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.

2022 Acura MDX Type S review: better, but not the best Words and photos by Mitchell Weitzman What is it? Acura’s venerable MDX SUV turned up a couple clicks after receiving the ‘Type S’ treatment. Don’t overthink Type S, though, as it’s not the AMG equivalent for Acura (at least not yet, where’s the Type R, Acura?), yet this does bring a raft of hardware and tuning changes to make the most sporting Acura SUV ever. On paper, this new MDX Type S promises to be a more engaging and sporting SUV in their lineup to keep things interesting and hopefully fend off new and updated rivals in the luxury three-row SUV segment. What’s good? Like the standard MDX I tested a year, the MDX Type S does many things very well. It’s attractive for one, with the Type S wearing this gorgeous coat of deep blue paint. Other subtle tweaks to the fascias, different wheels, red brakes, and quad exhaust, easily make this the best looking MDX ever. Can I imagine how pretty the blue is again? Inside is a luxurious and exquisitely crafted interior, with a fit and finish built to the same tight tolerances as the Hadron atom collider. The leather used is marvelously soft and the seats are rather excellent. The driving position itself is spot-on for an SUV with a great steering wheel feel, and this one even has seat massagers (they work decently well, too!). No occupants will complain of the luxury that’s on offer on the inside, though it’s not quite up to the level of the Genesis GV80 for theatre. And for those needing the extra space, this MDX also has a third row of seats. Out goes the old naturally-aspirated V6 in favor of a new, three-liter turbocharged V6 making 355 horsepower for an increase of 65 over other MDXs. Mated to a ten-speed automatic and Acura’s literal super-handling-all-wheel-drive, this MDX can scoot to 60 MPH from rest in 5.5 seconds when you get the blood boiling. At full tilt, that’s only about as quick as a base BMW X5 40i, but it is a huge increase over former MDX models, being nearly a full second quicker to 60. And also, it still has the same serene smooth V6 characteristics coupled with a nice sound when asked. When driving the MDX Type S in normal everyday errands, it doesn’t feel particularly special or engaging through the chassis, until you decide to push things a little, that is. Head to some favorite corners, build up some speed, and I was thoroughly impressed with the competence that this big SUV carries among its mass. I recently tested the smaller RDX and found a similar pattern of it coming alive when driven hard, and the Type S MDX is the same; the harder you drive it, the better it is. The steering is quick with feel to its assuredly weighted effort, and the tires dig in hard. That all-wheel drive works wonders to improve the driving experience, as it helps cancel out understeer and slingshots you out of corners. That same X5 can’t come close to the satisfaction that this chassis can produce. Even rapid transitions are done with grace and ease as the Type S changes direction. Well done here, Acura. What can be better? While the MDX Type S does lots of things well, as is the Acura norm for a being consistent, there are still things it can and should do better. Gas mileage? Yeah, hope you’re not worried about that! Reason being is that I saw a paltry 18 MPG overall when driven quite easily. Don’t be thinking the smaller turbocharged engine gets improved mileage, because it doesn’t. Let’s bring up the X5 again, a car that is as fast in a straight, but it can achieve a real world 23 MPG. There’s more that’s wrong with the engine: explicit turbo lag. Turbo lag can be cool in some high-powered sports cars, but not in an SUV that’s meant for everyday, family driving. It’s expounded by an absolutely trash throttle response in its normal drive mode. When leaving from a stop, for example, I found a delay when adding throttle as nothing happens initially. I ended up applying too much throttle to get it moving at times, which then results in bad lurches as the engine suddenly builds boost and power - this is especially noticeable on hill starts. Turning the drive mode to sport helps, but that also changes the programming for the transmission, too, and will hurt your mileage even more; There’s no excuse for poor throttle response in any car’s standard drive mode these days. Maybe they can fix it in a software flash? Normally, slow turbocharged cars show this characteristic most prevalently because of their weak little motors that solely rely on boost, but this is a big V6 and it’s not acceptable. The 10-speed automatic transmission could be improved in sporting driving. In normal, boring cruising and errand-running, it's fine and does the job needed. But, when upping the pace, the transmission is missing charisma and finesse of the ZF eight-speed auto that is so commonplace these days. Full throttle redline upshifts are satisfying enough, but how often are you going to be doing those? It's the other places that will be far more commonly used where it falls behind the best. What doesn't help are paddle shifters that feel like they must've been pulled out of the Civic parts bin; they have no place in a $70,000+ car. While clicking the 'D' button again for a sports transmission mode increases the overall snappiness of the system; it's just not quite enough to be truly convincing. The transmission also behaves weirdly when changing down gears. Pull the left paddle to drop down a gear, like if you're wanting to produce engine braking on an aggressive corner entry, and the shift not only takes too long, but there’s a pronounced moment in-between gears that resembles neutral, causing freewheeling. If you’re downshifting to help slow the car down, that lapse makes it feel more like the car is accelerating, not slowing down, and it’s quite unnerving. Like the last MDX and recent RDX I drove, this also has Acura’s new touchpad-controlled infotainment that is awkward to use (that's being kind, mind you). It’s uncomfortable not being able to lift your finger (or else it re-centers the cursor) and when you get near the edge of it. Perhaps the theory is there, but the execution isn’t. It also behaves differently when using Apple CarPlay where you (yay!) can lift your finger without re-centering. I also don’t like that I can’t turn off the splitscreen when using Acura’s own native navigation, meaning you can’t have the map on full screen; You’re stuck always having something on the side when I’d prefer a full view of the map to see better. Also, there's a lovely top-view camera, but there's no physical switch to turn on command to help when pulling into parking spots or when pulling alongside a curb. There's at least a setting that allows it to come on automatically when you get close to an object, but I want it when I want it. I found myself shifting into reverse at times for no reason other than to trigger the camera to turn on. Survey Says… It’s a beautiful car inside and out, quite spacious, and the new turbo V6 adds some real thrust. As good as the steering and chassis is, there is no way around how thirsty and unresponsive the new powertrain can be, an average transmission, and a price tag that is, er, sweat-inducing. At $74,000 as-tested, it’s not the typical value you find from Acura. Yes, it’s far less than an SQ7 Audi or X5 M BMW, but those also are on whole other magnitudes of performance. In fact, the pepped-up MDX only really matches the speed of standard offerings from the German brands. The hardest part is justifying the $10,000 increase over the still quite good MDX A-Spec when fully-loaded. It frankly needs more power or some missing fizz to really separate it from the pack. 2022 Acura MDX Type S Pros: Great handling; spacious; nice interior Cons: Genesis GV80 interior is nicer; thirsty; not that fast Verdict: It's a better MDX, but it comes at a cost

Two Mazda crossovers - and two of the best on the market - compared head-to-head Words and photos by Mitchell Weitzman Looking for a new crossover SUV? Mazda makes two of the best with their CX-5 and CX-9 models. Sharing eerily similar styling, you might not be able to tell the two apart even (hint, the blue is the CX-5, and the white is the larger CX-9). The reason for choosing one over the other are differences in size and price. While you're not going wrong with either, as I hold each separately among the top of their own classes, this short guide can maybe help choose which is right for you and your needs. Price With both examples tested in their 'Signature AWD' guises and with the same punchy turbo engines, this makes for a direct apples to apples comparison: The bigger CX-9 retails for $48,830 as equipped while the CX-5 stickers for $40,000. What do you get for your extra $8,830? The most obvious advantage is the size, with the CX-9 being a roomier car throughout and having a third row of seats. I also do find the CX-9 to have an interior built with a slight bit more quality and luxury, though both represent the best in their respective classes when it comes to interior builds. Mazdas are known to border on bona fide luxury that nearly rivals more expensive German alternatives. Seriously, sit in this CX-5 and then a comparable RAV4 Limited and the Toyota materials and details are that of a cheap rental car. Size As mentioned, the CX-9 is the bigger vehicle with its third-row seating, but how much bigger is bigger? It's quite substantial on paper, with the CX-9 hogging 199" of pavement next to the modest 180" taken by the CX-5. The CX-9 is five inches wider at 78 compared to 73 for the CX-5, and it's also two inches taller at 68. The styling reflects this, as the CX-9 does appear stretched, but in a rather elegant manner; The CX-5 is a little stubby for contrast. I love the sensual curves and creases of each, with an understated class when other rivals can be just too fussy when it comes to design. However, it must be said that the CX-9 is not the largest vehicle in its class when it comes to shear volume due to its pretty, yet compromising roofline that gently slopes down. It's a three-row vehicle, sure, but it's far from the biggest inside. If ultimate practicality is what you're after, it's tough to beat Kia's Telluride. On the Road With less weight and size to manage, the CX-5 is the more sporting of the two to drive, with a keen turn-in and natural handling motions. Really, the CX-5, even as a crossover, drives better than most sedans. It's too soft to be an out and out sports car, of course, but it really does make the competition feel so wayward and boring when you throw a barrage of corners at it. Plus, it has the optional and gutsy 2.5L turbocharged inline-four that sends it from 0-60 MPH in 6.2 seconds, worlds faster than any Hyundai Tucson, Honda CR-V, or Toyota RAV4 (excluding the fast and expensive RAV4 Prime model). With this eager and powerful engine option, though, gas mileage isn't the greatest, with an average MPG of 24. If you're looking for the most driving fun, the CX-5 wins over the CX-9. However, many of the traits of the CX-5 remain in the CX-9, with it also being the engaging choice in a crowded field of three-row SUVs. Steering is feelsome and has actual weight to it. Handling is deft for a vehicle this large and one that rides so comfortably with control over bumps; you can carve corners faster than you'll ever need to in a long SUV, minus if you're in a crew of international thieves or spies. Yes, it will use more fuel than the CX-5, with the CX-9 averaging 21 MPG, as there is more mass to motivate. It's also slightly slower for that same reason, needing seven seconds to hit 60 MPH. Both cars have available AWD for optimal traction, too, as tested here. Why choose a Mazda to begin with? Every Mazda currently on sale is at the top, or runner-up in their competitive classes. If you want one of the best driving and most luxurious, quality affordable cars on sale today, Mazdas, especially when equipped in their 'Signature' trim, do not dissappoint. There's simply a connection between the driver and the car/road that other manufacturers fail to identify. Add to that the outstanding, luxury quality that's available that feels more akin to a German offering, and you can see why I'm so fond of Mazdas. There's nothing fussy about them; Just good engineering and good quality. Which is right for you? Neither is the wrong choice, but the choice should be up to your needs and budget. The extra space of the CX-9 could come in handy one day or for some with larger families, but if you know you won't ever need the volume advantage, then perhaps the CX-5 is the better choice. It's more fun and performs better while using less gasoline to boot, but it's not entirely big. Stepping up to the CX-9 does require a not small amount of coin, but if you want the tiny bit of additional luxury and that third row, the CX-9 should be a top choice for its combination of values. 2022 Mazda CX-5 Turbo Signature AWD Price as-tested: $40,000 180″ L x 73″ W x 66″ H 2.5L turbocharged inline-four with 227 horsepower 2022 Mazda CX-9 Turbo Signature AWD Price as-tested: $48,830 199″ L x 78″ W x 68″ H 2.5L turbocharged inline-four with 227 horsepower CX-9 photo gallery CX-5 photo gallery

This popular crossover has impressed in the past, but woeful fuel mileage on this new 2022 model is why you should skip it. 2022 VW Tiguan SEL R-Line 4Motion review by The Road Beat. Unless you’re Patrick Star and living under a rock in a cartoon, gasoline is expensive. Shoot, everything is expensive these days. So, it might make sense that, with many peoples’ monthly gasoline expenditures literally doubling compared to just earlier this year, you might be interested in saving some coin. If that’s what you’re after, this Tiguan is not for you. I have tried two Tiguans in the past and have liked the way they drive and handle, not to mention their spaciousness inside. They’re competitively priced with other crossovers of the same size, and they offer a third-row seat option even, albeit one best reserved for the single-digit age groups. What they have always lacked is performance and class-trailing MPG. While their economy was never truly dreadful, with prior examples averaging 25 MPG (on the same exact some roads as driven here), it just was at the tail-end of a crowded, competitive field. Toyota’s standard RAV4 can do about 27-28 MPG in testing, and their hybrid model can leap all the way to above 35 MPG even. This most recent Tiguan, however? 21. Twenty-one MPG is all it could muster. In a time when combustion is so expensive to ignite, that’s a dog that doesn’t hunt. Even on the highway, MPG never surpassed 25. A much bigger Toyota Highlander, with a comparatively burly V6 engine, gets better MPG than that even. And no, I didn’t drive it like a lunatic - quite the opposite in fact. It’s baffling, really, and I can only hope that maybe I had a bad batch of gas in mine or something bizarre. Maybe they sacrificed efficiency for speed? Nope, as this is one of the slowest new vehicles on sale today. Under its hood is a 2-liter turbocharged four-cylinder making 184 horsepower and notable 221 pounds of torque, but it feels like half that at times. Throttle response in its standard mode is poor to begin with, with sluggish getaways from a stop that are compounded with a transmission that hunts for gears; There might be eight gears, but somehow none are ever the right one with such a puny motor. Leaving a stop sign and merging onto a 45 MPH road, for example, the first instance of throttle does nothing, so you press down a little more, waiting for something, and then you get this lurch of power as the turbocharger’s boost finally builds. It’s not a graceful means of travel, and disappointing that the drivability can be so affected by the weak engine. It’s not noticeable every time, but no car in two-thousand-freaking-twenty-two should exhibit behavior like this. Oh, and 0-60 MPH takes a heady 9.5 seconds. Bummer. But, let’s look on the bright side. The interior has improved somewhat with new digital air con controls that look better than the old, cheap knobs; After one try, I found them easy enough to use. Interior volume impresses, too, with a surprisingly large space inside despite being classified as a ‘compact’ vehicle by some. The Fender-branded stereo is just okay, nothing to shout about, but the logo does earn cool points. The front seats are comfortable, and the steering wheel feels lovely in the hands with its quality leather even if there are too many buttons on the wheel itself. In actuality, the digital cluster is pretty to look at, but it’s so crowded with information that it makes finding what you’re looking for sometimes a chore. On the outside, it’s as handsome as ever, especially in R-Line trim with classy chrome details and badges here and there and sexy alloy wheels; The blue paint on this one is particularly nice, too. The nose has been refreshed and now appears sleeker and more low-slung - this is a good thing. Some might find it still a tad reserved, but it’s an elegant shape no doubt and looks unequivocally German. Tiguan remains a fine handling car for sure, maybe the best in its class. Steering is a tad too light and overboosted for my liking, but it does make driving easy and tireless. Add to the fact it’s also accurate and the chassis responds well to being driven aggressively, and yeah, it drives very fine indeed. I liked that the steering didn’t have as much of a rubbery effect like on a recent Jetta I tried, instead feeling more natural in its operation. Turn into corners with purpose and you’ll be met with a surprising poise and balance, with the 4Motion all-wheel drive system definitely lending a hand when it comes to traction. The ride quality is quite good, and doesn’t get unnerved by bad pavement as bad as, say, Hyundai’s Tucson does. It’s a shame the engine is so dreary, because a Tiguan could easily handle loads more power. There’s no way to sugar-coat this cold, unsweetened truth: I can’t recommend the Tiguan. Not everyone will notice or care that it’s slow or be keen enough to complain about the throttle from slow speeds, but its lackluster fuel economy really does pose huge problems for potential buyers. With other bills and goods all rising around us in our everyday lives, you will feel the difference and it will hurt. That being said, if my fuel economy is an isolated experience and some strange instance of a bad batch of gasoline, then you can throw the entire economy argument out the window. It’s still slow, though. 2022 Volkswagen Tiguan SEL R-Line 4Motion As-tested price: $37,790 Pros: Same handsome exterior, improved interior Cons: Slow and THIRSTY Verdict: The sinking MPG makes it tough to recommend

A recap of last year's 2021 edition of The Quail, A Motorsports Gathering. Full photo gallery of the best of Monterey Car Week - Further proof that this might be the greatest car event on Earth. Words and photos by Mitchell Weitzman and Daniel Blodgett K​ing for a day. That's how I described my first visit to The Quail, A Motosports Gathering in the scenic Carmel Valley, CA, and it still holds true several years later. What's now become a headlining feature during the annual automotive pilgrimage that is Monterey Car Week, The Quail has become my favorite. However, I was at the Quail Lodge and Golf Club before The Quail became The Quail, as it used to be the home for the Concorso Italiano car show. The Italiano since moved to various venues, leaving the Quail to form its own eponymous show in its stead. While it started small in its infancy, it's rapidly grown the past decade to become a tour de force for car lovers. Unlike other car shows, this one is about more than celebrating the automobile - It's the whole lifestyle that we embrace. But, wait! There's more! You don't have to love cars to enjoy The Quail. A foodie and/or drink lover? Your admission gets you unlimited food and beverages. At various corners of the lush, green fairways (in an otherwise drought-stricken California), you'll find large tents that are home to a variety of gourmet dishes to fill your heart's (and stomach's) content, with each location featuring a different theme of food; Greek, French, etc,. Find a bartender, and you can pick between cocktails and wine. While I don't recommend getting piss-faced around a collection of a half-billion dollars worth of cars, you certainly can if you feel entitled enough to. Ranging from classics to modern hypercars, there is plenty to ogle over, so much so that, even after staying for 7 hours, cars had packed up and left that I hadn't gotten the chance to see yet. I even got to meet Jenson Button and Ant Anstead, both of whom were there showing the new Radford Type 62-2, a stunning sports coupe with retro Lotus styling and underpinning from Hethel, too. Oh, both the Englishmen were absolutely amazing to meet and chat with - just normal blokes who love cars. Guntherwerks showed off their new Speedster restomod, Bugatti had the Bolide track-only hypercar on display (that they just confirmed to build, too, no less), plus there were the Koenigsegg Gemera and Jesko megacars, and of course a multitude of Paganis. I don't mean it to sound like an afterthought, but it's just because of HOW many brands were represented there, but Rimac was also present as was Hennessey's new F5 and the Pininfarina Battista (which is based on said Rimac). I almost even forgot the new Countach. It's so much to take in, same with the food. I have a decent appetite and yet I was unable to convert on each food tent, settling for just two of them; I ought to fast the entire day before next time! And next time I do hope for, as The Quail has become my pinnacle event of Monterey Car Week. Some people look forward to Christmas or their birthdays, but nothing comes close to The Quail for me. King for a day - it feels nice. I eagerly already await next year's edition. Until then, please enjoy and indulge in the full photo gallery below.

This loaded up Jetta has one big trick up its sleeve: good gas mileage. 2022 Volkswagen Jetta SEL review by The Road Beat. Words and pictures by Mitchell Weitzman. What is it? Volkswagen's Jetta, their compact sedan that's proved extremely popular the past two decades, here in fully-optioned SEL trim. It's simple, small, and reasonably sedated. If sipping gas is what you're after, but don't want a Japanese hybrid, you might be interested in this German offering. It starts at a lowly $21,460 with this tester coming it at $29,190. What's good? For those after conservative styling inside and out, the Jetta will deliver. While this is a con for some, it definitely remains a strong plus point for others. There's no denying it's a handsome shape while basic. Standard Corollas look stubby and Sentras look overdone. Honda's new Civic blends a best balance of class and restraint, but the Jetta will be ideal for many. Boring for others, but aesthetic for the rest. It's all personal preference. It also has a VW badge and its German identity going for it; Other German brands will require significantly more money to play. The biggest reason to want a Jetta like this is the fantastic fuel mileage. Though not as fantastic as other Volkswagen cars I've tested with the older 1.4-liter engine, it's still quite exemplary for a gas-powered, non-hybrid machine. With a highway mileage of 44 MPG at 70 MPH and averaging 33 overall, it's friendly on your wallet in the age of $6.00/gallon gasoline in the States. For the record, a Golf and another Jetta last year reached 50 MPG on the highway at times even. Performance is decent, even if it never feels particularly quick. With 158 horsepower and 184 foot-pounds of torque from its turbocharged 1.5-liter engine, 0-60 MPH takes 7.3 seconds. That's quicker than almost all competitors including the Civic and Corolla. The 8-speed automatic also works well with no annoying characteristics. The interior is comfortable and spacious given the tight exterior dimensions and shallow footprint on the road, and the trunk is enormous. I actually drove the Jetta with a 80-pound Labrador in the back seat for an hour and a half, and even he had a plethora of space. If you have a large dog or two, the Jetta's rear accommodations are more than adequate for your fluffers. The front seats are fine, just too flat, but they're well acquitted enough for this class of vehicle. The SEL's leather wheel feels fabulous in your hands, and the wheel itself is a nice shape and size - none of that inconvenient flat-bottom crap found here. Compared to other cheaper Golfs and Jettas I've had, this SEL definitely shows a marked improvement in overall quality. The Volcano Brown interior with real leather seats add some flair to avoid being too drab, which the black interior option would create. While still no luxury car, and a loaded Mazda3 and Civic Touring are still the kings here for this size of car, you can appreciate the effort VW has made to refine this proven formula. Point the Jetta at some bends, and it is unexpectedly happy when shown corners. In normal driving, the steering can feel too light and rubbery, but the chassis does perform reasonably well when asked and comes about in a natural and fluid manner. Understeer is minimal, with literally zero torque-steer, and the front differential does well to help guide you through and out of turns as you apply the power. While not class-leading, for a small, economy sedan, it does drive well enough when asked, and the ride quality is superb, too. What's not? Beeps and bongs are aplenty in the Jetta, with perhaps the loudest single bong in any new car. If you're like me and always start your car with the door open (to let air in on hot days), you will be greeted (wait no, greeted would imply its friendly...) by a blaring bong alerting you your door is open, even though the car is in park. Basically all cars do this, but this sound is like a megaphone in your ear - it's so loud. I looked to adjust the volume and you can't. Which brings me to the next point, and that's the settings menu of the vehicle is only accessible when parked - not even a passenger can do it for you. That also means you have to stop to access the digital traction controls. Oh, and you also can't drive off with the door open, with the automatic transmission forcing you into park. This might sound like a stupid complaint, but what if I'm parallel parking and want to open the door to see the curb? Nope, it won't let you move. To be fair, many new cars also do this, but I thought the Germans would think higher of their drivers. The interior has been improved, but there are some cheap plastics still present, like the air conditioning controls for example, and the style of the cabin needs a fresh update after classy and swoopy-cool updates from Honda and Hyundai recently. It's just a bit boring. If you do spec a black interior, it'd feel like a bleak dungeon inside. I do like the way the car drives when some aggression is added, but in normal driving, this is a very boring prospect to say the least. Behind the wheel, this is pure Novocain during a morning commute. And the steering does seem to have used Jell-O in place of bushings, something the average consumer won't notice, but it does lack the confidence and direct nature of Honda's new Civic. Strange that an economy car like this is weirdly better to drive hard than softly. A better Jetta? Or a never Jetta? The Jetta is a good choice for many needing an affordable and economical car. It gets great gas mileage and is spacious on the inside. The entry price is very attractive, too, but this SEL raises the admission to a questionable amount when there are other very alluring players to contend with. As an overall package, the new Civic is unbeaten. It's nicer to drive, has a better interior, and is also wondrously efficient; It really does it all. But, for those wanting something a little more German in character, that 'Das Auto' life, the SEL Jetta is a better Jetta with the added touches and quality it includes. However, if you're really set on a Volkswagen of any kind, go for the GLI or Golf GTI, both of which are absolutely electric to drive in comparison and properly fast and only another $3,000. And they still get plenty good mileage. You'll thank me later. 2022 Volkswagen Jetta 1.5t SEL As-tested price: $29,160 Pros: Great economy, quicker than rivals Cons: Interior is improved, but rivals best it; kinda boring Verdict: Efficient, affordable, and unexciting transportation Dimensions: 187″ L x 71″ W x 58″ H