V6 with 5-speed transforms 626 to family hot rod
1999 MAZDA 626 LX
Likes: The new look is smooth and stylish, and the spaciousness is amazing, but the V6 performance is most noteworthy, especially with the 5-speed.
Dislikes: With all that room, the power seat and sunroof may make it tough to find the optimum seating angle.
Bottom line: Base price $17,665; as tested $22,310.
There are those of us who buy sports cars, and those of us who buy family sedans, and it seems more and more unlikely that those twains shall ever meet. Although we’re talking cars here, not twains.
The fact that most sedans built to carry out mundane, everyday family tasks are often boring, doesn’t mean that those of us who must buy them are free of desiring more exotic, more exciting, more enjoyable vehicles.
Thankfully, Mazda has addressed those suppressed desires with a version of the 626 sedan that not only is an over-achiever when it comes to family hauling, but is ‘way off the scale when it comes to fun-to-drive attributes.
The test-car I recently got was properly attired in a sort of champagne/beige/sand/whatever color, which was classy in a subdued sort of a way. Showed off the neat flow of lines of the newest 626 without being blatant about it.
It was an LX model, which used to be the middle-of-the-road version, more filled with creature-comforts than the DX, and not as loaded as the ES. For this year, Mazda has dropped the bottom-line DX, so the only models are the LX and ES, with each of them having two versions, depending on whether it has the 4-cylinder or V6.
The test car was armed with the 2.5-liter V6 engine, which is a high-revving, dual-overhead-camshaft, 24-valve gem to begin with. And even though it’s small in displacement, it’s potent when you stand on the gas and let those revs wail.
However, with all engines in general, and with smaller engines more dramatically, filtering the power through an automatic transmission takes the performance edge off a car, and while it adds to the convenience of the coffee-and-cell-phone era of drivers, it also takes away from the driving control and enjoyment of driving.
So I was excited to see that the test 626 also came equipped with the basic 5-speed manual transmission. Mazda folks have told me that they have had a surprising number of sales of stick-shift 626es, both with the very good dual-overhead-cam 2.0-liter 4-cylinder and the V6.
Still, I was not prepared for the sport-car-like takeoff. Put it in first, let out the clutch, and zap! You’ve gone 100 yards. Swiftly. A whole bunch of sedans with Ford and GM names, and with larger engines but without 5-speed availability, would be seriously surprised at the comparison.
The shifter works smoothly, and the performance was very strong in every gear. Since many other medium to full size sedans come with V6 engines that are over 3.5 liters, the test car was ample evidence of my previous findings that the right engine, in the right car, with the right transmission can be much more satisfying and enjoyable.
MORE FOR THE MONEY
The LX model starts at $19,065, which is not inexpensive, until you consider what comes on the car. The test car had traction control, ABS, 15-inch alloy wheels, a sunroof, power driver seat and an upgraded Bose stereo system with a CD player, and that full complement of options pushed it to $22,310.
That also may be approaching ES territory. But the base LX with the 4-cylinder starts at a mere $17,665. When loaded with the V6 and all, that still was a lot of car for the money, because standard equipment includes 4-wheel disc brakes, independent suspension, keyless entry, power windows, power locks, and a good stereo system.
I have always liked the 626 as an understated mid-size sedan that has been an over-achiever for years. Built now in Flat Rock, Mich., exclusively designed for the U.S. market by a Mazda company that now has shared ownership with Ford Motor Company, the latest 626 is the best of the batch, in my opinion.
In Mazda’s scheme, the top of the line used to be a large flagship called the 929. Those were simpler days, when Mazda had a big 929, a medium 626 and a small 323. The 323 begat the Protege, which is among the best of all subcompact cars. And the 929 went away, to be replaced by a high-tech, luxurious but still sporty Millenia.
The most recent style change of the 626 came a year ago, and transformed a solid and well-built, but very understated sedan into a slightly larger but definitely more stylish car.
In fact, with its front end more sculptured, and a curvy uplift to the rear, the new 626 looks a lot more like the Millenia than it does the previous 626, which was aerodynamically smooth, but without the little grooves and curves that add personality.
Over the years, Mazda has suffered a bit, unfairly, against the excellent top models of the Honda Accord and Toyota Camry. The 626 is strong, durable, well-built and easily capable of being a 10-year car for its owners, with excellent fuel efficiency as well. Its sales have not challenged the top duo Accord/Camry, but its performance has. And its history goes back to 1979, when it was a rear-drive coupe and sedan tht was named Motor Trend’s import car of the year in that first year — 20 years ago.
Throughout its history, Mazda seems to have discovered a method of building more room into its vehicles than should reasonably be anticipated. This is the fifth generation 626, and for a mid-size car, its trunk is spacious, the front seat head and legroom is large, and the rear seat room is enormous. Even with the front buckets moved quite far to the rear, there is more than enough room for adults in the back seat.
Dual depowered airbags are standard, and one of the most impressive features of the 626 is that it is built strong but light, rather than merely loading weight on in the name of safety. Structural rigidity and tight-building concepts can accomplish major safety characteristics without weight, if done well. And this one is.
DRIVING THE BEAST
I don’t mean to imply that you have to be a race driver to enjoy the 626 with the V6 and 5-speed. You can manage it very nicely without ever revving it to the ample 7,000 RPM redline. It’s just pleasant to have all of those 170 horses available at the tap of a toe. The horsepower peaks at 6,000 revs, with the 163 foot-pounds of torque peaking at 5,000. Those are high figures, but the engine revs so willingly, that there is never a feeling of strain.
I got 25 miles per gallon, running the revs up. EPA estimates are 21 city, 27 highway.
Handling around corners kept up with the power. The car has stabilizer bars both front and rear, and rack-and-pinion steering that has a power boost that fluctuates based on engine revs, because you need a lot of boost when you’re going slowly enough to park, and you need almost no boost when the engine revs are as high as they’d be at cruising speed.
The traction-control system can be switched off, but it does a good job in foul-weather driving on the front-wheel-drive sedan. It is the same system perfected on the more costly Millenia, and it gauges wheel-speed to detect when one wheel seems to have the urge to spin faster than its partner, and in such cases it reduces engine power by limiting fuel and ignition firing.
With the optional alloy wheels, the handling was fine in normal usage. I had one trip on the freeway with gusty, 40-mile-per-hour crosswinds, and you had to keep pointing the car in the right direction. That may have been a function of the tires, or the car’s lightness. It wasn’t a bother, just more noticeable than I anticipated.
The cruise control switches are accessible with your thumbs, without taking your hands off the steering wheel. And the headlights were very good, with a sharp cutoff.
I did have a couple of nuisance things I didn’t like about the 626. One was the cloth seats. They were comfortable and supportive, but Mazda is proud of adding a control that raises and lowers the seat. That’s a big feature, one that Volkswagen buyers have enjoyed in Jettas and Passats in recent years. But on the 626, I found that it just wanted to raise or lower the rear part of the bottom cushion. So when you raised it, it changed the angle of the cushion, and when you lowered it, the front part was more firmly up under your knees.
I also like a lot of headroom, as much as I like outward visibility, but when I raised the seat cushion just a bit for optimum visibility I found my head was brushing against the ceiling. Now, that is because the sunroof causes the ceiling to be at least an inch lower. I could easily tilt the backrest back a bit, but I like to sit with my backrest pretty near vertical. All that means I might try buying the car without the power seat, which also takes up a bit of the vertical room between the floor and the roof.
If I were to buy an LX this loaded, I’d have to compare the already-loaded ES model for driving position.
Overall, in the midst of the most hotly competitive market segment, the 626 LX seems to be placed well, starting with the 4-cylinder/5-speed for those looking for all-out economy and some fun; the 4-cylinder/automatic for those not looking for higher performance; the V6/automatic for those who want higher performance but are beyond having the urge of shifting for themselves; and the V6/5-speed for those aforementioned types — drivers who must fill all the requirements of a responsible family sedan, but also want an answer to the Walter Mitty urges for high performance.
Mercedes hits luxury pinnacle with new S-Class
You’ve seen the television ad campaign, one of the more clever for automobiles, where various shots show such items as Ernest Hemingway, with the underline “a writer,” then a Greek or Roman ruins with the words “a building,” an astronaut planting the U.S. flag on the moon with the words “a visit,” a video of Jackie Robinson swinging the bat with the caption “a ballplayer,” and finally a view of the new Mercedes S-500 sedan, with the caption “a car.” After all that, a graphic says: “Sometimes words can be hopelessly inadequate.”
Great ad. Impressive car. Mercedes is aiming the new S-500 at being the definitive luxury automobile, and it’s true — even a few thousand words might struggle to adequately describe it.
The recent merger between Mercedes Benz and Chrysler appears to a lot of car folks to be more of an acquisition, and it will be intriguing to observe the new Daimler-Chrysler corporation unravel its mysteries over the next few years. However, there is no mystery that the Mercedes S-Class stands out, above and beyond the call of normal automobiles. Or even normal luxury automobiles.
The 2000 model year is designated as the latest of six incarnations for the Mercedes S-Class luxury sedans, but the first models are headed for the nation’s showrooms even now. The first few hundred S-Class vehicles reached San Francisco’s preparation base a few weeks ago, so Mercedes summoned four waves of automotive journalists to meet up with about 15 of the cars in Arizona last week to get the first actual test-drives of off-the-line production vehicles.
An all-too-brief test drive in a pair of new model S’s gave graphic indication that Mercedes has combined off-the-scale luxury, convenience, technology, comfort, safety and — surprisingly, perhaps — sportiness, into one all-out vehicle.
The S500 is clearly for the discriminating buyer who demands, and can afford, the ultimate sedan in one package. And the S430 isn’t far behind, as an alternative costing $8,000 less. Now, an $8,000 saving is significant, but before you reach for your checkbook let’s get one thing straight: The S430 costs $69,700, and the S500 costs $77,850. Not counting $595 for destination delivery.
So we’re talking fantasyland here for the basic, average car-buyer, or even the high-rolling car-buyer. But there are folks out there looking for the ultimate ride. Mercedes sales were up 39 percent in 1998, with 17,000 of them being S-Class flagships. It is aiming 25,000 of its new-year production of 75,000 S-Class sedans at the United States, which last year became the largest market in the world for Mercedes cars. It used to be the largest outside of Germany, where most taxicabs are Mercedes diesels, where the durability for 200,000 miles far outweighs the initial expense.
But let’s do a fast once-over on the new S-Class:
APPEARANCE
Mercedes has gotten pretty daring in recent years, renovating its base C-Class sedans and its midrange E-Class, then coming out with its stubby SLK sports car, a beautifully flowing CLK sports coupe, and its hot-selling M-Class sports-utility vehicle, which is made exclusively in the U.S. By comparison, the larger S-Class still looked impressive, but it was beginning to look more like a tugboat than a flagship next to its sleeker, high-tech siblings.
The new S-Class takes care of that. Both models are smoother, less-blunt, with a steeply tapered front end widening gracefully to the passenger compartment, and then on down to the rear, which is stylish on its own. The sloped frontal area and overall design gives the S-Class a wind-cheating 0.27 coefficient of drag, which is the best of any production sedan in the world. Lower is better, aerodynamically, and a lot of very sleek sports cars and coupes rank from 0.32 to 0.28.
The all-new frame and body have used aluminum, thinner gauge but stronger low-alloy steel, and even magnesium for some engine components. The result is that the new S-Class is 550 pounds lighter than its predecessor, yet stronger, tighter and safer. It also is over 2 inches shorter in both wheelbase and overall length, an inch narrower and a couple of inches lower, but it has more headroom and legroom both front and rear.
The seats are sumptuously covered with leather, and you can get different types of leather depending on option choices. You look at a gently styled dashboard, with wood paneling. The S500 gets Napa leather and burled walnut, while the S430 gets “plain” leather with eucalyptus wood. The power switch allows you to move the driver’s seat 14 different ways.
Among the more impressive features is a cruise control that is radar-controlled, so it not only maintains your speed, but it adjusts to maintain the interval between you and the car ahead.
An option package gets you special ventilated seats, in which 10 tiny electric fans, six in the cushion and four in the backrest, draw air from under the seats and distributes it through the ventilation holes in the seat leather, cooling the seat so thoroughly that it can dry out a heavily perspiring occupant. In the winter, it works in concert with electric heating elements to warm the seat more quickly.
Yet another astounding feature is the active lumbar orthopedic touch, where seven different air chambers in the seat, lower back, shoulder and side bolsters can be adjusted for support, but also can be activated automatically to inflate and deflate slowly and completely about twice a minute in modulating fashion. The motion is imperceptible to the occupant, but it is designed to effectively relax the spine and back muscles without approaching the dulling massage-therapy type of relaxing.
The rear seat also is heated and adjustable to 10 percent for the seatback.
PERFORMANCE
Big, hefty luxury cars usually need enormous engines to function with appropriate power. The new S-Class uses a pair of all-new engines that represent a breakthrough in modular engine design for Mercedes. A couple of years ago, Mercedes brought out its new CLK coupe and installed a new V6 engine. After years of battling BMW for supremacy of inline 6-cylinder designs and performance, Mercedes switched over to the V6. It had three valves per cylinder and a single overhead camshaft, in a technical field where four-valve heads and dual overhead cams predominate.
But Mercedes used exhaust flow and varying intake runners and alterable camshaft timing to satisfy itself that the design would work, with two intake and one large exhaust valve on each cylinder, which also has two sparkplugs for thorough, timed firing. The original design was of 2.8 liters displacement, and a 3.2-liter version, with a longer stroke, came next. That was used in the M-Class SUV and the E-Class sedans.
Now Mercedes has expanded the V6 block to a V8, which measures 4.3 liters, and is the engine in the S-430, with 275 horsepower and 295 foot-pounds of peak torque, and at the same time offers a larger bore 5.0-liter V8 for the S-500, which produces 302 horsepower and a staggering 339 foot-pounds of torque.
With that, the recently introduced 5-speed automatic transmission is installed, with improved driver-adapted tendencies based on computer imput of how you drive. That is standard on both the 430 and 500, as is a TouchShift feature that is similar to the Porsche/Audi Tiptronic, or the newest shifter from BMW, and, quite by coincidence, operates almost identically to the AutoStick offered by Chrysler — Mercedes’ new partner. It allows the driver to shift manually without a clutch, if he or she chooses. You put the floor shift lever in “D” for drive and let it shift, or you nudge the spring-loaded lever right to upshift or left to downshift.
That is particularly handy for coming off a freeway, where you want to downshift from D to, say, third, or where you want to accelerate hard enough to hold a gear and let the revs rise further into the power band. Besides, it’s fun, and it gives the sporty flair to the S-Class that Mercedes is demanding.
Complementing all that power distribution is a new suspension, with four-link front and five-like patented rear, and AIRmatic hermetically-sealed air springs that replace the usual steel coils with pneumatic struts controlled by an electric high-pressure air compressor.
The whole suspension package does several tricks besides allowing you to zap around tight corners with precision. For example, the air suspension lowers the car over a half-inch at any speed above 68 miles per hour to reduce air drag and fuel economy, returning to normal height when speed drops to 40. It also can be raised .8 inches manually whenyou’re on a rough road, and it retuns automatically if speed gets to 75, or is sustained at 50 for over five minutes.
Special valves on the adjustable shocks also stiffen or soften according to imput from various sensors that measure longitudinal and transverse movement and determines which of four settings is appropriate.
How does it all work? StarWars-sounding or not, the whole package is fantastic. Two of us alternated driving two difference cars, with a Mercedes guy in the back seat. Driving along one newly paved but deserted straight stretch, I gently but smoothly accelerated, which led to an interesting exchange.
“Oh, this car has a rev-limiter, doesn’t it?”
“Yes, but how do you know?”
“I just discovered it.”
“How fast?”
“A hundred and thirty.”
It was stunning, and it was only for a short blip, and it was not the sort of thing that would be recommended or promoted outside of a controlled test circumstance, but the car was smooth, precise and completely stable at 130, which will be fine on the autobahns of Germany, and indicated what kind of technical underpinnings are in the car.
My codriver overdid things a bit on the twisty mountain roads, driving unfamiliar curves far too fast and in a race-car manner that a 4,133-pound sedan would never and should never be forced to challenge. But it was stable and smooth at such excesses, where I protested that such driving manners were great for testing the traction-control devices, but put far too much responsibility on the tires.
At that, the oversized disc brakes and suspension collaborated to haul the beast down from any speed.
SAFETY
Mercedes always has been at the forefront of vehicle safety and the crushable front and rear energy-absorbing technology. The new S-Class sedans have dual-stage front airbags tht instantly deploy moderatel for a mild crash and totally for a harsher impact. It also has sensors in the seats to determine whether someone is sitting there, and won’t deploy the costly airbags if not needed.
The car also has four door-mounted side airbags and two side curtain airbags that run the total to eight. The curtain side airbags drop down all along the sides that are 6.5 feet long and 14 inches in width and two inches thick. They have proven to reduce side impact head injuries by 90 percent.
Mercedes always has run its cars through more severe crash tests than the U.S. government tests. So the new S-Class sedans meet frontal offset crashes of 40 mph instead of 35 or 30, and side impact tests at 38 mph instead of the U.S. test’s 34.
In addition, little things like locating the fuel tank ahead of the rear axle to be protected from the “deformation” area in a crash, and placing the spare tire against the rear subframe to increase the structural rigidity, are also well devised.
There is more, much more, such as a standard navigation system that can be used with or without coordination with a hands-free onboard telephone. It has a global positioning system that can help you plot trips and track your location, and also connects with a Protection One service for instantaneous help in the event of a crash. If a collision deploys an airbag, the system immediately contacts Protection One, which immediately calls the car’s cell phone. If there’s no answer, it relays all pertinent information about precise location to the closest police and emergency vehicle services. It can be activated even quicker by an onboard button.
The audio system, air-filtration device and winter-driving traction control also deserve explanation, but, as the ad indicates, words — and space — have their limits.
The only drawback is an Up North driving preference for front-wheel drive, or all-wheel drive. Mercedes remains steadfast about front-engine/rear-drive, and has gone all-out in its traction-control technology. But Mercedes does offer one E-Class model with all-wheel drive. So we — at least those of us who might afford one of these babies — can hope the all-wheel-drive feature gets added to the S-Class.
Ranger, Mazda B-4000 are same compact pickup
The Ford Ranger is the nation’s largest selling small pickup truck, and has been for a dozen years in a row.
Mazda pickups have always been tough little competitors that created a smaller but very enthusiastic following of those who admired the easy-to-use B4000.
In past years, if you liked the Ranger, you might not like the Mazda, and vice versa. But for 1999, if you drive both the Ranger and the Mazda B4000, you’ll note some similarities.
For example, both the Ranger and the Mazda B4000 come with optional extended cabs, and they are the only two compact pickups that offer reverse-opening door access to the rear jump seats on both the driver and passenger sides. Interestingly, both offer great access to that tiny little area that isn’t quite big enough to have a regular seat, but it does allow fold-down, side-facing jump seats.
Both the Ford Ranger and Mazda B4000 come with small 4-cylinder engines, of 2.5 liters, and both have optional 3.0-liter V6 engines, plus top-of-the-line 4.0-liter V6 engines available.
Another quite remarkable feature of both vehicles is that they have exactly the same length (201.7 inches), width (70.3), height (67.5) and wheelbase (125.9), if you measure just the extended-cab versions of the two.
The Ford Ranger first came out as a 1983 model, and its manufacturing is done at the St. Paul assembly plant, as well as in Louisville, and in Edison, N.J. It has always been rugged enough for farm or ranch work, carrying loads through fields or woods, while having enough comfort to be used on streets as well. But ruggedness has been a major feature of Rangers.
Mazda pickups also have been known for ruggedness since they started being sold in the U.S. in 1971, but its reputation was more of on-road durability, with overhead cam engines that would easily last 150,000-200,000 miles. In recent years, however, when switching to the 2.5, 3.0 and 4.0 configurations, Mazda has lost the overhead-camshafts and uses more conventional pushrod-style engines. Those newer Mazda B4000s are made, incidentally, in Edison, N.J.
Hmmmmmm. Has anyone yet made the connection?
Sure enough, Ford bought deeper into Mazda, and ever since 1993 Ford has manufactured both the Ranger and the Mazda pickups in the Edison plant. What they do is build the Ranger, then put a Mazda badge on some of them, to be sold as Mazda B-Series trucks.
By doing so, Ford shares the all-new vehicle it had redesigned just one year earlier, and the whole thing seems pretty efficient.
The Ford publicity book for 1999 says that the SuperCab was added to the Ranger midway through the 1998 model year, which means “Ranger is one of only twocompact pickups to offer a four-door model — Mazda’s B-Series is the other.”
And with good reason.
Ford redesigned the popular Ranger for the 1998 model year, with new front end styling and a new interior, plus improved performance and a new front suspension. While a 5-speed manual is standard, you can get a 4-speed automatic, or Ford’s new 5-speed automatic, which, it says here, is “shared by the Mazda B4000.”
We’re not surprised.
The diehard buyers of Mazda pickups of a decade ago might be surprised to find a lot of features they had never seen on previous Mazdas, but they would look strikingly familiar if they had hitched a ride or two in any Rangers of recent vintage.
I had a chance to test both vehicles a while ago, and it was interesting that one followed the other within a couple of weeks. Both were equipped with the 4.0 V6, and both had extended cabs.
The power was good in all citified applications. The Ranger pulled smoothly and quickly enough, and seemed a worthy worker if you had to haul moderate to heavy loads. The Mazda B4000 was equally as impressive.
While seating position and cushion comfort were good in both vehicles, and the visibility from the driver’s seat was equally good as well, I remain puzzled by one identical feature.
While the 4.0-liter V6 is a strong engine, especially at lower RPMs, it is made in Ford’s Koln, Germany, plant, strong and durable but without overhead camshafts. Two years ago, Ford engineers beefed up the 4.0 and reinforced it, then ran it through a makeover that mounted overhead cams on it. It was built for Ford’s Explorer SUVs, and magically, the freer-spinning overhead-cam 4.0 produced nearly as much power as the 5.0-liter V8, and also got as good fuel economy on the smaller, less-powerful V6 engines.
Perhaps Ford is having trouble keeping up with production of the 4.0-V6, because that engine still is being sold only as optional on Explorer models, while the Ranger pickup — which could use the extra punch — doesn’t even get the full-powered overhead-cam version of the V6.
The result is that both the Ranger and the Mazda B-4000 run well up to 70 on the freeway, but if you happen to be cruising along, on the steering-wheel-operated cruise control, and you have a situation where you might want to swing out and pass, you might be surprised to find that you already are on the floor with the gas pedal and the vehicles balk at the idea of going over 75. Pushrods, in this case, are a very effective method of speed control.
The pushrod 4.0-liter V6 in the Ranger (and the Mazda B-4000) delivers 160 horsepower. With the overhead-cam version in the Explorer, that same engine delivers over 200 horsepower. For two years, I’ve assumed it was just a matter of time until the overhead-cam V6 showed up in the Ranger, but it’s an assumption I’m figuring is out of the question.
Dodge has moved its Dakota up to what it is calling “mid-size” — between the compact size of the Ranger and the full-size pickups — and it is offering a full crew cab with four full-sized doors in the new model, and the available power of a big V8. Also, Toyota’s strong and smooth compact pickups are being complemented by a bigger Toyota pickup, and both have strong, overhead-cam engines.
Ford has a good, durable truck in the Ranger, and the new one with its longer wheelbase and styling upgrades, could increase its market share. But it also is going to have Mazda right alongside as a twin, and the question is, will they be ahead or behind those new and impressive challengers for market segment?
Subaru’s SUS can answer SOS from SUVs
Rarely, if ever, has there been a car that seems to cry out for foul weather more than the Subaru. Any Subaru. Coming with all-wheel drive and usually a low center of gravity, Subarus are less inclined to dazzle the country club set, but they thoroughly impress folks who live where negotiating foul weather is of utmost importance.
When I test-drove a 1999 Subaru SUS, I took it to the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, seeking the foulest weather in the area. The worst we found was a little drizzle.
You’ve heard of SUV, which stands for sports-utility vehicle. Subarus always have been sports-utility vehicle types, but they neglected to patent the monicker. Now that it’s trendy, Subaru wants its share of the segment to remain solid, so it’s expanding to offer an SUS — sports-utility sedan.
First, there were all sorts of spartan, basic Subarus. Then they branched out to larger — mid-size to most — Legacy sedans, available in station wagon form too. When everybody started building SUV trucks with off and on road capabilities, Subaru took its Legacy wagon, raised it up on taller, off-road-type tires, and put round foglights on the front with grids over them. They called this model the Outback, and hired the movie guy from Crocodile Dundee to conduct an ad campaign. He either escaped from or captured the bad guys because he was in a Subaru Outback in the Australian Outback, while they were in normal SUVs.
As popular as the Outbacks were, I thought they were kind of high up, kind of bouncy instead of the low-profile road-clingers I had come to expect from Subaru.
Now, for 1999, we have the Subaru Legacy SUS. Essentially, it takes the hardier look of the Outback and applies it to the Legacy, which isn’t a large departure from what the Legacy always was, and it sticks on an emblem to celebrate the 30th year of Subaru’s business in the U.S. Presto! We have the Subaru Legacy SUS, and it has a neat badge.
For everyday use, the SUS has the reliable 4-cylinder Subaru engine, displacing 2.5 liters, and with the pistons lying flat, two per side, and pumping horizontally. This horizontal-opposed layout was originally copied by Subaru from Volkswagen and Porsche, and since VW has long since gone to in-line engines, Subarus and Porsches are the only ones left that use this design.
You can find Subaru engines with six cylinders too, or turbocharged. They have fantastic power. The SUS is simply the normally-aspirated version, no turbo, but with fuel injection. It lacks the neck-snapping thrust off the line of bigger or turbo engines, but it is adequate in takeoff, and it cruises easily at highway speeds.
Again, it fits the mood of the car. Pragmatic, basic transportation, in any weather, aimed at durability. It’s a quiet engine, with power redlined at 6,500 RPMs, and the 4-speed automatic transmission shifts seamlessly. Suspension is firm but supple, and the car delivered 23 miles per gallon, while EPA estimates are 21 city, 27 highway.
The test car was black granite pearl, with slate-grey interior leather, all-wheel drive, four-channel antilock on the four-wheel disc brakes, heavy duty “raised” suspension, front and rear stabilizer bars, a two-way moonroof, and sporty tailpipes, hoodscoop and rear spoiler. The leather seats are heated, as are the outside mirrors.
You wouldn’t want to go tearing too far off the road with the SUS, because even with its slightly raised stance, it is not a truck. Or even trucklike. But since 90 percent of SUV owners don’t go off-road anyhow, except to trundle down the little road to the cabin, that shouldn’t be a problem.
You can adjust the height and lumbar of the seats, and the AM-FM-cassette-CD player also has a weather band. It also has a four-speed automatic transmission, air conditioning, with power windows, locks and mirrors, and cruise control. It also has halogen foglights — although not the big, round Outback style — and silver alloy wheels, with a gold accent.
A sticker price of $26,090 might seem high, but all of the features are standard equipment. That’s the way the SUS comes, loaded. Subarus have never had quite the level of sophistication of competitors such as, say, Honda or Toyota, or Mazda or Mitsubishi or Nissan. They have their advantage in foul-weather-worthiness, but there still are a few niggling little nuisance things that seem to be snags in the ergonomics.
For example, when the car was delivered, I noticed the parking lights stayed on. I mentioned it to the fellows dropping it off. These guys had wheeled it in from Chicago, and they were mightily annoyed that, try as they might, they couldn’t get the parking lights to go off until we contacted a dealership. There is a tiny switch, on top of the steering column, that can be rockered on to control the parking lights, independent of the light switch. Trouble is, that switch is all but invisible unless you lean forward and look over the hub of the four-spoke steering wheel. It is even less visible when rockered on, as this was.
The power locks are another novelty. Many cars have a remote lock switch on the key fob. The SUS had power locks, but no remote. OK. So you turn the key and all four doors lock or unlock, right? Wrong. Turn the key and the driver’s door locks, but the rest don’t. So you have to remember to lock the other three doors with the inside switch before you get out and lock the driver’s door. Same when you go to unlock it. You unlock the driver’s door, then must get in to unlock the other three with the power switch.
The power lock switch on the driver’s door is a rocker switch, but you rock it up to lock it, and down to unlock — the opposite of what manual switches and most power switches do. It’s not a big problem, and you’d undoubtedly get used to it, but a key-fob remote would be a wonderful option.
Then there’s the cupholder. On the center panel of the dash, the heat/air controls are at the top, with the stereo controls in the middle, and the disc slot right down there. Push another button and cupholders zip out and unfold, so you put your coffee cup or pop can in there and everything is fine. Until you decide to eject the disc, and Lyle Lovett slides out only part way before smacking into the cup or can. Meanwhile, if you want to adjust the heater, you have to reach up and over and behind the top of the cup/can to slide the switch.
Those are ergonomic, attention-to-detail things that always have set Subaru apart from Honda-Toyota-Mitsubishi-Nissan-Mazda, who seem to lead the world in making those features easy to operate. On the other hand, Subaru’s 4-spoke steering wheel is very good, with the spokes positioned so you can lock your thumbs comfortably around the upper bars if you want.
The foglights cut a usable, wide swath up front; the glass roof is so heavily shaded it’s tough to see the stars but it’s great for blocking out bright sun. The seat heaters come in two levels, slow sizzle and instant broil for frying your buns.
And, as a much appreciated touch, when you go to reach for the power window switch or the door lock, or the door handle, you are pleasantly surprised to realize you can see it. Then you realize you can see the switches because there is a little, tiny floodlight shining precisely on those switches.
All in all, the Subaru SUS has a lot to offer, and if the price is too high and the features are beyond what you want, you could always back off to the more basic Legacy.
Whichever Subaru you consider, try to time your test drive to a day with a sleet storm or blizzard. Because Subarus crave foul weather, Subaru drivers must find themselves smiling when the forecast is gloomy.
Honda’s Accord among top U.S.-built cars
1999 HONDA ACCORD EX
Likes: Tight body, excellent fit and finish, responsive engine, spacious trunk and overall coordination of parts and driver as one.
Dislikes: Honda needs to realize that Up North, we need tires that stick better on ice and snow than the stock Michelin MXV4s.
Bottom line: Base price $20,900; as tested $21,315.
It’s 1999. Do you know where your “American” car is made?
Two or three decades ago, it was easy. If it was made by General Motors, Ford, Chrysler or American Motors — remember American Motors? — it was American. Otherwise it was “foreign.” From Germany, or Sweden, or, most likely, Japan.
Nowadays, your Camaro is made in Quebec, your Chrysler minivan in Ontario, and your Ford Escort in Mexico. And the Toyota Camry and the Honda Accord are the top two cars sold in the U.S., both having beaten out the Ford Taurus. Toyota pulled off a startling reversal of tradition and closed 1998 with a batch of sales incentives to win the prestige of being No. 1.
Without that move, the Accord, all new for ’98, probably would have been No. 1. As it is, the Accord — made in Maryville, Ohio — is the No. 1 car built in the U.S. and sold for export. Yup, they’re building Accords in Ohio to ship back for sale in Japan.
I recently had the chance to test drive a new 1999 Honda Accord 4-door EX model, and it provided a near-flawless missile with which to get through the worst blizzard of the winter, and over-achieved from virtually every standpoint. As an EX, it came loaded with all sorts of option-type details as standard equipment, with a sticker price of $21,315.
When I first got into this black beauty, it greeted me with firmly supportive seats, and an immediate impression of ergonomic excellence: All the controls and gadgets fell easily to hand with logic and efficiency. Visibility is excellent, whether looking down the steeply sloped nose at the road ahead, or out the sides or rear.
Driving impressions were, in a word, impressive. From the start, picking the car up in Chicago at the height of a snow-over-ice storm, I found the acceleration quick and responsive. It made me assume that the car was armed with the new V6 from Honda. Turns out, I was wrong. It had the 2.3-liter single-overhead-camshaft 4-cylinder, with four valves per cylinder and the VTEC (variable valve timing and control) system.
That allows the system to extract optimum power from a comparatively small engine, making it feel like it has the power of a V6, yet still delivering the economy of a four-cylinder. The EPA estimates are 25 miles per gallon city, 31 freeway, and I got 29 on one freeway trip and 26 driving steadily into the face of a storm on another.
The 5-speed manual transmission was a treat. It shifts with sports-car precision, and also helps to extract maximum power from the engine, which undoubtedly would have been adequate but doggy with an automatic. The majority of folks want automatics nowadays, but the efficiency, winter-driveability and sheer fun of the 5-speed sets the Accord apart. Just try, for example, to find a 5-speed manual on a Taurus or Lumina.
A year or two ago, Honda gave in to the demands of critics who said Toyota and Nissan, among others, had V6 power. Honda installed an optional V6, but before you choose it, you should drive the VTEC four. More than likely, it’s all you need and then some — particularly with its easy running up to the 6,300-RPM redline.
Honda, with its championship motorsports history in Formula 1 and CART Champ cars, has superb double-wishbone suspension front and rear, with stabilizer bars front and rear as well. Four-wheel disc brakes with antilock are standard, as are driver and passenger airbags, a secutiry system with keyless engtry and a theft-deterrent immobilizer; AM-FM-CD player with six speakers and 80 watts; a micron air filter on the air-conditioning; power locks, windows and driver seat support.
The EX model is top of the line, so it also provides a glass tilt and slide sunroof, and alloy wheels mounted with Michelin MXV4 tires, all standard.
My only complaint, in fact, deals with those tires. Michelin may be unexcelled at making long-lasting, good-handling tires, but do it they use a hard compound, and among the cars I test drive, I find that even the all-season varieties of Michelins tends to slip and slide. That’s a fact of the usual compromise for long wear or sticky traction — only very few production tires can bridge that compromise.
In stormy weather, on ice and snow, I never had a problem getting anywhere with the Accord EX, but often I would have to anticipate that it would spin a few revolutions before getting underway, and I would leave extra room for slowdown when I had to turn or stop.
WHAT IS AN AMERICAN CAR?
The current global automotive scene is a vast departure from the days of 20 or 30 years ago. Back then, we were all proud and protective, and we wanted to buy American cars. In fact, we wanted to so bad, that some buttons were made up that said, simply, “Buy American.”
But along the way, the U.S. automakers were diddling us consumers. They were building stuff that wasn’t great, didn’t have outstanding fit and finish, and didn’t come close to the ever-advancing technology of some of those “foreign” cars. Tolerances were sloppy, and gas mileage was lousy.
When it became obvious that a whole new generation of auto buyers were choosing less-expensive but higher-tech cars from Honda, Toyota and others, something had to be done. Ford contracted with Mazda to build some of its lower-priced economy cars; Chrysler did the same with Mitsubishi; and General Motors did the same with Toyota, Suzuki and Isuzu.
In a way, it was clever, because the U.S. big three was able to sell very good but not-very-profitable economy cars through their arrangements, to meet new laws on emissions and fuel economy. In another way, it was trouble, because the U.S. companies could avoid the need to build good little economy cars on their own and use their import cousins to meet the standards.
Meanwhile, the U.S. companies got the government to threaten the imports with tariffs to eliminate the competition with the U.S. companies. Keeping them out of the country would help the domestics, and letting them in only when their prices had to be jacked up for taxes would be even better, because it would allow U.S. companies to increase the price of their cars.
On the other hand, the U.S. companies coaxed the government to pass the North American Free Trade Agreement, or NAFTA, supposedly to allow us to help poor little Mexico’s third-world economy, and also open the trade doors to Canada, freeing up the trade back and forth at both borders, unhindered by traditional import rules enough so cars from both would be declared “domestic” instead of “import.”
The reality of those two moves has been interesting to observe. Japanese companies, as well as BMW and Mercedes from Germany, beat the tariff idea by coming to the U.S. and building assembly and manufacturing plants. Surprisingly, the technology and design of those cars was duplicated by the U.S. plants.
Meanwhile, U.S. companies built automotive assembly plants in Mexico, where workers earn a paltry amount compared to the U.S. labor force, and others in Canada, where a Canadian dollar is worth about 65 cents against the U.S. dollar. In recent years, for example, GM has either sold off or closed down something like 18 or 20 U.S. plants, eliminating a lot of costly jobs for U.S. workers, because it’s cheaper to build vehicles in Canada or Mexico.
An item on public radio the other day assessed the first five years of NAFTA, and indicated that the U.S. had a substantial surplus in trade with Mexico in 1993, but now we have a $15 billion deficit in trade with Mexico, and we have an $18 billion deficit with Canada. Data indicates that the Mexican workers are more productive working in the streamlined U.S. plants than they were before, but they still make 90 cents per hour or less! That means they can’t afford to buy the cars they are building for U.S. companies, which can bring them back into the U.S. and sell them at even more substantial profits than before.
Fortunately for all of us, U.S. companies have improved their products drastically. They had to, or they’d have been out of business, as Honda Accords and Civics, and Toyota Camry models shot to the top of the list of sales, challenging the best Taurus could do for Ford, or Cavalier for Chevrolet. We should thank the imports for forcing U.S. car makers to get with it.
Even though Honda, Toyota, Nissan, Mitsubishi, Mazda, Subaru, Isuzu and others have built plants in the U.S., a few older stalwarts remain, thinking it’s unpatriotic to buy something with a foreign nameplate. The U.S. automakers don’t trumpet the “buy American” theme anymore, but they take glee in having the very customers they’ve fooled shout it out on their behalf.
Some will claim that some of those Japanese plants in the U.S. don’t have the unions of the U.S. plants, but the counter argument is that they treat their workers so well, there hasn’t been any clamor for unionizing protection.
And when it comes to patriotism, stop and think. Which is more patriotic, to buy a Camaro built in Quebec, or to buy a Honda Accord made by American workers in Maryville, Ohio, while GM lays off thousands of workers and closes U.S. plants?
About the Author
John Gilbert is a lifetime Minnesotan and career journalist, specializing in cars and sports during and since spending 30 years at the Minneapolis Tribune, now the Star Tribune. More recently, he has continued translating the high-tech world of autos and sharing his passionate insights as a freelance writer/photographer/broadcaster. A member of the prestigious North American Car and Truck of the Year jury since 1993. John can be heard Monday-Friday from 9-11am on 610 KDAL(www.kdal610.com) on the "John Gilbert Show," and writes a column in the Duluth Reader.
For those who want to keep up with John Gilbert's view of sports, mainly hockey with a Minnesota slant, click on the following:
Click here for sports