displacement
315 cu in, 5163 cc
Power
526 hp @ 7500 rpm
Torque
429 lb-ft @ 4750 rpm

TRANSMISSION
6-speed manual

CHASSIS
Suspension (F/R): struts/multilink
Brakes (F/R): 15.5-in vented disc/15.0-in vented disc
Tires: Michelin Pilot Sport Cup 2, F: 295/35R-19 (104Y) FP R: 305/35R-19 (106Y) FP

DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 107.1 in
Length: 188.9 in
Width: 75.9 in
Height: 54.2 in
Passenger volume: 87 cu ft
Trunk volume: 14 cu ft
Curb weight: 3818 lb

C/D
TEST RESULTS
Rollout, 1 ft: 0.4 sec
60 mph: 3.9 sec
100 mph: 8.7 sec
130 mph: 14.7 sec
Rolling start, 5–60 mph: 4.5 sec
Top gear, 30–50 mph: 10.0 sec
Top gear, 50–70 mph: 10.8 sec
¼-mile: 12.2 sec @ 119 mph
Top speed (drag limited, C/D est): 180 mph
Braking, 70–0 mph: 150 ft
Braking, 100–0 mph: 289 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 1.09 g

EPA FUEL ECONOMY
Combined/city/highway: 16/14/21 mpg

Read More

2019 BMW X7 vs. 2020 Mercedes-Benz GLS-Class: Which Decadent Full-Size Luxury SUV Does It Better?

2019 BMW X7 vs. 2020 Mercedes-Benz GLS-Class: Which Decadent Full-Size Luxury SUV Does It Better?

By   16:04

This comparison test is more than a decade in the making. Usually, German automakers chase each other down every segment, no matter how small or seemingly insignificant. But, in this case, it took BMW 13 years to deliver a response to the full-size, three-row Mercedes-Benz GLS-class. The X7 is BMW's answer to that big Benz.

Initially launched as the GL in 2006 and renamed the GLS for 2017, it has been steadily chipping away at the marketspace long dominated by the domestics such as the Cadillac Escalade, Chevrolet Tahoe and Suburban, Ford Expedition, and GMC Yukon. Those domestic entries have evolved from pickup-truck-based SUVs to properly civilized machines in their latest generation. A couple years ago the Lincoln Navigator received a massive update, and the new generation of the Escalade, Tahoe, Suburban, and Yukon will have independent rear suspensions that add much-needed third-row space.

Face Off

Although both Mercedes and BMW sell smaller SUVs with third rows, the promise in this segment is a combination of luxury and space for up to seven people. Both the X7 and the GLS offer available heated seats and automatic climate control in their third rows. (That's five zones of separate temperature control.) It also means sufficient stretch-out space for the rearmost area to be used in more than just a pinch and for more than just small children, plus there's space for cargo even when that back row is occupied.

The X7 and GLS we're testing here are the entry-level six-cylinder models—the X7 xDrive40i and GLS450 4Matic. Both start in the $75,000 neighborhood and can be optioned until they soar past $100K. Our test vehicles came well equipped, bringing their prices to $85,445 for the BMW and $96,835 for the Mercedes. The V-8–powered models, the X7 xDrive50i and the GLS580, start near $100,000 and continue the climb from there.

On the Road

 

These two vehicles largely deliver on our expectations for speed, comfort, and sophistication at this lofty price point. The GLS is refined and comfortable no matter what driving mode it's in. Even in Comfort mode, it can hustle without feeling floaty. In contrast, an X7 in Comfort mode is softened to the point that its body motions are bothersome. But selecting Adaptive or the Sport setting cinches up those movements considerably. Think raised S-class and 7-series wagons and you won't be far off. In fact, it's easy to forget the size and mass and find yourself driving both of them much faster than you realize or intend to.


2019 BMW X7

2020 Mercedes-Benz GLS450

As in many BMWs, the X7's steering is somewhat numb and disconnected. We thought we liked the GLS's far better until we drove them back to back and found the Mercedes's to be only slightly better. On big impacts, the GLS will send an occasional quiver through its structure, and the giant wheels send more noise and vibes into the cabin over broken roads. The X7 is resolutely solid. The GLS also exhibited odd body undulations over rough sections of roads, almost like they were tripping up its active, hydraulic-and-air suspension, called E-Active Body Control, a $6500 option. Perhaps the base air-spring suspension would do better in this regard. But E-Active Body Control also enables bounce mode, which is always a crowd pleaser, and also the possibility to lean into turns in three different intensities, but that sensation just feels strange in practice.

We might have preferred the X7's firmer brake pedal over the initial squishiness of the GLS's, but the GLS dominated in braking and cornering performance—0.92 g on the skidpad and a 154-foot stop from 70 mph—thanks to its $1750 21-inch wheels wearing Pirelli P Zero PZ4 summer tires. Upgraded performance rubber also is an option on the X7, but ours was fitted with 21-inch all-season Bridgestones.

Both of these SUVs are powered by turbocharged 3.0-liter inline-sixes. One key difference is that the GLS's engine is assisted by an electric motor to boost low-rpm acceleration. The BMW's engine makes 335 horsepower, and the Benz boasts 362. Despite the power difference, acceleration times are close. The Bimmer and the Benz remain within a tenth of a second of each other from their mid-five-second dashes to 60 mph all the way up to their governed 129-mph top speeds. But it wasn't hard to pick BMW's inline-six as our favorite. It's simply more refined and expensive sounding, more willing to rev to its higher, 7000-rpm redline, and also more responsive. Despite the GLS's electric assist, the X7 outhustled it in our 30-to-50-mph and 50-to-70-mph passing tests, although part of the credit goes to the BMW's brilliantly tuned ZF eight-speed automatic transmission. The GLS channels its thrust through Mercedes's own nine-speed automatic. These big boys also can tow when properly equipped, with the X7 rated to tug up to 7500 pounds and the GLS good for 7700.

The X7's maintains its powertrain advantage at the gas pump. In our steady 75-mph highway test, the X7 returned 28 mpg versus the GLS's 24 mpg. And although our GLS had the $1100 acoustic comfort option, which includes additional sound insulation and a laminated, sound-attenuating windshield and double-paned side glass, the X7 was quieter at 70 mph.

Interior

Take a seat and it's clear that both of these SUVs are all about extravagance. The GLS's interior likely benefits from an upcoming Maybach version of the GLS that will crest $200,000. It's likely that the GLS450's power-adjustable second-row seats and power headrests are there because the Maybach version will have them. A power headrest isn't new, but it's a feature that's usually missing from the front seats of wildly expensive vehicles, such as the Bentley Bentayga. The X7 also has power-adjustable second-row seats but not headrests, and it has the ability to control them from the driver's seat.

Both have power-folding second-row seats. On the GLS, however, only the passenger-side seat is electrified, and the button must be held down the entire time it's returning to its original position. Both the BMW and Mercedes setups are slow to fold. The fold-and-slide options on mainstream SUVs—for example, the Honda Pilot's excellent one-touch operation—are quicker and more useful, although none of them has a power-return function.

In terms of pure space, the GLS is the clear winner, with far more second- and third-row room. Even sliding the second-row seats all the way forward leaves sufficient space for six-foot-five occupants, whereas the X7's second row needs to be moved back to find comfort for the 99th percentile. The GLS's third row has far more head- and legroom and can better accommodate adult humans.

We found the GLS's front seats slightly more comfortable and also more embracing than the X7's. But we preferred the appearance of the BMW's leather to the elephant-skin-look graining on the GLS. And we still love BMW's double-hinged seatbacks that allow for a separate adjustment of the backrest at shoulder height—part of the $750 Multi-Contour Seats option. The GLS does have one party trick that the X7 lacks. The Benz has a new automatic seat setting based on the driver's height that does a pretty good job of choosing the right position, but it's wholly unnecessary unless you just started driving.

A quick glance into the cargo areas makes the GLS appear to be able to carry a lot more than the X7. But in our cargo test of carry-on-suitcase-size boxes, the GLS accommodated four behind its rearmost row, just one more than the X7. Both have one-touch power-folding capability for their third rows, although the BMW goes one step further with dedicated controls for enabling maximum passenger or maximum cargo configurations with a single press of a button.

Even without its expensive active suspension, our GLS would've still cost nearly $5000 more than our X7, and yet the BMW had more features and content. Present on the BMW but missing on the Mercedes—although all of these things are on the Benz's options list—was third-row climate control and heated seats, soft-close doors, and heated front armrests. Both of these utes have a long list of infotainment features and Apple CarPlay compatibility, but the GLS scores an additional mark for also featuring Android Auto. That said, we find BMW's iDrive setup and its console scrolling wheel easier to navigate than Mercedes's touchpad-based MBUX system.

Conclusion

We're trying our best to resist the "you decide" cliché, but picking a winner in this case really depends on the buyer's priorities. The X7 drives slightly better when not in its default Comfort mode, it's quieter, has the more refined inline-six, and gets notably better fuel economy. However, if it's space you're looking for, the GLS dominates with larger second and third rows, and substantially more cargo space. But you pay for the Benz's accommodations with worse fuel economy, and you'll also pay more to get the same level of features. That the X7 is less expensive and better to drive while still offering loads of practicality heretofore unseen in the BMW lineup is enough to earn it our vote over the GLS in this initial matchup.

Specifications

2019 BMW X7 xDrive40i

VEHICLE TYPE
front-engine, all-wheel-drive, 7-passenger, 4-door wagon

PRICE AS TESTED
$85,445 (base price: $74,895)

ENGINE TYPE
turbocharged and intercooled DOHC 24-valve inline-6, aluminum block and head, direct fuel injection
Displacement
183 cu in, 2998 cc
Power
335 hp @ 6500 rpm
Torque
330 lb-ft @ 1500 rpm

TRANSMISSION
8-speed automatic

CHASSIS
Suspension (F/R): multilink/multilink
Brakes (F/R): 15.6-in vented disc/14.6-in vented disc
Tires: Bridgestone Alenza Sport A/S RFT, 285/45R-21 113H M+S ★

DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 122.2 in
Length: 203.3 in
Width: 78.7 in
Height: 71.1 in
Passenger volume: 142 cu ft
Cargo volume: 12 cu ft
Curb weight: 5337 lb

C/D
TEST RESULTS
Rollout, 1 ft: 0.3 sec
60 mph: 5.4 sec
100 mph: 14.3 sec
120 mph: 22.5 sec
Rolling start, 5–60 mph: 6.2 sec
Top gear, 30–50 mph: 3.3 sec
Top gear, 50–70 mph: 4.0 sec
¼-mile: 14.0 sec @ 99 mph
Top speed (governor limited): 129 mph
Braking, 70–0 mph: 184 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.81 g

C/D
FUEL ECONOMY
Observed: 20 mpg
75-mph highway driving: 28 mpg
Highway range: 610 miles

EPA FUEL ECONOMY
Combined/city/highway: 22/20/25 mpg
 

2020 Mercedes-Benz GLS450 4Matic
VEHICLE TYPE
front-engine, all-wheel-drive, 6-passenger, 4-door wagon

PRICE AS TESTED
$96,835 (base price: $76,195)

ENGINE TYPE
turbocharged and intercooled DOHC 24-valve inline-6, aluminum block and head, direct fuel injection
Displacement
183 cu in, 3000 cc
Power
362 hp @ 6100 rpm
Torque
369 lb-ft @ 1600 rpm

TRANSMISSION
9-speed automatic

CHASSIS
Suspension (F/R): control arms/multilink
Brakes (F/R): 14.8-in vented, cross-drilled disc/13.6-in vented disc
Tires: Pirelli P Zero PZ4 PNCS, F: 275/45R-21 107Y MO-S R: 315/40R-21 111Y MO-S

DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 123.4 in
Length: 205.0 in
Width: 77.0 in
Height: 71.8 in
Cargo volume: 17 cu ft
Curb weight: 5594 lb

C/D
TEST RESULTS
Rollout, 1 ft: 0.3 sec
60 mph: 5.5 sec
100 mph: 14.4 sec
120 mph: 22.6 sec
Rolling start, 5–60 mph: 6.2 sec
Top gear, 30–50 mph: 3.4 sec
Top gear, 50–70 mph: 4.5 sec
¼-mile: 14.1 sec @ 99 mph
Top speed (governor limited): 129 mph
Braking, 70–0 mph: 154 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.92 g

C/D
FUEL ECONOMY
Observed: 17 mpg
75-mph highway driving: 24 mpg
Highway range: 570 miles

EPA FUEL ECONOMY
Combined/city/highway: 21/19/23 mpg

Read More

2020 Mercedes-Benz GLC300 vs. 2019 BMW X3: Which Brand Builds the Better Compact Luxury SUV?

2020 Mercedes-Benz GLC300 vs. 2019 BMW X3: Which Brand Builds the Better Compact Luxury SUV?

By   15:46

Face Off

It's perhaps best to think of the Mercedes-Benz GLC and BMW X3 as the Honda CR-V and Toyota RAV4 of the luxury SUV world. While they have more brand power than those mainstream SUVs, these two compact luxury crossovers are similarly important to their brands. Just as the CR-V and RAV4 have eroded the sales of the Accord and Camry, the GLC and the X3 are what shoppers have turned to instead of the C-class and 3-series.

The current-generation GLC arrived for 2016 as a replacement for the previous GLK-class. Mercedes did, however, give the GLC a comprehensive update for 2020 that includes revised styling, an updated engine for the four-cylinder GLC300 model, and an array of new tech features. BMW completely redid the X3 for the 2018 model year and hasn't changed in any significant way since. Like the GLC300, the X3 30i is powered by a turbocharged 2.0-liter inline-four. Both vehicles come standard in rear-wheel-drive form, with all-wheel drive adding $2000 to the bottom line.

For this test, we drove a 2019 X3 xDrive30i back to back with a 2020 GLC300 4Matic for our subjective evaluation. Wet weather prevented us from being able to perform instrumented testing on the X3, but it is mechanically identical to the 2018 X3 xDrive30i we previously tested, and we're comfortable relying on that earlier X3's objective numbers.
On the Road

Although it benefits from a slight horsepower bump for 2020, Mercedes's 255-hp turbocharged 2.0-liter inline-four still lacks the smoothness, response, and power delivery of BMW's 248-hp engine. The numbers tell a different story. Acceleration testing shows a clear advantage for the GLC300 4Matic, which can go from zero to 60 mph in 5.4 seconds, or 0.7 second quicker than the 175-pound-heavier X3 xDrive30i. What the numbers don't tell you is that the BMW's engine simply works better in the real world and sounds more engaging than GLC's engine. We have to give some credit to BMW's ZF eight-speed automatic transmission, which downshifts more authoritatively and willingly than the Benz's more relaxed nine-speed automatic.

The X3 did manage to beat the GLC's fuel economy numbers. In our hands, the X3 xDrive30i averaged 22 mpg versus 20 mpg for the GLC300 4Matic. In our steady 75-mph highway test, the BMW returned a strong 31 mpg, or 2 mpg better than its EPA highway estimate. In contrast, the Benz posted 25 mpg in the same test, which is 3 mpg lower than its EPA highway number.

Driving both back to back reveals that the X3 is the more athletic of the two. It has better body control, heavier and more direct steering, and a playful eagerness to challenge corners. The Benz's driving experience is subdued by comparison. We didn't love the GLC300's light-effort steering and slightly mushy brake pedal, although the Mercedes did perform slightly better in our 70-mph-to-zero braking test than did the BMW with its optional M Sport brakes. For buyers who like to drive, the X3 has been graced with sports-sedan moves. We'd even go so far as to say that you might mistake it for a 3-series if not for its elevated seating position.

Interior

We'll call it a tie in terms of rear-seat accommodations, as both the BMW and the Mercedes have comfortable cushioning in back and a reasonable amount of room for adults. In terms of cargo space, their spec sheets would have you believe that the X3 boasts a whopping 10 more cubic feet of cargo space than the GLC, but we're skeptical of those measurements because we fit eight carry-on-suitcase-size boxes in the GLC's cargo area and only seven in the X3.

Mercedes introduced a new infotainment system to the GLC as part of its update for 2020. It's called MBUX, and we're not sold on its touch-heavy interface, which incorporates a touchscreen, a touchpad controller on the center console, and touch-sensitive buttons on the steering wheel. The displays themselves look crisp, but we prefer turning physical knobs such as the one that's used to control BMW's (somewhat) more intuitive iDrive infotainment system. Turning a knob requires less concentration than swiping or pinching on a virtual touchpad, and the BMW setup is less distracting to use while driving.

We'll hand it to Mercedes in terms of interior style, though, as the GLC's cabin is far flashier than the BMW's. There's rich detailing of the buttons and knobs, and the wood trim looks and feels expensive. The X3 measures up in terms of fit and finish, but the BMW's dashboard design lacks the panache and wow factor of the Benz's. 

Conclusion

For the 2020 model year, the X3 xDrive30i starts at $44,945 and the GLC300 4Matic begins at $45,595, with both of our examples sporting generous luxury and technology options that pushed their as-tested prices to nearly $60K. If we were writing the check, it's the BMW X3 that we'd rather take home. While the Mercedes-Benz GLC300 is refined and luxurious, the X3 is a near match for the GLC in those measures, and the BMW adds a superior driving experience, a better powertrain, and a more intuitive infotainment system. It's that extra degree of athleticism that is built into the X3 that earns it a narrow win over the GLC.

Specifications

2018 BMW X3 xDrive30i

VEHICLE TYPE
front-engine, all-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door wagon

PRICE AS TESTED
$57,820 (base price: $43,645)

ENGINE TYPE
turbocharged and intercooled DOHC 16-valve inline-4, aluminum block and head, direct fuel injection
Displacement
121 cu in, 1989 cc
Power
248 hp @ 6500 rpm
Torque
258 lb-ft @ 1450 rpm

TRANSMISSION
8-speed automatic

CHASSIS
Suspension (F/R): struts/multilink
Brakes (F/R): 13.7-in vented disc/13.5-in vented disc
Tires: Pirelli Cinturato P7 All Season Run Flat, 245/50R-19 105H M+S ★

DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 112.8 in
Length: 185.9 in
Width: 74.4 in
Height: 66.0 in
Passenger volume: 99 cu ft
Cargo volume: 29 cu ft
Curb weight: 4297 lb

C/D
TEST RESULTS
Rollout, 1 ft: 0.3 sec
60 mph: 6.1 sec
100 mph: 17.1 sec
120 mph: 28.1 sec
Rolling start, 5–60 mph: 7.5 sec
Top gear, 30–50 mph: 3.9 sec
Top gear, 50–70 mph: 4.8 sec
¼-mile: 14.7 sec @ 94 mph
Top speed (governor limited): 126 mph
Braking, 70–0 mph: 175 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.86 g

C/D
FUEL ECONOMY
Observed: 22 mpg
75-mph highway driving: 31 mpg
Highway range: 530 miles

EPA FUEL ECONOMY
Combined/city/highway: 25/22/29 mpg 

2020 Mercedes-Benz GLC300 4Matic SUV

VEHICLE TYPE
front-engine, all-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door wagon

PRICE AS TESTED
$59,475 (base price: $45,495)

ENGINE TYPE
turbocharged and intercooled DOHC 16-valve inline-4, aluminum block and head, direct fuel injection
Displacement
121 cu in, 1989 cc
Power
255 hp @ 6100 rpm
Torque
273 lb-ft @ 1800 rpm

TRANSMISSION
9-speed automatic

CHASSIS
Suspension (F/R): multilink/multilin
Brakes (F/R): 13.5-in vented, cross-drilled disc/12.6-in vented disc
Tires: Pirelli Scorpion Verde All Season Run Flat, 235/55R-19 101H M+S MOE

DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 113.1 in
Length: 183.8 in
Width: 74.8 in
Height: 65.5 in
Passenger volume: 102 cu ft
Cargo volume: 19 cu ft
Curb weight: 4122 lb

C/D
TEST RESULTS
Rollout, 1 ft: 0.3 sec
60 mph: 5.4 sec
100 mph: 15.4 sec
120 mph: 25.4 sec
Rolling start, 5–60 mph: 6.7 sec
Top gear, 30–50 mph: 3.6 sec
Top gear, 50–70 mph: 4.6 sec
¼-mile: 14.2 sec @ 96 mph
Top speed (governor limited): 131 mph
Braking, 70–0 mph: 172 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.85 g

C/D
FUEL ECONOMY
Observed: 20 mpg
75-mph highway driving: 25 mpg
Highway range: 430 miles

EPA FUEL ECONOMY
Combined/city/highway: 24/21/28 mpg

Read More

2020 Porsche 911 Carrera vs. 2020 Mercedes-AMG GT Coupe: Which Is Better for Chasing Apexes?

2020 Porsche 911 Carrera vs. 2020 Mercedes-AMG GT Coupe: Which Is Better for Chasing Apexes?

By   15:34

But death and devastation were too much to consider for too long, so we busied ourselves with less grave questions, such as: How, after three hours at a total standstill, have we not seen more stranded drivers peeing on the side of the road? And, more urgently, where are we going to pee? And what would possess someone to affix fluffy seat covers topped with teddy-bear heads to the front seats of their car? Also, who is smoking weed right now? We can smell it, you know.

We also spent some of our unexpected downtime considering a response to the question you're surely asking: Where the hell is the 2020 Chevrolet Corvette? The short answer is that the new Corvette is here. The less flippant answer is that there will be all manner of Corvette stories in the future, including comparison tests. There will be so many, in fact, that you will begin asking why all stories have to have a Corvette in them.

For now, we must first sort these two contenders in what might be called the everyday-supercar class. The cars we've gathered here, the new-generation Porsche 911 Carrera S and the familiar Mercedes-AMG GT, straddle the divide between day-to-day commuting comfort and back-road friskiness. Both carry prices that blast through the $100,000 mark by a considerable margin, making them a little too dear for head-to-head competition with the five-figure Corvette.

Even at an as-tested price of $122,540, the 992-generation Carrera S is the less expensive of the two. And our test car is a relative stripper (not a stripper relative). Porsche has a panoply of options to boost that price, if you'd like. But no matter how much you spend on a Carrera S, you still get the same rear-mounted 443-hp twin-turbocharged 3.0-liter flat-six of our test car. A seven-speed manual version is now available but wasn't in time for this test, so our car came with Porsche's eight-speed dual-clutch automatic. This 911 is equipped as we might spec our own personal Carrera S—just the perform­ance-enhancing options, thank you. Rear-wheel steering adds $2090 to the bill. The Sport package, which includes the Sport Chrono pack and a stiffer suspension tune, boosts the price by $5460. And $440 goes toward Sport Seats Plus, which still have manual fore-aft adjustment. That's it.

The Mercedes-AMG GT is the model line's base car. It starts at $116,895 and pumps 469 horsepower out of its twin-turbocharged 4.0-liter V-8. But our lavishly optioned test car rang the register at $131,315. It's the company's third go this century at a long-nose, two-seat V-8-powered sports car that puts the driver on the rear axle, after that Las Vegas of supercars, the SLR McLaren, and the gullwing-doored SLS.

2nd Place: Mercedes-AMG GT



Pros: Sultry styling, thundering exhaust note, well-appointed interior.
Cons: Unforgiving ride, poor outward visibility, prone to the occasional twitch.
Verdict: Hits many of the right notes but doesn't really play the song properly.

With the GT, Mercedes plucks the emotional strings like a true virtuoso. Look at it. It's wide and low, carrying its visual weight near the ground. The passenger canopy sits so far rearward that it appears as if speed itself had swept it back there. Its absurdly long hood telegraphs power and perhaps a rude Freudian suggestion. And its tight chopped-roof cockpit makes you feel as though you were deep in the belly of the beast.

The GT's shape and its sound might be rooted in old sports- and racing-car emotional triggers, but damn if they don't still elicit the intended responses.

Listen to it. Of all modern carmakers, Mercedes is perhaps the best at retaining a V-8's deep growl even while slapping turbos between the engine's explosions and the exhaust's throat. Quickly hop off the throttle, particularly in Sport Plus mode, and the resulting pops sound as though they're going to rip the exhaust open at the seams.

It's all comfortably familiar, a compelling rendition of an old song. The GT's shape and its sound might be rooted in old sports- and racing-car emotional triggers, but damn if they don't still elicit the intended responses.

 
And yet, the GT is outclassed by the 911 in most categories on our score sheet. Its torquey V-8 is more flexible than the Porsche's smaller flat-six. It has far more features and amenities than the lightly equipped Porsche. And even though the interior feels like a cocoon that passengers will soon want to break out of, the Mercedes scores a victory in cargo volume. (The Porsche's vestigial back seats prove to be pretty good parcel shelves, but we count that extra space in the features, not cargo, calculation.)

At 3709 pounds, the Mercedes is 330 pounds heavier than the dimensionally similar Porsche. Its heft turns the GT's power advantage into a power-to-weight disadvantage. That, combined with a launch-control program that cannot match the Porsche's, means the Mercedes trails by more than half a second to 60 mph and through the quarter-mile. Hitting those marks in 3.5 and 11.8 seconds, respectively, the GT is still a very quick car. But you know, the big fish eat the little ones; it's the nature of the world.


2020 Mercedes-AMG GT R Roadster

A similar fate met the Mercedes on the skidpad, where even with a stellar 1.06-g performance, it couldn't quite match the Porsche. The GT also chewed up the corners of its front Michelin Pilot Super Sport tires. The 911's front Pirelli P Zero PZ4s looked almost showroom new after its skidpad runs. Plus, the GT stopped from 70 mph in 156 feet, 15 longer than the 911 managed.

But the performance numbers are close enough that if the Mercedes were the more enjoyable car to drive, we could forgive these shortcomings. But it's not. Its ride quality is pretty unforgiving. Its steering is direct, but effort doesn't build naturally as cornering forces increase. And the GT's seven-speed dual-clutch auto is not as quick to downshift as the 911's transmission.

1st Place: Porsche 911 Carrera S

Pros: Supercar quick, GT-car accommodating, world's best automatic transmission.
Cons: When you forget that the fuel filler is on the front fender.
Verdict: Better at straddling than a bowlegged bull rider.

Seems odd to think of any 911, even this newest generation, as the more modern vehicle in a pairing. Porsche has been slowly developing and tweaking the same basic concept for longer than most of our staff has been alive. And yet it is the vehicle that makes fewer of the sacrifices performance cars have traditionally made.

The Porsche's fittings are, in fact, beautiful in their own way. Layers of black with slightly different textures and reflectivity make you feel as though you were sitting in a modern wristwatch.

Casting roughly the same-size shadow as the Mercedes, the Porsche manages to carve out a surprisingly spacious interior. Though small and upright, the rear seats suffice to take young kids on an ice-cream run or they can hold easily accessible cargo. Outward visibility is Honda Accord–like compared with the Mercedes's. A relatively low center console and a dash that does not wrap around into the door panels give the 911 an almost airy feel. And even our six-foot-five co-driver was not cramped.


2020 Porsche 911 Finally Available with a Manual

He was, however, less enthused about the 911's interior than was your narrator. He noted that there's no good place for a driver to set a mobile phone. About this, he is correct. Further, he noted that the lightly optioned Carrera S's all-black, near-minimalist interior seemed a bit cheap for a $100,000-plus vehicle. He preferred the GT's more traditionally luxurious interior. About this, he is misguided.

The Porsche's fittings are, in fact, beautiful in their own way. Layers of black with slightly different textures and reflectivity make you feel as though you were sitting in a modern wristwatch—one from Porsche Design, for example. Check out the fingertip-pleasing knurling on the ends of the toggle-switch-like controls. Feel how precise and hefty their movements are. I might opt to replace the muddy-sounding stand­ard audio system with either the $1600 Bose or $5560 Burmester upgrade. Other­wise, this guy's happy.

 
Not only does the Porsche have a more livable interior, it has a smoother ride than the Mercedes (assuming you use the recommended "comfort" tire pressures for light-load sub-165-mph driving). It also makes a clean sweep of the performance tests, delivers better fuel economy, and costs less. Is there anything wrong with this car? Not really.

In addition to being practical, the 911 is one helluva back-road companion. Set it to Sport Plus mode and the dual-clutch transmission fires off ridiculously quick shifts that manage to somehow never upset the car. And the automatic is absolutely telepathic. You can work the paddles, but honestly, the transmission is just as adept at picking the time and place for gearchanges. It's that good. The Porsche's handling is utterly confident with none of the surprises of the Mercedes. The 911 is a clean high; no side effects.

 
And clearly the 911 is a car developed for the real world. Even in its stiffest setting, it just eats up midcorner bumps and never gets thrown off course even on the haphazardly maintained or repaired Kentucky roads that comprised our driving loop. Okay, the Porsche doesn't have the rolling-thunder exhaust of the AMG, but the rip of a flat-six is a sublime substitute.

From the start, the 911 was designed to be an everyday, all-weather sports car, a sensible toy. This new version, with a shocking breadth of talent, proves that the formula works better than ever.

Read More

2019 Honda Accord Hybrid vs. 2019 Toyota Camry Hybrid: Which Gas-Friendly Family Sedan Is Better?

2019 Honda Accord Hybrid vs. 2019 Toyota Camry Hybrid: Which Gas-Friendly Family Sedan Is Better?

By   15:21

As demand for sedans declines due to consumers' infatuation with high-riding SUVs and pickup trucks, there are two cars that continue to crusade against the impending takeover. Sure, both the Honda Accord and Toyota Camry have seen sales wane over the past few years, but they still ranked among the top 10 best-selling vehicles of 2019. That's not a coincidence, because Honda and Toyota have earned a reputation for dependability and have developed a loyal customer base.

Likewise, the Accord and Camry recently entered an all-new generation together for the first time in their long-running rivalry. While we've compared them with other mid-size sedans, we haven't put their hybrid variants head to head—until now. And although the Accord's ongoing streak of 10Best awards seems like a spoiler alert, don't forget that the latest Camry is vastly improved, and the hybrid adaptation is arguably its best yet.

Face Off
There are no significant changes to the 2019 Honda Accord, and the hybrid that we drove for this review was the top-of-the-line Touring model loaded with standard leather upholstery, a head-up display, heated and ventilated power front seats, passive entry, wireless charging, a Wi-Fi hotspot, and all of the Accord's available driver-assistance tech (the Accord’s test results are from the test of a nearly identical 2018 model). While the cheapest 2019 Accord hybrid starts at $26,250—about $3100 less than the 2019 Camry LE hybrid—the photographed here stickered for $35,920.

The 2020 Toyota Camry adopts an all-wheel-drive option and a sport-tuned TRD variant, but those don't apply to the 2019 Camry XLE hybrid, which is the fanciest trim level available. The XLE has standard leather upholstery, heated power front seats, passive entry, wireless charging, and a suite of driver assists. Along with a base price of $33,930, our Toyota had $4570 worth of options, such as navigation, a head-up display, a premium audio system, and a sunroof. These extras helped close the equipment gap with the Honda, but our Camry still had less content and cost about $2500 more.

On the Road

The Accord hybrid uses a 2.0-liter Atkinson-cycle inline-four and a motor-generator to drive the car, as well as a dedicated generator-starter to feed electricity to feed the drive motor. Combined output is 212 horsepower. Although its handoff between gas and electric power is sometimes less-than-smooth, the powertrain is responsive around town and when pulling away from stoplights. Acceleration at highway speeds, however, is a bit lazy and to top it off it is accompanied by a droning soundtrack. Still, it operates with much of the same athleticism and engagement that makes its nonhybrid counterparts so rewarding. Instead of crashing or floating over bumps, the Accord's suspension reduces them to slight hiccups. Its tactile steering is relaxed in feel but direct in action, with enough feedback for engaged drivers to appreciate twisty roads. Despite the uneven responses that often plague the brake pedals of hybridized vehicles, the Honda's is consistently firm and easy to modulate. Unfortunately, our Accord’s low-rolling-resistance rubber contributes to a lengthy 189 feet to stop from 70 mph, which was nine feet more than the Camry.

With Toyota's history of hybrid integration, we're not surprised that the Camry's powertrain felt more refined than the Accord's. Toyota's hybrid system consists a two-motor transaxle (one of the motor-generators delivers motive force) that pairs with a 2.5-liter Atkinson-cycle inline-four to produce a combined 208 horses. Unlike the Accord hybrid, the Camry's continuously variable automatic transmission also has a simulated manual mode that allows the driver to swap simulated gear ratios using steering-wheel-mounted paddle shifters. While the Toyota isn't as snappy when pulling away from a stop, it felt more powerful when passing on the highway and sounds quieter under load than the Honda. Its gas-electric transition is less intrusive as well. However, the Camry doesn't feel nearly as composed on the road as the Accord. Its steering is less predictable and lacks the responsiveness of the Honda's helm. Although we appreciated the Camry's quiet ride and forgiving suspension that gently lean the car around sharp corners, it doesn't isolate bumps as well as the Accord, and its brake pedal feels soft at the top of its travel, which makes it somewhat tricky to modulate in traffic.

Both hybrids boast better fuel-economy ratings than their gasoline counterparts, but only the Camry XLE model gets outshined by its own siblings. While the XLE has EPA estimates of 44/47 mpg city/highway, the less expensive LE hybrid is rated at 51/53 mpg. Every 2020 Accord hybrid has the same government ratings—48 mpg across the board—but the 2018 Touring hybrid that we tested, which is mechanically identical to the 2019 model, only managed 42 mpg on our 75-mph highway test, or 2 mpg shy of a 2018 Camry we tested.

Interior
The Accord has a sophisticated interior that defies its price tag. The attractive materials, precise controls, and smart design make it easy to enjoy inside. The digital gauge cluster looks slick and offers myriad menus, but both it and the 8.0-inch touchscreen atop the dash can wash out in direct sunlight. Still, the user-friendly infotainment system has large onscreen icons and physical buttons and knobs. The leather-wrapped steering wheel feels lovely to hold and hosts intuitively bundled controls for active-safety and audio system features. It's too bad that Honda's initially nonintuitive push-button shifter arrangement diminishes the Accord's mostly flawless ergonomics. Otherwise, front-seat passengers benefit from comfy seats, and those in the back can enjoy 2.8 inches of extra legroom compared with the Camry. The Accord hybrid's battery pack is mounted under its rear seat, so it doesn't affect the car's 17 cubic feet of trunk space, which is enough to swallow seven carry-on suitcase boxes; the Camry can accommodate only six.

The latest Camry's interior is vastly better than its predecessors, specifically its panel fitment and plastic materials. Although its design is a bit busy for some tastes, which results in some awkwardly placed controls, nothing inside the Toyota is offensive. Its infotainment system is easy to operate, but the 7.0-inch touchscreen suffers from low-res graphics and some less-than-intuitive menus. Our test car had Apple CarPlay, but Android Auto wasn't available until the 2020 models. Toyota jazzes up the cabin with plush seats that have attractive inserts, but we wish the front buckets had additional thigh support. Despite having less rear-seat legroom than the Honda, the Toyota has better rear outward visibility and more useful interior cubby storage. The Camry's active-safety equipment also performs more naturally, with smoother adaptive cruise control operation and less intrusive lane-keeping assist.

Conclusion

While sedans have become less popular, Honda and Toyota have recently reported increased hybrid sales. That makes sense with the crescendo of electric vehicles entering the market and these two brands' pedigrees in hybrid technology. Toyota may have built the best Camry yet, and the hybrid version exemplifies the breed with seamless operation and excellent fuel economy. However, it's not significantly more efficient than the Accord hybrid, and the Camry's greater refinement under its hood is offset by less sorted driving manners, as well as a smaller and less pleasant cabin. Factor in the stronger value of the Honda, and the Accord's hybrid variant, much like the rest of the Accord lineup, makes for a winning combination.


Specifications

2019 Honda Accord Hybrid Touring

VEHICLE TYPE
front-engine, front-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door sedan

PRICE AS TESTED
$35,920 (base price: $35,920)

POWERTRAIN
DOHC 16-valve 2.0-liter Atkinson-cycle inline-4, 143 hp, 129 lb-ft; permanent-magnet synchronous AC motor, 181 hp, 232 lb-ft; combined output, 212 hp; 1.1-kWh lithium-ion battery pack

TRANSMISSION
single-speed direct-drive

CHASSIS
Suspension (F/R): struts/multilink
Brakes (F/R): 12.3-in vented disc/11.1-in disc
Tires: Michelin Energy Saver A/S, 225/50R-17 94V M+S

DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 111.4 in
Length: 192.2 in
Width: 73.3 in
Height: 57.1 in
Passenger volume: 103 cu ft
Trunk volume: 17 cu ft
Curb weight: 3404 lb

C/D
TEST RESULTS*
Rollout, 1 ft: 0.4 sec
60 mph: 7.0 sec
100 mph: 20.3 sec
110 mph: 27.0 sec
Rolling start, 5–60 mph: 7.8 sec
Top gear, 30–50 mph: 3.9 sec
Top gear, 50–70 mph: 5.8 sec
¼-mile: 15.4 sec @ 90 mph
Top speed (governor limited): 115 mph
Braking, 70–0 mph: 189 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.83 g

C/D
FUEL ECONOMY*
75-mph highway driving: 42 mpg
Highway range: 530 miles

EPA FUEL ECONOMY
Combined/city/highway: 48/48/48 mpg 

2019 Toyota Camry XLE Hybrid

VEHICLE TYPE
front-engine, front-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 4-door sedan

PRICE AS TESTED
$38,500 (base price: $33,930)

POWERTRAIN
DOHC 16-valve 2.5-liter Atkinson-cycle inline-4, 176 hp, 163 lb-ft; permanent-magnet synchronous AC motor, 118 hp, 149 lb-ft; combined output, 208 hp; 1.6-kWh nickel-metal-hydride battery pack

TRANSMISSION
continuously variable automatic

CHASSIS
Suspension (F/R): struts/multilink
Brakes (F/R): 12.0-in vented disc/11.1-in disc
Tires: Hankook Kinergy GT, 235/45R-18 94V M+S

DIMENSIONS
Wheelbase: 111.2 in
Length: 192.1 in
Width: 72.4 in
Height: 56.9 in
Passenger volume: 99 cu ft
Trunk volume: 15 cu ft
Curb weight: 3656 lb

C/D
TEST RESULTS*
Rollout, 1 ft: 0.3 sec
60 mph: 7.8 sec
100 mph: 19.2 sec
110 mph: 23.6 sec
Rolling start, 5–60 mph: 8.1 sec
Top gear, 30–50 mph: 3.7 sec
Top gear, 50–70 mph: 5.1 sec
¼-mile: 16.0 sec @ 91 mph
Top speed (governor limited): 116 mph
Braking, 70–0 mph: 180 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.84 g

C/D
FUEL ECONOMY
75-mph highway driving: 44 mpg
Highway range: 580 miles

EPA FUEL ECONOMY
Combined/city/highway: 46/44/47 mpg

Read More

The Quickest Cars of the Decade

The Quickest Cars of the Decade

By   18:24

 

11. 2019 Lamborghini Urus — 3.1 seconds

The Lamborghini Urus is the quickest SUV we've tested. The decade saw an impressive development of super-car-contending, high-performance sport utility vehicles. The Urus is the quickest, for now, blasting to 60 mph in 3.1 seconds. Man, this overweight bull is quick.

 

 

11. 2019 Lamborghini Urus — 3.1 seconds

Tested date: October 2018

Price as tested: $243,377 (base price: $203,995)

Engine: 641-hp 4.0-liter twin-turbocharged V-8, eight-speed automatic transmission

Weight: 5314 lb

 

 

10. 2020 Chevrolet Corvette — 2.8 seconds

The 2020 Chevrolet Corvette is powered by a 495-hp 6.2-liter LT2 V-8 that's located behind the passenger seats, a first for a production Corvette. The launch-control system hurls the mid-engine Vette to 60 mph in 2.8 seconds, hammering through the quarter-mile in 11.2 seconds at 122 mph. This won't be the quickest or fastest C8, though. A hybrid variant, likely called eRay or Zora is expected to approach 1000 horsepower. The resulting all-wheel drive will launch the hybrid Corvette at lightning-quick speeds, likely vying to be one of the quickest cars on the planet.

 

 

10. 2020 Chevrolet Corvette — 2.8 seconds

Tested date: October 2019

Price as tested: $88,310 (base price: $64,995)

Engine: 495-hp 6.2-liter V-8, eight-speed dual-clutch automatic transmission

Weight: 3647 lb

 

 

9. 2019 Porsche 911 GT3 RS — 2.8 seconds

The Porsche GT3 RS may not be as quick as its twin-turbocharged GT2 RS sibling, but it still meandered its way to this list. Porsche's naturally aspirated 4.0-liter flat-six produces 520 ponies and helped the GT3 RS zip to 60 mph in 2.8 seconds. That's only three-tenths of a second slower than the 700-hp GT2 RS.

 

 

9. 2019 Porsche 911 GT3 RS — 2.8 seconds

Tested date: December 2018

Price as tested: $208,717 (base price: $190,050)

Engine: 520-hp 4.0-liter flat-six, seven-speed dual-clutch automatic transmission

Weight: 3260 lb

 

 

8. 2015 Tesla Model S P90D — 2.7 seconds

There are quicker Teslas, but the company refuses to let us test them. So, from the slim number of Teslas we have tested, the Model S P90D is the quickest one to the 60 mph mark. It was also the first sub 3.0-second zero-to-60 mph sedan we ever tested, reaching the speed in 2.7 seconds.

 

 

8. 2015 Tesla Model S P90D — 2.7 seconds

Tested date: February 2016

Price as tested: $134,200 (base price: $119,200)

Engine: 532 hp 2 asynchronous AC

Weight: 4842 lb

 

 

7. 2019 Ferrari 488 Pista — 2.7 seconds

Ferrari's baddest modern road car, the 488 Pista, is practically a carbon-fiber rocket ship. Sixty mph arrives in 2.7 seconds, 100 mph just 2.5 ticks later, and the quarter-mile passes in 10.1 seconds at 144 mph. It's the hard-core version of the 488GTB, with a claimed weight savings of 176 pounds and an additional 49 horsepower.

 

 

7. 2019 Ferrari 488 Pista — 2.7 seconds

Tested date: September 2018

Price as tested: $448,884 (base price: $353,800)

Engine: 710-hp 3.9-liter twin-turbo V-8, seven-speed dual-clutch automatic

Weight: 3308 lb

 

 

6. 2019 McLaren Senna — 2.7 seconds

The McLaren Senna, named after legendary driver Ayrton Senna, was developed to be the quickest car around the track, but it does pretty well in a straight line, too. The launch-control system holds the engine at 3000 rpm and tells you when to release the brake. Then it hits 60 mph in 2.7 seconds, takes 5.0 seconds to bring up 100 mph, and another 5.4 seconds will take you to 150 mph.

 

 

6. 2019 McLaren Senna — 2.7 seconds

Tested date: September 2018

Price as tested: $982,816 (base price: $964,966)

Engine: 789-hp 4.0-liter twin-turbo V-8, seven-speed dual-clutch automatic

Weight: 3030 lb

 

 

5. 2019 McLaren 720S Coupe — 2.6 seconds

We used launch control to achieve the majority of these zero-to-60-mph times. The McLaren 720S's launch button is intertwined with the radio, climate, and navigation controls. With both pedals squeezed, the digital tachometer sits at around 3200 rpm for four full seconds before “Boost Ready” flashes on the digital instrument cluster. Sixty miles per hour arrives 2.6 seconds after takeoff.

 

 

5. 2019 McLaren 720S Coupe — 2.6 seconds

Tested date: February 2018

Price as tested: $378,215 (base price: $288,845)

Engine: 710-hp 4.0-liter twin-turbo V-8, seven-speed dual-clutch automatic transmission

Weight: 3161 lb

 

 

4. 2019 BMW M5 Competition — 2.6 seconds

The Competition variant of BMW's already uber quick (though 26 pounds heavier) M5 sedan is the quickest four-door we have ever tested, going zero to 60 mph in 2.6 seconds. For acceleration like that in a four-door sedan, you can thank a 4.4-liter twin-turbocharged V-8 and an all-wheel-drive system.

15 of 22

 

4. 2019 BMW M5 Competition — 2.6 seconds

Tested date: March 2019

Price as tested: $129,595 (base price: $111,995)

Engines: 617-hp 4.4-liter twin-turbo V-8, eight-speed automatic transmission

Weight: 4262 lb 

 

3. 2018 Porsche 911 GT2 RS — 2.5 seconds

This 700-hp Porsche 911 GT2 RS isn't only quick to 60 mph, it takes just 5.5 seconds to hit 100 mph and blasts through the quarter-mile in 10.2 seconds at 140 mph. Its twin-turbocharged flat-six engine and racing-derived aerodynamics make it a beast on the track, too, where it once held the all-time fastest lap at our annual Lightning Lap competition at Virginia International Raceway. It also held the production-car lap record at the Nürburgring.

3. 2018 Porsche 911 GT2 RS — 2.5 seconds

Tested date: June 2018

Price as tested: $348,730 (base price: $294,250)

Engine: 700-hp 3.8-liter twin-turbo flat-six, seven-speed dual-clutch automatic transmission

Weight: 3376 lb

2. 2018 Lamborghini Huracán Performante — 2.3 seconds

A 631-hp V-10 engine, all-wheel drive, and sticky Pirelli P Zero Trofeo R tires makes the Huracán Performante the second-fastest car we have ever tested. It went from zero to 60 mph in 2.3 seconds. The V-10 engine sounds fast, too, providing a 100-decibel naturally aspirated symphony at wide-open throttle, one of the loudest figures we recorded this decade.

2. 2018 Lamborghini Huracán Performante — 2.3 seconds

Tested date: October 2017

Price as tested: $317,285 (base price: $279,185)

Engine: 631-hp 5.2-liter V-10, seven-speed dual-clutch automatic transmission

Weight: 3429 lb

1. 2015 Porsche 918 Spyder — 2.1 seconds

We tested the quickest car of the decade in May 2014. The hybrid, all-wheel-drive Porsche 918 Spyder has two electric motors with a combined 285 horsepower paired with a 608-hp 4.6-liter V-8. By routing torque—as much as 830 lb-ft—to all four wheels, the 918 maximizes traction and blasts to 60 mph in an unbelievably quick 2.1 seconds.

1. 2015 Porsche 918 Spyder — 2.1 seconds

Tested date: May 2014

Price as tested: $875,175 (base price: $847,975)

Engine: 893-hp 4.6-liter V-8 with 2 AC motors, seven-speed dual-clutch automatic

Weight: 3724 lb

Read More