Search Results

A recipe for greatness that comes up short. 2022 VW Golf Mk8 R review with The Road Beat. Words and pictures by Mitchell Weitzman. A compact hatchback with over 300 horsepower, all-wheel drive, a fancy dual-clutch transmission, and one that's been honed and tested on the Nurburgring - Should be a recipe for greatness, right? Or perhaps a curse, brewed in the same cauldron by the witches of Macbeth. There is greatness destined here, but at what cost? There sure is a tangible cost, yes, to the tune of a staggering $45,885...for a VW Golf. The specs are exciting, though, so how it could possibly be anything short of ludicrously entertaining? The Golf R is the result of being so competent that it becomes, well, boring. An exciting machine this should be, but the emotions of what drives enthusiasts is where the Golf R does not fully deliver. Similar to laboratory boffins designing the most beautiful man or woman and then forgetting to give them a personality, VW has indulged ability, but removed involvement and the notion of fun. My tester was a dual-clutch car, and I have no doubt the manual that is available would improve interaction, but I'm afraid a manual won't save this car, especially when I enjoyed the cheaper Golf GTI so much and that also had the same dual-clutch. So where does the new Mk8 R go wrong? One of the headlining figures for the Golf R is the 315-horsepower that its 2-liter turbocharged engine produces. Paired to AWD and the potent dual-clutch 'box with launch control, prospects ought to be alluring. I've seen other magazines report 0-60 MPH runs below four seconds, a time that matches $200,000 supercars from 15 years ago - ballistically quick in other words. However, I never found the speed of the Golf R to be anywhere near that. With launch control working, I never saw a 0-60 MPH under four and half seconds, and after that benchmark speed, acceleration waned considerably. With a couple friends in the car, not a single one of them thought the car felt fast. Perhaps my R I tested had bad gasoline? But even after adding additional gallons later, it wasn't like that set the genie free either. Now, I'm not calling the Golf R slow, but it certainly isn't nearly as quick as others have reported or have led you to believe. The biggest tell is that the Golf GTI I tested a few weeks prior, which has some 70 less horsepower on the spec sheet, felt just as quick at any point in its rev range. Maybe one day I'll get to try another R to see if mine was indeed lacking, but the tester I was sent did not impress on the speed front at all. You might have heard about the publicized 'drift mode' that the Golf R has, so that must be good, yeah? True, you can turn your AWD Golf R into a pseudo RWD car for a so-called drift mode (it sends only half the power to the rear, but it can direct it all to the outside tire to easily 'overwhelm' the rubber). Does it work? Yes, it'll drift and power oversteer pretty authentically for a hatchback, but there's a catch, of course. At speeds over 30 MPH, the drift mode is less usable and best recommended to be left off. Leaving a corner with the power pinned and flicking upshifts at the redline through the first few gears, I was met with a wag from the rear at each upshift, like a dog's tail when excited, leading me to countersteer while going straight. This greasy weasel of a rear axle is not for the faint of heart and you need to be prepared. If you thought torquesteer in a front-drive car was bad, wait until you feel torquesteer from the rear! So yes, it can drift, but don't use drift mode anywhere else. So what about attacking back roads? Surely a car with an 'R' badge attached to it ought to be at home in this setting. And it is, but just not in the way you would hope. With its firm, sporting intent, and all-wheel drive security and grip, the R can be devastatingly effective on b-roads; If you know what you're doing, you can easily embarrass the casual Sunday-supercar-owner. Yet, there was little joy in backroad barnstorming, being a boring affair, free from passion; I found it akin to an old arcade style racing game, button smashing on a PlayStation 2 controller if you will. Furthermore, the car's electronic safety measures were far too intrusive, often limiting power before any slip had even occurred. Okay, so let's switch this hatch into the special 'Nurburgring mode' via the center display, that ought to do the trick. This is a car, after all, famous for a quick 'Ring time, so this mode must be exceptional. Except it isn't. Responses are heightened, but again even in this track mode, the aggression exhibited by the safety nannies was beyond aggravating, not letting any freedom before intervention. I seriously doubt this was the mode that was used to set a fast lap at the Nurburgring... These big brother antics are made worse by noticeable turbo lag when shifting manually. At a decent pace, I found myself turning in and eager to get on the throttle and utilize the all-wheel drive to whizz me along. Instead, power is restricted by traction control (even in track mode), and then you're left having no idea when it will come because once the nannies release you, the turbo has stopped spooling and now needs to rebuild boost pressure. The only caveat I could think that might help is that my tester did wear Hankook summer tires, which I've had good experiences with in other cars, but I would recommend getting Michelins on yours instead for added tactility and grip. The only real solution for some fun in this car then, is to disable traction and stability controls completely, but how many are going to be comfortable doing that in the real world where variables are endless and without gravel traps to protect you? I did try it in this way, and it is improved, yet the R is still not as malleable as the front-wheel drive GTI when you get aggressive with the wheel, lacking flickability and overall fun factor of its junior. I'm sorry to say it, but the Golf R is just not nearly as fun as it could and should have been. Clinical might be the best term for it, and I don't want clinical in a performance car. But maybe this is exactly what you're looking for in a vehicle; easy and accessible speed, albeit up to a limited point. Fast, but never entirely fun. There are some good points to mention, like seats that do a great job holding you in place and the fuel economy. During my time with the Golf R, I averaged a decent 26 MPG and saw about 32 on the highway. These are not bad numbers for a car with this much claimed horsepower, though a new Toyota Supra 3.0 gets even better with more power. The other nicety is the practicality that a squared-off hatchback brings, with plenty of cargo and back seat space for a vehicle that is only 170" long. Ready for more negatives, though? For a vehicle over $45,000, the interior just doesn't cut it, sharing many materials with the now discontinued $25,000 base Golf; This simply is not a cabin worthy of the price tag. Also, I wrote about this is in detail with the also-new MK8 Golf GTI, but the center display/infotainment system is terrible. I believe it was a system designed by programmers who then never tried actually using it themselves. It's slow, disorganized, and with too much stuffed into it (note the lack of physical buttons on the dash). Just abysmal. Then there's the touch-sensitive steering wheel buttons that work only half the time you want them to, and many times that you don't want them to. Ergh. And why is the switch for the climate control shortened to a dumb 'clima' instead of climate? The center console storage also makes a nasty sound, and, you have to raise it all the way up before it can close. Not even holding the lever as a clutch defeats this, which would make sense, but perhaps sense doesn’t translate well in German. Wow, it sounds like I really hate this car, but it's more that it could have been so good. Instead, it's overpriced, not as fast as advertised in the real world, and not all that fun on the roads where it should be. I enjoyed driving the cheaper GTI more and found it just as fast when it comes to power despite the lower horsepower. I'd much rather point a buyer in the direction of a GTI and save them nearly $10,000 while doing so. As a reasonably quick, small AWD car, however, it doesn't have much in competition. You could look at a base Audi S3 or Mercedes CLA35 AMG, and there's also the BMW 230xi (a 2 door coupe) instead. The only way I can see this as being recommended is if you absolutely require an AWD vehicle based on your climate and don’t want a Subaru. Viewed as a performance car, though, there are definitely better and more involving cars for the money (and for even less - looking at you, Hyundai Elantra N). Perhaps the biggest threat is yet to come, with Toyota's highly praised AWD Corolla GR-Four now imminent, and also don't discount the new Civic Type R. 2022 Volkswagen Golf R As-tested price: $45,885

The new GV60 takes an imaginative exterior and interior design and couples it to nearly 500-horsepower. 2023 Genesis GV60 review with The Road Beat Words and photos by Mitchell Weitzman What is it? The first all-electric vehicle from Genesis, the luxury subdivision of Hyundai/Kia. Slotting in below the GV70 and GV80 SUVs in terms of size, the GV60 isn't any cheaper, but it is wildly more powerful in this spec due to its all-electric powertrain that makes 429 horsepower (and 483 temporarily for extra boost). Does this compact luxury crossover make any sense, though? Highs When the GV60 was first revealed online, I was unsure what to think of it. The common word I saw and heard was 'funky,' which doesn't quite tell if that's good or not; A Honda Crosstour is funky, but also ugly, for example. In the flesh, I really enjoyed the distinct personality of the GV60's aesthetics, and so did basically all who saw it. The proportions aren't unlike that of the Tesla Model Y, but the Genesis doesn't resemble a Dr. Seuss-designed creation (though apparently hundreds of thousands of people don't mind driving around in a car fresh off the lot from Whoville). Anyways, call it funky, off-beat, fresh etc., this is a unique and cool-looking car in person. Continuing the stylish exterior is a distinct and exuberant interior. Video/streaming advertisers will love it, as this is OTT (over-the-top) to a next and new level of interior design. Is that a Tolkien Palantir in the center there? No, it's the drive-selector concealed. A gimmick, sure, but hey, at least it's not boring - people dug it, too. Materials in the cabin are good, but not great, with some plastic and flimsy bits disguised as machined metal and so forth, but this interior nails the brief for pure theater. More importantly, it's just exciting and great to see the creativity coming forth with new models from a new brand. Also, it's quite comfortable, too, and while the back seat isn't humongous, it's also not as cramped as you might initially think. If you want power, then the GV60 in Performance trim will surely satisfy your appetite. The standard power output might be 429, but pressing the boost button on the steering wheel unlocks an additional 54 horsepower for 483 total. That's as much as a Ferrari F430 in case you were wondering. Actual performance greatly depends on the drive mode selected, too, but when the correct mode is selected and with that boost button pressed, you better hold on. 0-60 MPH takes only 3.8 seconds, and the rush from any low speed is relentless to any legal velocity. There are faster vehicles still, but why? The ability to seemingly teleport down stretches of suburban roads are reaching more and more reasonably attainable vehicles, and if you weren't prepared for it, it might not even be safe! Further establishing this point, because it's electric, there is no build-up in horsepower, coming on instead instantaneously. When passing a slow vehicle up a hill, the GV60 responded so quickly to peak acceleration I nearly rammed the back of the minivan in front as I was changing lanes! The GV60 also continues the Genesis trend of building superlative-driving machines. The ride resists being choppy and unnecessarily firm nor floaty, with handling that impressed on winding country roads. The steering, like on most modern cars, is dead, but it does steer nicely still and with confidence. I dislike how light the steering is in the standard mode, but it firms up nicely when driven with extra vigor. What I found most noteworthy is that, despite all that power available, the chassis takes it just fine, with enough grip to out drive most Sunday-supercar-owners, and a balance firmly derived from a sorted sports-sedan. The all-wheel drive in particular does a great job in corner exits and can really propel you forward once the wheel gets straightened out. I recently had also tried Volvo's C40, which also has 400-horsepower, and in tight roads, it was definitely more power than the brakes and chassis could handle, The GV60 can really slug it out in contrast, treating beckoning roads like easy batting practice. For those wanting charging and efficiency info, I averaged 2.8 miles per kWh of battery capacity. With a 77 kWh battery pack, that equates to about 215 miles of range, somewhat less than what a Tesla Model Y Performance can achieve from a similarly-sized battery pack. Why isn't this a negative? It does at least match the efficiency of a VW ID.4 and Toyota bZ4X, both of which are far slower EVs. So, it's way faster, but it isn't any less efficient than other cheaper offerings. Call that a win-win? Maybe not entirely, but at least the Genesis has lightning recharge times, with the ability to juice at up to 350 KWs, or about double the charging speed as some other options. Lows Some issues are hard to overcome, though. Like, why the interior at first glance is this creative, almost science-fiction interior with flashy components, but then why do random bits feel cheap? The metallic-appearing surfaces on the door panels are a good example, flexing upon grabbing and squeezing the interior door handles; It's more luxury by opulent appearance rather than raw materials in other words. Oh, and how does the GV60 not have wireless Apple CarPlay? To enable this function, your phone must be plugged in. Strange. Not exactly a large car by any means, some might be disappointed with the rear seat and cargo space inside, both of which are compromised by the sloping roofline. The Hyundai Ioniq 5, with a traditional, square hatchback silhouette, succeeds better in this regard to maximize volume. One must also ask themselves if 215 miles of range is enough, too. There are a lot of new electric vehicles coming out in this size class, and all seem stuck around 3 miles per kWh of energy and 200-250 miles of range. Someone needs to move the game forward here at a non-outrageous price. Lucid has, but it'll cost you. Everyday Teslas can eek out a little bit more real world range and still holds an advantage here. Perhaps the biggest obstacle to this GV60 Performance is the price, because at $69,560, it's anything but cheap for what is a compact vehicle at 178" long. This is all the more worrying when you realize you can have an Hyundai Ioniq 5 AWD or Kia EV6 AWD with every option ticked for about $15,000 less on the Monroney. That's a huge chunk of change to move up to the GV60, and while those aren't as fast, they're still plenty quick on their own and offer more universally liked designs, too. If the GV60 moved the game on from the EV6 and Ioniq 5 twins with both increased performance and range, then it could be more justifiable, but it actually represents a decrease in range. If you want the nicer car, sure, go for it, but I don't think the difference is enough from both those excellent and cheaper offerings. Verdict: Don't get me wrong, for I did enjoy my time with the GV60 Performance. I liked the interesting design and wild cabin, while occasionally relishing in the fun peak acceleration the GV60 can offer. However, I don't think it does enough to differentiate itself from the Hyundai Ioniq 5 and Kia EV6, which sticker for far less dough, and it's not like either of those have barren, apocalyptic rental car interiors, too. I like the GV60, but the toughest competition comes from within the same corporation. 2023 Genesis GV60 Performance As-tested price: $69,560 (starts at about $60,000) Pros: Neat design inside and out; Impressive speed Cons: Some cheap interior parts; The Ioniq 5 and EV6 exist A great and unique new EV, but faces strong internal competition.

The original hot hatch continues into its 8th-generation. Still a deserving icon? What is it? There are only so many certainties in the world. Some include death, taxes, another obscure baseball record broken by Shohei Ohtani, Trump denying an election, and Volkswagen's Golf GTI. The German Giant's extremely popular Golf hatchback, doused up in performance GTI trim, has amazingly been around now for nearly 50 years, debuting in 1975 at the Frankfurt Motor Show. It changed cars forever, proving that a practical and affordable, front-wheel drive hatchback could be great fun. Due to enormous successes, the GTI continues today, tested here as the new MK8 model. Is it still a winner? What's good? At first look, you might not be overly excited about a 241 horsepower hatchback, especially when base Mustangs and Camaros come with 300 horsepower engines these days. However, that 241 figure is a big fat lie. How do I know that? This GTI felt exactly as fast, if anything quicker due to a strong turbocharged midrange surge, than my own 332 horsepower Nissan 370Z. Get your stopwatch out and the GTI, with the snappy DSG dual-clutch automatic, fires to 60 MPH from a rest in a rabid five seconds flat. Even after 60 MPH, the motor just keeps on pulling and pulling; It's insanely impressive and must be closer to real-world 300 horsepower. It's also miles quicker than a Jetta GLI, which has a similar power rating, and extremely well-matched to Hyundai's fundamentally brilliant Veloster N in terms of speed. Despite only sending power to the front wheels, there is some magic at play that makes it entirely usable no matter which direction you're heading. You might think that all that power comes at the cost of the front tires, being a front-wheel drive box at its core. However, Volkswagen is the world leader when it comes to front-drive refinement, with only a hint of torque steer when spooling the turbos below 10 MPH at its stonking 26 PSI peak boost pressures. After that, it's legitimately unnoticeable, and, thanks to some mechanical and electronic trickery, you can get on the power heavily mid corner and not face the dreaded unholy understeer that plagued past front-drive performance cars. Rather that pushing off over a cliff edge, the GTI can utilize its trick limited-slip differential to send power to the inside wheel and pulls you through a corner; It's mightily impressive. On a tight, twisty road, there isn't much that a GTI couldn't keep up with as most roads don't allow a McLaren 720S to use all its power, and nor are most drivers able to extract even half of what a big Mac can do. You can definitely annoy supercar owners and influencers in your GTI and have a laugh about it later. Which then brings us to the handling - It's good. While not as sharp or single-minded as a Veloster N, the GTI represents a deft blend of capability and everyday comfort while remaining quite fun and provocative when asked - you can turn off all the assists and relish in the playful balance easily and safely. And it does all this yet retains a reasonable ride quality, something a Veloster N can't do when you enter its 'N' mode. The steering lacks outright feel, but once you're turned it weights up nicely and has a direct connection to the direction of your front wheels. At just 1.9 turns lock-to-lock, it's very alert, with a steering ratio that is more reserved for supercars. The rack is also variable, meaning the ratio quickens and slows the more or less you turn, but it comes across natural and confident. Sport mode in the GTI tightens up all responses, and also brings a notable increase in exhaust volume that might not be to everyone's liking. Overall, from a performance perspective, the new GTI is an exhibition in outright aptitude, but also is entirely usable and livable. For those concerned, gas mileage is excellent, with the GTI averaging an impressive 28 MPG during my time with it. As Borat would say, "Very nice!" What's not good? So I mentioned that it basically drives excellent, but the GTI is not without fault, but none of it has to do with how it drives. A big change for the new Golf is a redone infotainment module that removes almost all physical buttons, but, that's not good. Not only is it clunky, but it's just too much work for basic tasks. Sometimes it responded slowly, too, and organization could certainly be improved. The screen that makes up the gauge cluster might be eye-candy, but it's similarly difficult to navigate through. VW has gone all-in on this touchscreen interface, but I feel like they didn't do any testing with potential owners. Of course the engineers behind it will know how to use it and think they hit the jackpot and praise their own intellectual prowess, but others, actual real people, will no doubt find it frustrating to use. And why the heck is climate labeled just 'clima?' You couldn't add two more letters? Somewhat related are the touch controls that are available in this GTI. You will not find a volume knob, rather, a bizarrely terrible touch sensitive +/- that you can either click or slide, located below the screen yet in-between some wonky secondary fan controls. It's hard to see at the angle it's positioned, doesn't respond accurately, and I also found myself accidentally adjusting the climate control next to it, since there are literally three +/- sliders all next to each other. Bad planning. You could instead use the volume on the steering wheel, but like all the other too many steering-wheel controls present, it also doesn't respond well to neither clicks nor slides. Sliding barely ever worked when meant on purpose, and I found myself accidentally sliding against it and other controls at random when moving my hands on wheel at times causing screens or volumes to change. Steering wheels do not need slideable controls. Just no. Further, there are literally seven buttons for cruise control. Why? The user interfaces are not well-thought out, but that's not the only knock on the interior. I was mostly happy with the quality of the interior, but there are some cheap bits that standout. Chief of which is the single worst center console cubby of any new car I've tested. Raising it brings out a nasty clicking sound from its plastic mechanism as you lift it up. Yuck. But also, you can only close it if you raise it all the way. If not at max height, there's a gear that freezes it in place. Not even holding the release handle defeats this - you actually have to lift it up to close it. So, it makes a terrible, cheap sound, and it's a struggle to close. Who signed off on this, VW? It's a freaking cubby cover - it's not that hard! Couple these issues with VW's trademark, industry-leading beeps and bongs. Did I say industry-leading? Yes, by that, I mean the worst. Maybe it's just for an American audience they don't think too kindly of, but the warnings beeps and bongs are horrendously loud. Don't even think about opening the door with the engine running while parked (or even with just the ignition on), because the loud blaring becomes unbearable. As I was taking photos and had the door open for interior shots, the bong was loud enough to completely outdo the radio. Curiously, it won't display this behavior when any door except the driver is opened. Passengers want to open doors at will? Have at it I guess. Every modern VW displays this same annoying characteristic and it must be because they think so little of the people that drive them. I would pay a decent chunk to someone with a computer to code out the sounds. Closing thoughts The MK8 Golf GTI is a terrific performance machine that can be enjoyed and used every single day, but as an everyday car, that's where it struggles. How does that make sense? Well, it's an amazing machine and crazy fast for the price, but its function as a car, your daily transport, suffers from its wonky infotainment, touch controls, and the absurdly annoying safety bongs. If you want a real dedicated sports car for the same price, the Hyundai Veloster N is the better choice still, however, you will sacrifice comfort and refinement. The GTI could be the easy default number one choice as long as you can acclimate to the concerns on the inside; The invigorated, consummate performance icon blighted by bad tech. Eh, you'll probably still love it anyways. 2022 Volkswagen Golf GTI as-tested price: $36,880 Pros: Huge speed; great handling; good economy Cons: infotainment and controls need work; annoying beeps Verdict: Affordable, practical, and great performance, with a serving of bad tech.

Too expensive for being so tiny and slow. At least the MPG impresses. 2022 Lexus UX 250h review with The Road Beat Words and photos by Mitchell Weitzman What is it? The Lexus UX 250h, a compact crossover based on Toyota's bargain basement C-HR (they share the same 103.9" wheelbase), albeit with the Lexus-luxury treatment and a hybrid powertrain. I can't stress 'compact' quite enough when describing this vehicle, especially when it comes to the inside. The as-tested price for this 'Luxury' trim UX (aren't all Lexus vehicle luxury by definition?) is a whopping $44,115. Be prepared, this review is not going to be entirely nice. At all. Highs Exceptional gas mileage is the key strong point of the UX 250h. During a week with this blue Lexus, I averaged 35 MPG, a commendable figure that has become consistent with the Toyota group's latest hybrid powertrains. If you want something luxurious and that saves on gas, the UX 250h does deliver that goal in spades. Even with its meager 10.6 gallon tank, that still means you can go almost 400 miles per fill. And yes, wearing both a Lexus badge and 'Luxury' literally printed to the end of its name on the window sticker, this is a thorough Lexus experience when it comes to the quality of the cabin. The seats are made out of Lexus' 'NuLuxe' synthetic leather, but you'd be easily fooled into thinking it's the real deal. There's just a certain polish evident in the interior environment that whispers things like, "long-lasting" and a whole-hearted, "nice" to you. If there's one thing Lexus knows, it's how to put an interior together. Some of the buttons are of the cheaper variety, but for the most part, all touch points are a job well-done and gives the accurate and convincing impression of luxury. The steering is accurate and not ponderous, and the car on the whole is secure and competent. Modest run-flat tires prevent it from being any real fun in corners, but the handling is at least decent on the whole. It doesn't really stop it from being snooze-fest, but the Toyota architecture underneath does provide a platform yearning for freedom. As just a car to hop in and for running to your destination, the UX largely succeeds with how easy it is to operate and drive. Despite the flashy blue paint and aggressively sculpted bodywork, just don't be fooled into thinking this is a sporting machine: It's not, not even in the slightest of ways. At least normal buyers will find comfort and confidence in its commuting dynamics. And there's where the advantages of the UX 250h end, unfortunately. Lows There's not a lot Lexus can do to make up for its obvious weaknesses, all which circle back to that exhausting asking price. A severe lack of interior space and performance make the UX 250h nearly impossible to justify at the $44,115 cost. On paper, the UX has an overall length of 177", which is anything but tiny. However, past the front seats, this is a claustrophobic nightmare. Rear leg space dwindles for anyone over 5.5' tall, and my friend, at 6' 2", had a laughable experience seeing him cramped into its confines. This is partially in due to the short 103.9" wheelbase (even a Corolla has a longer wheelbase) combined with the low 60" height. While young kids would be fine, and some small dogs, this is not a back seat meant for actual humans for any period longer than five minutes. The same applies to a cargo space that is not Costco-optimized, so plan accordingly when you decide to pick-up some new furniture from that Facebook Marketplace ad. The economy does impress yet, but the engine on the whole is an absolute garbage disposal. With only 181 horsepower to motivate this 3,600 pound crossover, acceleration is disappointing to say the least, with 0-60 MPH requiring a lengthy nine seconds to accomplish. And when you do need to ask for throttle when merging onto faster roads, the noise emitted is toxic, exacerbated by a continuously-variable transmission that holds the engine speed near redline for prolonged time. This kind of noise and behavior is not one reminiscent of a luxury product. Honestly, this is where fully-electric powertrains would be beneficial, because it'd be smoother, way more powerful, and you wouldn't have to hear that rattling racket anymore. But, then it'd cost even more... The price becomes more challenging when you realize you can have a Toyota Venza Limited at the exact same price, which is pretty dang close to interior build quality, gets the same MPG, and is significantly larger inside everywhere as it's based on a Toyota RAV4 rather than a C-HR/Corolla. This kind of money also gets you into an okay Highlander Hybrid, even. You can sacrifice 5 MPG and have BMW's excellent X1, too, which drives soooo well and is also larger inside. The car is so cramped inside that it really does pose a legit concern for anyone spending over 40 grand on any vehicle. If it were cheaper, sure, it could make sense for those wanting a luxury compact car, but the price is a real head-scratcher. It's not like, "oh, at least it's fast or fun." No, for it's slow, expensive, and small. A trifecta of illness. This UX still has the virus-like touchpad interface that is a curse of the automotive legendarium. It should soon be phased out for a modern and improved approach that's now available in the bigger NX, luckily, but for a car called the UX, the UX (user experience) is pretty awful. Programmers and digital architects ought to have been more mindful in a car that is literally named the User Experience 250h for those that work and live in a digital world, which is basically all of us now. Verdict If this car cost $10,000 less, all would be forgiven. At that price, it would be basically a Toyota C-HR that's been hopped up to real luxury levels at a $7,000 price premium - an interesting niche. But no, you're paying almost $15,000 more here than for what the C-HR Limited, on which it's based, retails at - That is a cookie that's crumbled before even the first bite. What's more is that this UX 250h is just too dang small for the price, with storage and a back seat that are too compromised for everyday usability and utility. Toyota's own Venza is such a smarter choice, not to mention stepping up to an entry Lexus NX hybrid, which will still be a nice car in its own right. I like the idea of a compact luxury car because not everyone needs the space of something big, but it makes next to no sense at this price and with the lack of any other highlighted traits besides the gas mileage. If you're concerned about gas mileage and saving money there, just buy a cheaper car to begin with. 2022 Lexus UX 250h Luxury Price as-tested $44,115 Pros: Great fuel economy Cons: Cramped inside, woefully slow, it costs how much? Verdict: It's too slow and cramped to justify the price Better alternatives: Toyota's own Venza, as mentioned, a hybrid that will average identical MPG, an upscale interior (for a Toyota) in Limited trim, and costs the same as this Lexus. Want something small, but actually fun? BMW's X1 might get a few MPG less, but it's leagues faster and sure to put a smile on your face in comparison. Likewise, save almost ten grand and bag a Mazda CX-30 Turbo Signature. It has a wonderful (and slightly bigger) interior, great performance, and drives neatly with real sporting edge. The upfront savings alone are big enough to justify 27 MPG overall verse 35.

The Integra returns, but is it worthy of the name? 2023 Acura Integra A-Spec review with The Road Beat Words and photos by Mitchell Weitzman What is it? Acura's Integra, a new compact sedan that revives the name of some of Honda's and Acura's best driver's cars ever from the 1990s and early 2000s. Some people say the new model isn't worthy of the Integra name, which is bizarre given the Integra was always just a cheap economy car. Sure, they made a couple Integra Type Rs, but suddenly it's sacrilegious to bestow the 'Teggy' name on anything else unless it's the second coming of Jesus himself. The Integra cult, it's real, man. This new model is essentially a rebodied and remodeled Honda Civic. The Civic is an amazing vehicle, so I have high hopes. Oh, and this example has a delightful six-speed manual transmission. Highs Starting out with the Honda Civic Si as a donor car, the Integra A-Spec presented here is basically just a better, luxurious Civic. By no means is that an insult, though, as I genuinely love the new Civic. While lots were quick to criticize the Integra when it was first unveiled in photos, I can confidently say it looks far better in person. It's not particularly exciting looking, no wings or anything to see here (at least not yet), but it is a handsome car. But the best is when you open the door, greeted by swaths of gorgeous and sumptuous red faux-leather and microsuede in the cabin (some of the best synthetic 'pleather' in the business). Furthermore, there are lots of soft touch points and luckily all the controls and switches don't feel cheaply flimsy. Seriously, this is a decently luxury interior that meets the expectation of the Acura badge (Acura, after all, is the luxury division of Honda). As a better-appointed Civic, the Integra succeeds here. With the Tech package equipped (an obligation if you want the stick shift), there's loads of equipment and features, even though that's to be expected now at this price point. For a car costing $37,395, it has nearly everything you could ever wish for, like the head-up display, safety features, and an impressive stereo. Honda has always had a knack for slick shifters, and the unit on this Integra is no different, with pleasing and precise throws and engagement. It's easy to drive, too, with light effort and feel through both pedals and stick. I personally prefer a little extra weighting to both foot and hand controls, but it's a proper pleasure to use and row gears. The gearing is short, too, which lends a hand to perky-feeling acceleration and also allows the user to shift more often, which is a good thing given how fun it is to do so. And it's also quite frugal, burning a gallon of gas every 30 miles in my time with the Integra. Handling is basically perfect for an everyday, front-wheel drive car. Are there more focused cars with higher limits? Sure, like the Veloster N, or the forthcoming Civic Type R, but both of those are compromised elsewhere with an MO of track performance. The Integra won't be as happy on track, but on the road, where it's been designed for, it's a hoot. Steering is wonderful, if lacking some feel, but it's quick and oh-so direct. Chuck the wheel one way and the car responds intuitively to your liking. The front bites long enough until the tires gives out, but the balance really is damn impressive in how fluid and neutral it is. There's even some body roll to help with confidence and allows you to lean on the outside corner when pushing things, and pushing it safely at non-outrageous speeds. TL/DR: this is a fun car! Lows Eh, that engine. No, it's fine, it really is, but being significantly more expensive than a Civic Si, you would hope for extra power. Yeah, no. The Integra A Spec is only working with 200 horsepower here from its 1.5L turbocharged inline-four, and while the short gearing gives the impression of some quickness, it just isn't fast enough. 0-60 MPH, for example, takes 7 seconds. For contrast, an everyday Golf GTI MURDERS this car in a straight line. Sure, one of those is a bit bare-bones in terms of interior refinement and quality by comparison, but it goes to show how much speed is available elsewhere in this price range now. Why would this not have the same spec 272 horsepower 2.0L four-cylinder that the Acura TLX has? Or at least something in the middle. At least I can say that the engine is smooth and avoids sounding like a garbage disposal that other four-bangers can do remarkable impressions of. Also of note is the quiet exhaust on the Integra. Remember, this is trying to be a civilized luxury car. And then there's the price, coming in at $37,395 as equipped with the desirable Tech package. It's not just a couple grand more than the Civic Si on which it's based, but some $7,000 more? Yikes. I noticed there aren't even air vents for the back seats, relying too much on the economy skeleton that is the Civic underneath. And similarly, the seats might be impressive, but there are too many other details that are plainly a Civic and doesn't do enough to distinguish itself in terms of quality. That said, the new Civic is a huge step forwards from the old one by fit and finish. While it makes for a nice starting point, it'd be nice to have more of its own design. Verdict The Integra A Spec is easily the best Honda Civic currently on sale. Think of it as just a Civic with the luxury turned up and, if anything, one that's even better to drive. However, to get the well-equipped A-Spec model with a manual like tested here, you gotta pay for it, and it's frankly too much. It's the better Honda Civic, but one that's been priced basically out of contention once you consider the performance you can get from rivals. One drive in a Veloster N and I'd be like "Yeah, I'll trade some leather for this." To make the Integra make sense, it needs more to identify itself as a unique offering. Or perhaps, maybe Integra wasn't the right name in this instance. But hey, Ford calling the Mach-E a Mustang has worked wonders for the Blue Oval in terms of sales. I'll be here waiting for a Type S, Acura. 2023 Acura Integra A-Spec Manual As-tested price: $37,395 Pros: Manual transmission, great handling Cons: It costs how much? Too slow. Verdict: The better Honda Civic, but it's too expensive.

The most efficient EV I've tested yet, but it comes at a big cost for a small car. 2022 Hyundai Kona Electric Limited review Words and photos by Mitchell Weitzman with The Road Beat What is it? Hyundai's cute little Kona compact crossover, but now electrified with a real, usable amount of electric juice. However, it is indeed, and by literal definition, a compact vehicle, and is based upon a car that starts well under $25,000. Is it worth its electrically-inflated $43,880 price tag here in Limited form? It might undercut other electric vehicles by price, but perhaps it's too small and compromised for its own good. Pros There is no denying that this isn't the most efficient EV I have yet to test. The easiest means of measuring EV efficiency is to calculate miles per kilowatt-hour of energy. So far, each of the five other EVs I've sampled all achieve about 2.8-3 miles/kWh. This Kona EV, a smaller car than any of those options, lays down an impressive 3.5 miles/kWh. Like MPG in a gas-powered vehicle, this means you can go further per each unit of stored electricity. Front-wheel drive helps here, too, as it makes for less mechanical drag compared to all-wheel drive. This Kona EV, being the Limited (range-topper in Hyundai-speak), is well-equipped with all the features anyone could want in a new vehicle. Safety items, LED lights, entertainment, and leather-trimmed seats elevate the modest and cheap Kona into a vehicle that sacrifices nothing in terms of shear equipment onboard. Also of note is a great warranty from Hyundai, including a 5-year/60,000 mile basic warranty and then a 10-year/100,000 mile warranties on both the powertrain and battery. The Kona EV drives mostly fine with ample power from its 201 horsepower motor. Acceleration and response is instant and lively enough, with 0-60 MPH needing 6.5 seconds. It's not an entirely fun vehicle, the potent and wild Kona N decimates this Electric variant when the going gets twisty, but that doesn't prevent the Kona EV from steering and handling with a refined eagerness. The Kona, even in its base form, has always been a fine-driving and well-sorted vehicle with its surprisingly agile and lively chassis, and the EV version makes good use of that. Again, don't expect to go barn-storming in the canyons - you'd be best off with a real hot hatch like a Kona N, Veloster N, or a Golf GTI for that to name a few. Cons Not all is rosy with the Kona EV, with the biggest detractors coming from the price and quality of what you're getting. Despite leather seats, the rest of the interior is indubitably that of a cheap compact, with hard plastics splattered about and just doesn't look or feel like a near $44,000 vehicle. That's an awful lot of coin for a car that is relatively tiny (that back seat is, er, not a place you'd want to spend a long journey in) - This much money can get you a nice Hyundai Palisade, an SUV with 3 rows of seats! The Kona EV does start at a considerably more appealing $38,000, but this does have the goodies that you will want. Despite being efficient, the 64 kWh battery is on the small side, equating to a 224 mile range when doing basic math. While certainly usable, this is not a range exactly worth bragging about. 75 kWh and a real-world 260 miles would open a lot more possibilities here. We also have to mention the inconvenience of charging to prospective buyers and lessees. Unless you have an actual charging station installed at home to the tune of roughly $1,000-$2,000, the included 3-prong plug replenishes juice at an alarmingly slow rate of only 2 miles of range per hour when I tried it. Also, best be certain to check your energy rates (you might jump to a higher tier with continual charging usage) to see if it agrees with your wallet. With gasoline at $6.00/gallon again in California as of September 2022, it is at least easier to justify a switch to electric compared to a year ago when gasoline was half that. I also mentioned that the front-wheel drive layout lends a hand in creating frugality, but what the Kona EV doesn't escape from is torque steer. With instant power going to only the front wheels, nailing the throttle from a stop results in wheelspin and a steering wheel that tugs (albeit gently) your hands. It's an unfortunate reality, but the natural drawbacks of front-wheel drive are present and exacerbated here by the perky powertrain, something that is unnoticeable in the slow, entry gas-powered Konas. Verdict Here's where it really hurts when reaching a verdict for the Kona: the gas-powered Kona Limited, essentially the exact same car but with a 195-horsepower turbo gasoline engine, costs literally $10,000 less. And I'm sorry, but there is no way in heck this is worth the additional dough for an equivalent model. Even with the options here, it comes across as a vehicle that should cost maybe $35,000 at the absolute most. This goes to show the expense still associated with electric batteries and motors for mainstream cars. And, for the price of this example, I'd much rather spend a tiny tiny bit more for an entry-level Ioniq 5 EV from Hyundai. Luckily, you should still be able to get the $7,500 federal tax credit on one of these, which will effectively nearly lower the price to that reasonable $35,000 mark just about - But other EVs can qualify for that, too, not totally helping its cause. If this cost the same as the gas version equivalent post tax credit, or were less even, then this would be a really compelling and truly affordable EV. Otherwise, the Kona Electric Limited frankly costs too much for what you get, and most would be better off stepping up to an Ioniq 5 or stepping down to a modest Kona Electric. If you even want an EV, that is. 2022 Hyundai Kona Electric Limited Price as-tested: $43,880 Pros: Highly efficient; drives surprisingly well Cons: It costs how much?? Snug rear seats and cargo Verdict: A definite win, but the price is too much for something this small

Mazda now has a confusingly named CX-50 alongside their excellent CX-5. This one's even better. 2023 Mazda CX-50 Turbo review by The Road Beat. What is it? A new crossover SUV from Mazda, the maker of the some of the best affordable vehicles on the planet. They curiously already make the CX-5, so what does adding an extra digit do exactly? It's eerily similar, but improves upon what was already the best driving and finished vehicle in its class. In all rights, the CX-50 should cannibalize CX-5 sales; It's that good. Highs There's only an easy way to say this: the CX-50 is easily the most attractive and polished vehicle in its class. But, that's not all, as it gets even better: it's also the best driving vehicle in its class! Case closed? C'mon, I have to say more than that! Next to the already handsome, if stout CX-5, the CX-50 grows nearly five inches. Couple that to exaggerated fenders and it gives the impression of a longer, wider, and lower machine - all aspects that make for alluring and improved aesthetics. A sleek and purposeful looking ride, this is one that ought to draw your pupil's gaze. The fenders also have a plastic cladding to add a utilitarian and off-road-esque feel that do not appear cheap at all. The inside is typical Mazda fair, meaning it's finished in fine leather and materials throughout on this here loaded Premium Plus trim. The contrasting stitching on this example is particularly delicious. This is every bit as nice of a car inside as a gutted, option-less BMW X3 that'll cost you the same. I'm serious - It's not the last word in luxury, but it genuinely surprises for its price point while rendering a top-shelf RAV4 as a parts-bin afterthought. I could care less about the looks and interior if the car drove like bile waste, but the CX-50 is motoring bliss for a family SUV. The steering is sublime, and in fact more tactile and responsive than some sports cars currently on sale. Confidence is key here, as the CX-50 doesn't necessarily have high grip limits, but it just turns in so intuitively and with legit balance. I reckon the engineers and test drivers developed the CX-50 on a rally course or gymkhana to achieve such handling prowess. On a looping, cloverleaf onramp, you can you push the CX-50 hard and have complete sense of control over its behavior. Understeer comes knowingly, not surprisingly, as you load the front tires. Add too much and you can relax the throttle as grip comes back, allowing you to tighten your line and nail the throttle - let the all-wheel drive traction carry you out. I haven't driven an SUV that isn't an M-badged BMW that displays such grace in the bends. Bravo, Mazda. Somehow, the ride quality is still pretty good, so it's not like they stiffened the crap out of it either to achieve such fluidity and composure. Power is strong, thanks to Mazda's stirring 2.5L turbo inline-four; It's a gruff unit that lives for the mid range. Horsepower might only be 227, but with torque peaking at 310 pounds-feet at only 2,500 RPM, there is usable shove that makes passing a breeze (horsepower jumps to 256, though, when filling up with premium 91 octane. I doubt you'll notice the difference in the real world.). The top-end is weak, but when are you going to be using that? Turbo lag is present when shifting the old six-speed automatic manually, but the surge can be fun. I averaged 24 MPG overall, which while not stellar, is decent enough given the performance advantage the CX-50 has over the geriatric-powered RAV4, Tucson, and CR-V alternatives to name a few. Part of the CX-50's new appeal is also some advertised off-roading ability. CX-50s won't be replacing Jeep Wranglers anytime soon, but there are terrain-control modes to lend a hand for those that are venturing into the domestic unknown for the first time. Also noteworthy is its modest, but quite usable 3,500 pound tow capacity. Lows? Very few, but the most glaring is a lack of interior space. Overall length might be an impressive 185-inches, but you wouldn't really know it once inside. The rear seats themselves are comfortable, but leg space is definitely less than on rival crossovers and SUVs. That sleek and coolly sloping roofline doesn't help either, infringing on headroom for occupants. Open the tailgate and you'll find that total cargo volume is somewhat compromised as well. Simply said, a RAV4 is a bigger vehicle on the inside. Then there's the price. At $43,170, this 2.5 Turbo with Premium Plus (AKA the one you want) borders beyond affordable. Yes, it's nice inside, very, very nice, and it's pretty, drives excellent, and has great power in this crowded field. But, it is a price you'll have to justify, and luckily I do think the Mazda acquits itself exceedingly well on pure merit. Also must be said that Mazda is still using a six-speed automatic when most others now use eight gears. There's little to complain about the current transmission, yet two additional ratios would benefit fuel economy and further utilize the stonking midrange the CX-50's gutsy motor has to offer. For those just looking for a nice vehicle, at the same price is Toyota's exceptionally boring and slow Venza Limited, but it does average 35 MPG from its hybrid powertrain. It's the best Did you expect anything else? The CX-50 is the best mid-size crossover/SUV today. It does so much so well, being the choice of those after a more luxurious ride, and also those wanting a fun and sporting edge. Mazda continues to set standards in all subjective and objective categories minus fuel mileage. The CX-50 deserves your attention. 2022 Mazda CX-50 Price as-tested: $43,170 Pros: Attractive inside and out; Performance; Drives damn well Cons: Not the most spacious

Expensive, but insanely fast, the C40 Recharge is a new electric crossover from Volvo. 2022 Volvo C40 Recharge review by The Road Beat Words and pictures by Mitchell Weitzman What is it? Volvo's first electric-only vehicle, meaning the C40 is only available as an electric vehicle and will only ever be an electric vehicle. It has a funky design that is undeniably the shape of an 'electric car,' and it has 400 horsepower for on-paper and charging station bragging rights (I literally nearly wrote gas station there...). It costs about $62,000 as equipped and is about identical to the electrically-converted Volvo XC40 Recharge EV that I also tested back-to-back, a crossover of the same size based on the existing XC40 compact utility vehicle. This is primarily a review of the C40, but because the two are so closely linked, there will be many mentions of the XC40 as well. Pros? Hang on tight, because this one is fast. In fact, this is one of the quickest vehicles I've ever tested. With 402 horsepower and all-wheel drive, 0-60 MPH takes about 4 seconds flat. From a walking pace, stabbing the accelerator can result in legit neck-snapping of occupants who are not expecting it. This can be fun, until your significant other starts complaining, that is. The acceleration is pure rapid, and not something I was expecting from a Volvo crossover. The XC40 EV is also similarly rampant when prodded. The styling inside and out is fresh and modern, even if I highly dislike the blue carpets inside this particular example (they're optional). For a small vehicle, storage and interior space is decent in the front and rear seats even. While on the road, the C40 drives cleanly and competently in most aspects. The steering might be dead, but it turns accurately with excellent traction when exiting corners and an ability to 'hold its line,' in other words, to not understeer into a tree. This vehicle has so much power that, on curvy roads, you really do need to be aware of your right foot as distances between corners do shrink quite quickly with heavy feet. Luckily, I was impressed and surprised how much speed you can carry safely, despite this being a shopping cart of a crossover SUV at its core. Its ability to distribute power between axles is quite remarkable in this regard for slingshotting out of bends. However, quickly changing direction is sloppy and shows a definite unsporting character. While you can cover ground quite hastily, this is no sports vehicle. There are different drive modes that do substantially increase power and throttle response as well as for regenerative braking. You can choose between no regeneration and treat it like a normal combustion car, or utilize the kinetic energy recovery, meaning you can drive almost completely with just one pedal. It takes some getting used to, but I rather like the involvement that one-pedal-driving can bring. Switching between the two can also help maximize your range. When driving with economy in mind, I was able to extract 3 miles of range for every kWh from the battery pack, a figure on par with most other EVs despite this Volvo having gobs more power at the ready. With 75 kWh of usable energy available, that would equate to a range of 225 miles. Not groundbreaking by any means, but decent enough for a smallish battery pack size and for running about in your local areas. With a little planning involved for chargers, driving this round trip to the Bay Area and back wouldn't be a serious concern. The C40 and XC40 both were just as efficient as a base 2WD VW ID.4 with nearly half the horsepower, a nice accomplishment. Cons? Speed isn't everything, though it can be a strong selling point. At around $62,000 as-tested, this Volvo is just too much money. Volvo is moving upmarket with some real luxury car credentials these days, but I thought the C40 felt and looked too cheap on the inside. Materials didn't impress (no leather is used here) and some things were plain flimsy. Passengers felt similar, too, when comparing to other vehicles I've sampled at similar prices. I later tested a Genesis GV60, a similarly priced and size car, and that interior blows the Volvo away; It's like comparing Ikea furniture to Pottery Barn. Similarly, an XC60, a larger and gas-powered Volvo SUV, is markedly nicer inside. The XC40 twin is alike in this regard, being similarly cheap inside as it a sub-$40k compact at its core. It's not that it's like a Toyota inside, it's just that this is in no way the interior worthy of a $60,000 car. It's also just a bit too small inside and with a heavily compromised cargo area on the C40 due to the dramatically sloped rear roofline. Less noticeable in the XC40 than the C40 was a firm and uncultured ride quality, reacting harshly to larger bumps that belies a luxury vehicle. I also experienced multiple electronic gremlins with the C40 and XC40. At times I found the large infotainment screen to completely lock and freeze at random. Another journey in the C40 resulted in the air conditioning not working, which was alarming on a warm 85 degree day. It eventually came back on another drive, but that is actually, completely, and utterly unacceptable. The radio also refused to work on a couple short drives. What's more is that the C40 refused to lock in one instance. No matter how many times I touched the sensor on the door handle or pressed the key's button, locking would not happen. And yes, I checked that all the doors were in fact. Eventually, I won and it decided to regain consciousness and lock. LOL, not good. The XC40 didn't display locking issues, but both cars did experience infotainment locks and crashes as described. I also don't like that neither have on/off start buttons, instead relying on the car's lacking intelligence to start and shut down. Both models also have a blank black button to the right of the steering wheel where a start button should be, which looks incredibly cheap and demeaning. Verdict I'm not sure why Volvo offers both the XC40 and C40 Recharge models, as they have such overlap. They're so alike in size, and with the same powertrains, and with too closely related names, that it will likely confuse buyers and lessees. The C40 is smaller on the inside than the XC40, and also costs marginally more, and the styling might not be to your liking also. The GV60 Genesis that came to market a couple months later does render both these models as nearly useless, doing everything better for similar money. While it is fast, I would not recommend either of these two Volvos at this price. And really, spending less for a loaded Hyundai Ioniq 5 or Kia EV6 wouldn't be a bad bet either. . 2022 Volvo C40 Recharge Twin Ultimate Price as-tested: About $62,000 Pros: Fast. Very fast. Cons: Electronic gremlins. Small inside. 2022 Volvo XC40 Recharge Twin Ultimate Price as-tested: $60,090 Pros: Fast. Very fast. Cheaper than C40. More room than C40. Cons: Still small inside. Infotainment gremlins. Still a lot of money. 2022 Volvo C40 Recharge photo gallery 2022 Volvo XC40 Recharge photo gallery

Attractive? Check. Hybrid economy? Check. Surprisingly nice interior? Check. 2022 Toyota Venza Limited review with The Road Beat. Words and pictures by Mitchell Weitzman. What is it? Toyota brought back the Venza name last year, with the original and awkward Camry-meets-SUV fusion mess having been canceled back in 2015. It's back, closely related to the RAV4 Hybrid, and it's probably the best overall vehicle Toyota currently makes. Like a quality, authentic burrito (no, I'm not talking about Chipotle here), the ingredients inside come together in a capably congruous concoction that will stimulate most appetites. It won't light the world on fire - it's not a burrito served wet with all the gooey melted cheese on top - but this is a simple creation that works well in any environment. What's good? The Venza, especially in its high-spec Limited trim, has all the goods that the casual buyer (the target market for a vehicle like this, remember) could and would want. Most Toyota designs are hit or big misses, but the Venza is a thoroughly attractive car, with smooth curves and tapered ends. It's decidedly upscale in appearance and reminiscent of a Lexus, except the Venza is prettier than any SUV Lexus currently makes. The style continues inside with swooping lines meeting soft, quality leather and touch points. The switchgear is typical Toyota-cheap, and the infotainment screen looks a little dated, but this interior is built to a higher standard than the related RAV4 Limited. Comfortable, too. Of course, like other Toyotas and rivals, there's lots of equipment onboard, like heated and cooled seats, a big sunroof, Apple CarPlay, a bird's eye view camera here, head-up display, and lots of safety features. Not unique among the class, but still worth noting for those wanting their transportation feature-laden. The total cost as-tested for this loaded Venza Limited is $44,655. Another highlight is the Venza's outrageously good fuel economy. Averaging 35 MPG during my week with the Venza is a terrific achievement for a vehicle of this size, and serves testament to how far hybrid technology has come. For those weary of charging an electric car, the Venza comes across as an understandable and faithful compromise to those not ready to devote their life to the plug. Now, the Venza is highly boring to drive, lacking enthusiasm whichever direction you point. While this is a negative to myself, this is a plus point to Toyota's customer base; They're not looking for excitement, they're looking for comfy and reliable transportation. When looked at from this accurate perspective, the Venza is perfect. The main positives are that it's comfortable, fuel efficient, and easy to drive. It does drive straight, with no wandering on the highway, and the steering is light and responsive enough, and the car even goes most directions you ask; It's the ideal Toyota. Negatives? Like I said, the Venza is a bore on the road, so don't buy one to drive with any level of intent and aggression. As a car to just hop in and drive to everyday destinations, it works stupidly well. There are some minor drawbacks worth pointing out, though. On the inside, the placement of the start/stop button is bad, coming across as a complete after thought. I am convinced that the engineers made the entire car and then realized their grave mistake of not including one. "How do we start it?" "Uhhhh, about that." So, awkwardly placed in a space-stealing storage cubby was obviously the only remedy. Wireless phone charging is done in the same place, and it can be tricky to slide your fingers in this space and grab your phone, too. Acceleration is not noteworthy, taking a smidge over eight seconds for a 0-60 MPH run. That's faster than a VW Tiguan at least, but a RAV4 Hybrid is a few tenths quicker with an identical powertrain. Speaking of the RAV4, the Venza is smaller on the inside, with rear seat and cargo storage suffering a disadvantage. Now, the back seats are still more than suitable for adults, but they just don't possess the same abundance as its stablemate. Out back, the roofline slopes downward on the Venza for improved looks, but this does compromise the cargo volume. A big enough vehicle? Yes, but smaller than alternatives. Price also rises for the modest luxury the Venza has, with a marginally higher cost than a comparable, but less upscale RAV4 Hybrid Limited. Honda's CR-V Touring Hybrid costs nearly $5,000 less. Interior isn't as nice, and the economy falls slightly short, but the savings are considerable for those not wanting a Toyota. Some other thoughts that affect all Toyotas, not just the Venza, is a an all-too busy digital instrument cluster. There are numbers and figures scattered all about in front of you, which is completely unnecessary. Not everyone is a computer-builder who actively monitors the temps of all 16 individual CPU cores along with fan speed and GPU percentages. No, we don't need all that here. A simplification would bring a more pleasing look ahead. The fuel gauge, together with its range readout, is also inaccurate, predicting a mere 400 miles of total driving from a full tank, when it should bring an easy 500 miles when averaging 35 gallons on a 14.5 gallon tank. That's just simple middle school math. C'mon. Toyota's radar cruise control continues to be too intrusive and eager to hit the brakes sharply while also consistently driving 1 MPH under my set speed on the freeway. Oh, and I had a bizarre incident where the Venza's brakes intervened because of a predicted collision that was so far away from happening I'm surprised the car behind me didn't rear end me. Must've been a fluke, because this has never happened in any Toyota prior let alone repeated in this Venza. The car also temporarily cut power so that I couldn't accelerate for a few moments after. Toyota's best? I really do think this is Toyota's best current offering. It's stylish, has an upscale interior, great economy, and it drives exactly like a Toyota should. Unless you're wanting to maximize space, I'd choose the Venza over a RAV4 Hybrid any day. Other hybrids from competing brands can't seem to match Toyota when it comes to fuel economy from their own hybrids. I point out a number of small details that could and should be improved, but the core values of what people are looking for in a car, the Venza nails it. 2022 Toyota Venza Limited As-tested price: $44,655 Pros: Stylish inside and out; great economy Cons: Smaller than a RAV4 Verdict: Toyota's unexpected star vehicle

Some of the most storied and historic racing cars assemble again at WeatherTech Raceway Laguna Seca One of Monterey Car Week's annual treats is the ability to see vintage race cars tackle one of the world's greatest and most famous tracks: Laguna Seca. Home of the Corkscrew, the daunting rollercoaster that drops over five stories in a couple hundred feet, it's an example of what it means to be a 'natural terrain' racetrack, nestled atop the rolling hills near Monterey Bay. While others come to Car Week for the lavish shows that feature fast and expensive cars parked and stationary, the Motorsports Reunion allows these gems to be once again in their natural habitat. This is combustion at a most visceral and aural delight. Featuring many diverse classes that include 1930s Grand Prix cars, 1950s sports cars, Group C Le Mans racers, and Niki-Lauda era Formula 1 cars, it's always been a favorite event of mine. Kids, you can go on YouTube to listen to the sound of a 4-rotor Mazda as much as you want, but nothing beats the real thing of a 787 flying by you at full tilt. Nothing. Perhaps one of the best most appealing aspects of racing at Laguna Seca is the open paddock that's available to all ticket-buyers. Unlike your restrictive pass to the Miami Grand Prix that cost an entire car payment, a mere $50 gets you access to any part of the track and you can freely walk the paddock to see all the cars up close. Below are some photo highlights from this year's event. The Monterey Motorsports Reunion will return next August.

Forget the stupidly priced Capstone. This is the Tundra you want Words and photos by Mitchell Weitzman 2022 Toyota Tundra Platinum review by The Road Beat What is it? Platinum might be one of the most valuable precious metals in the world, but the Platinum Tundra is now mid-grade when it comes to pricing in Toyota's new Tundra lineup. This is the second Toyota Tundra I've tested (after the range-topping Capstone) and easily the better of the bunch. It has all the luxury you could want from a truck, and on par with the Capstone, but it costs $10,000 less. There are a few features (that you don't need) that it forgoes, but it's overall the best new Tundra you can buy. If you want a Tundra, that is; competition is fierce. What's good? Toyota's new Tundra drives impressively for a vehicle of such magnitude. Although it's technically a light-duty truck on paper, it's the size of older heavy-duty diesels. Despite that, the steering is accurate and not completely dead. Highway cruising is no problem with almost no wandering, and the ride quality smooths out at speed (can be choppy over bumps at slow velocities). Turn it into some turns aggressively, like the Eureka Rd freeway exit in Roseville, and grip might not be high with the tires giving a deliverance-style squeal, but the balance isn't completely out of whack for a giant pickup truck. Consider me impressed. Throw some Pilot Super Sports on there and let's see what it can really do! The cabin is fashioned from lots of cushy leather wrapping the seats with many pleasing soft touch points. A giant screen dominates the view ahead, though there are some sharp and cheap plastics still randomly spread out that disappoint and contrast the velvety hide. The screen is simple enough to use, but I don't particularly like the graphics and the colors can be harsh at times. Space inside reflects the exterior dimensions: huge; Passengers in the rear seats looked like they were in the back of a Mercedes-Benz S-Class instead. As far as comfort, nobody had complaints. Unlike the Capstone, this did not have the optional hybrid V6, being 3.4-liter twin-turbo with no outside assistance. And, as expected, it's clearly the superior engine option. Output might be down, producing 389 horsepower and 479 foot=-pounds of torque. The hybrid, conversely, makes 437horses and 583 torques. You'd think there'd be a big difference, right? Nope. 0-60 MPH is only a couple tenths slower at 6 seconds (vs 5.8), and in the real world, there is literally no difference. I was so disappointed with the hybrid Tundra because it never gave any immediate shove, instead falling victim to turbo lag and an unaggressive transmission. Well, the lag is still there, but it's no worse. And I somehow averaged 17 MPG, which is 1 MPG better than the hybrid. Huh? Yeah, the hybrid 'MAX' engine option is not worth it, especially when costs over $3,000 more. Yikes. The V6 is very smooth at least, too. Where it lags This is a cheaper truck than a Capstone, but it's still expensive at an eye-watering $65,419. Yes, other rivals can be more expensive, but comparable trims can also be less. $65,000 can buy you the amazing Ram 1500 Laramie, the best driving truck on sale today and with a gorgeous interior. Plus, V8. It's really, really difficult to top today's Ram 1500s for value when they also happen to be the best driving truck in the class and also have gorgeous interiors. The Tundra Platinum's price does undercut that of premium GMC Sierras and Ford F-150s at least, which really goes to show how damn expensive trucks are these days. The storage cubby remains awkward to open and close, and below the screen are a row of buttons and switches, the top half being up/down rockers, and below are hard buttons. It's confusing because at first it seems up would be for the top label, and down for the bottom label. Why have two completely different operation-styles for such clustered buttons? I also found myself adjusting the volume knob countless times instead of the temperature that I meant; the layout is slightly, er, dumbfounding. And none of these feel particularly nice to use, not great in a vehicle this expensive. The built-in touchscreen has navigation, but it requires a subscription to use? Taking a page from BMW, Toyota. Luckily, you can use your phone via Apple CarPlay or Android Auto in its place. Throttle response from a dead stop is considerably poor as well. I found the Tundra constantly lurching when pulling away because the first bits of pedal travel result in nothing momentarily, and then it decides to randomly surge once it clears its conscience. Other turbocharged cars have displayed this recently and it’s a real problem - it makes smooth driving difficult! Why can't a new vehicle have a smooth and linear throttle response? I shouldn't have to "wait for it," that's just bad engineering. Despite achieving improved gas mileage over the outgoing V8 model, other rival pickups can achieve the same efficiency with their V8s as this can. Given the choice of a turbo V6 or a V8 in a pickup truck, I'd want the V8, and it's hard arguing against the sweet-singing 6.2L V8 that GM offers in the Sierra and Silverado. And the towing capacity in this Tundra might be similarly, marginally improved over the old, it doesn't top domestic rivals, with tow capacities around 1,000 pounds less. According to Toyota, this configuration can pull 10,890, which is mighty, but there are mightier. A middle of the road truck By all accounts, the new Tundra is a significant upgrade over the old model. The cabin represents a huge upgrade, it drives nice and it's comfortable, and the economy is only bad now instead of torrentially dreadful. However, it doesn't lead the crowded truck pack in any one segment, just catching up rather than trend-setting. The old Tundra had an ace up its sleeve in that it was considerably cheaper than domestic trucks as the years went on. That is not the case anymore, with pricing that can be painful at times for a product that has too many compromises. It's not a bad truck, it's just that others are so so good now. Still, this remains the top Tundra for now. 2022 Toyota Tundra Platinum CrewMax 4x4 As-tested price: $65,419 Pros: Improved interior; performance and MPG match the expensive hybrid option Cons: Expensive; not class-leading in any one area Verdict: The best Tundra, but not the best light-duty truck

The Honda HR-V compact crossover has been completely redesigned for 2023. It's pretty good. Mostly. Words and photos by Mitchell Weitzman 2023 Honda HR-V EX-L AWD review What is it? Honda's HR-V, a compact crossover SUV from the Japanese manufacturer. The first-generation HR-V has sold tremendously well in the United States, being a top choice for those wanting to spend under $30,000 on an economical vehicle, but want to sit a little higher. In fact, HR-V literally means 'high-rider revolutionary vehicle.' While not quite a revolution in all sense of the word, the evolution that has occurred here elevates the HR-V to among the cream of the crop for small crossovers. It also buries Toyota's new Corolla Cross into oblivion. What's good? Wearing a completely new face and clothes from top to bottom, inside and out, this is an automotive glow-up done right. While the nose is undeniably similar to Ford's Escape, it's nipped and tucked here to bestow some elegance in an affordable car. Trust me, it looks better in person verse the original press photos. The original HR-V always was renowned for generous interior space front and rear despite such diminutive exterior dimensions, and the new model goes further, with extra room throughout courtesy of a 10" stretch to overall length, now at 180-inches. In fact, that's only two inches shorter than the larger CR-V. Okay, so it's not quite exactly compact anymore, but the price certainly is, with this well-optioned EX-L AWD model coming at $30,590 as-tested. For those wanting to spend less, the base model starts under $25,000. The interior sees a complete overhaul, drawing inspiration and themes from the excellent new Civic sedan. In fact, it really just does feel like a Civic inside, and that's a good thing. While I won't call this luxury, materials are soft throughout and all seems screwed and glued together to a very high standard. The seats on this EX-L are leather, as is the steering wheel, and both are comfortable and feel quite nice. Toyota's new Corolla Cross, even in comparable trim, is downright destitute in comparison, with cheap and grungy materials and a dour design motif. For the same price, this larger HR-V is a revelation. Don't even think about Toyota's weird CH-R. Just don't. Of course, this new HR-V has all the niceties you could hope for, like active safety systems, LED lights, wireless Apple CarPlay and Android Auto, and heated seats to name a few. There really isn't much this doesn't have, and it should satisfy legions of casual car buyers. This example has a 9" touchscreen that is easy enough to use, though the standard 7" would be tough to picture here after using the bigger unit, as it'd look downright wimpy and disappointing in stature. On the road, the HR-V is typical Honda: confident. The steering is direct with a chassis that responds to inputs in a way that resembles a sports car relative to the bloated and blunt SUVs and crossovers of yesteryear. Body control impresses as does the ride quality, likely owing thanks to the complex multi-link rear suspension. Look, you ain't carving canyons in an HR-V, but if you're out in the wilderness and bit by a rattlesnake, you can hustle this thing harder and faster to a hospital than you'd think possible. The surprising part is that the HR-V seems willing for it, too; only its all-season 215 tires really let it down. Whereas a Corolla Cross felt wayward, as if steered by a rudder, the HR-V reminds that Honda knows how to make a car drive well. All-wheel drive here will help in the snow and rain, but most will likely not need it. As good as it is, Mazda's compact CX-30 remains the benchmark for driving dynamics and athleticism in this class. Improvements are needed here: While the pros to this car are abundant, there are issues that can be improved upon. Under the hood is a 2.0-liter inline-four making a modest 158 horsepower, being straight lifted from, you guessed it, the new Civic. This is an increase from the outgoing model's 1.8-liter and 141 horsepower. Is it fast now? No. If anything, it's slower than before. 0-60 MPH takes a long nine seconds, and throttle response from slow speed is gigantically glacial, not helped by a CVT transmission that is programmed for smoothness rather than performance. There was a point where I pulling onto a moving 45 MPH crossroad from a stop sign. I had misjudged the oncoming car's speed, but I was already committed so I planted my foot to the floor and the result was so mundane I thought the car was in a limp mode. I had passengers in the car and when I told them I was floored, they nearly didn't believe me - There was just zero urgency flooring it from a walking pace. Oh, and also, when you do 'nail it' (with more of a mallet than a hammer, really), the motor is far too loud and sounds like an old and struggling electric toothbrush when it finally winds up, and that's not a good thing. The other glaring issue is the resulting fuel economy with the increased-capacity engine and body. During my time with the HR-V, I averaged only 26 MPG, which isn't good enough in 2022 for a car of this size. One of my best friends has the last HR-V, with front-wheel drive, and she regularly averages 32 MPG in hers. This new model with FWD will certainly fare better, maybe 28 MPG, but even with AWD, 26 disappoints. However, for comparison's sake, Toyota's next-size-up RAV4 can average a great 28 MPG on its own, but their lollygagging Corolla Cross also only did 26 MPG despite being the smaller and slower car. Huh. Meanwhile, Honda's CR-V Hybrid averaged 32 MPG in my hands while the RAV4 Hybrid pushes that to 36. Get a better engine in there, Honda. That is all. Highly recommended So okay, the engine is a letdown, but for the average buyer and target market of this vehicle, they really won't care. 26 MPG overall isn't taking home trophies, but it's still fine enough for most; I'd happily trade an MPG or two for the fine handling/road manners and upscale interior of this Honda any day. The core strengths are certainly there and the HR-V is legitimately a nicer car than almost all its competition and more spacious. I'd love to see Honda use their superb 1.5-liter turbo engine instead here, that would give it the spunk it needs and, if anything, might get better gas mileage to boot. 2023 Honda HR-V EX-L All-wheel drive Price as-tested: $30,590 Pros: Great interior quality, spacious, drives really nice Cons: Slow and unimpressive fuel economy Alternatives: Others to consider are the Mazda CX-30, though while smaller on the inside, can be highly optioned with a gutsy 227 horsepower motor and an even nicer interior (for a premium). Also think of the Hyundai Kona and Kia Soul, which drive nice, but their interiors are not up to the standard of the HR-V and are a foot shorter in length. Definitely skip the Toyota Corolla Cross. VW's Tiguan is can be had for cheap and is a similar size, but much more cheaply made and put together except when spending at least $35,000. The small VW Taos was a disappointment. $30,590 for this HR-V, though fully-loaded, isn't a small amount either, and you're not far from stepping up to a decent CR-V Hybrid even at that point.