Search Results

2025 Hyundai Santa Cruz XRT review by The Road Beat Words and pictures: Mitchell Weitzman This is not a truck for everyone, and to many, they won’t even consider it a truck at all. Yet, oddly enough, that’s precisely the defining feature and strongest trait of the Santa Cruz. Rather than chasing unreasonable payload and tow ratings, Hyundai focused on crafting an everyday crossover that just happens to have a truck bed out back. Think of this as less of a truck and more of a South Korean cyberpunk El Camino, and you’re on the right path, and it's a good path at that. Mass appeal won’t be in the cards, but the niche this fills is one it absolutely nails. Picks Viewed through the right lens, this isn’t an alternative to a traditional pickup; it’s an alternative to a mainstream crossover or even a stand-in for the modern wagon’s absence. The reality is simple: not every driver who owns a truck truly needs one. In my corner of Northern California, light duty and consumer heavy duty trucks make up about half the traffic, yet only a tiny fraction are ever being used as trucks. That’s where the Santa Cruz, Honda Ridgeline, and Ford Maverick crossover-trucks thrive—offering an easier, more approachable gateway into truck ownership that prioritizes versatility rather than sheer capability. Hyundai and others have carved out a smart niche here, and although the Maverick currently leads in popularity in California (among these three - the Tacoma still wins the non full-size truck department), the Santa Cruz presents a compelling argument of its own. Hyundai’s progress in cabin refinement and build quality the past decade borders on staggering, and the Santa Cruz continues the streak even in midrange XRT trim. No rattles to speak of, tight and consistent fitment, and materials that exceed expectations for the brand—all rivaling or surpassing direct competitors. Having spent time in a Ford Maverick recently, this simply stands as the nicer, more refined vehicle. Highway manners are pleasantly quiet, seats are comfortable and spacious, and the overall vibe leans more near-luxury than bargain-budget-friendly. Power comes from a turbocharged four-cylinder in this example, producing 280 horsepower and 290 lb-ft of torque. Real-world performance leaves nothing to be desired; expect easy sub-seven-second 0–60 runs and effortless midrange shove courtesy of the readily available boost and a smart eight-speed automatic. Better yet, Hyundai’s four-cylinder avoids the grating, coarse soundtrack that plagues four-cylinder engines from other makes. Fuel economy isn’t half bad either, delivering an honest 24 MPG combined—comfortably ahead of a Honda Ridgeline or even the last Toyota Tacoma I tried which had a new turbo 'four of its own. Driving dynamics, though, stand as the most impressive aspect yet. Apart from glimpsing the bed in the rearview or climbing into the cab, you’d scarcely realize you’re in a truck-ish vehicle. Steering feels tight and precise, backroad pace borders on genuinely quick, and the real-world mechanical grip inspires confidence. On my usual El Dorado County country routes, this thing can keep up with nearly any reasonable sedan, let alone a crossover, and dispatches twisty asphalt with ease. Ride quality impresses, too, avoiding the overly firm, borderline pointless stiffness plaguing the latest Tacoma. Offering another strong perspective: if you want a truck bed in a vehicle, but not comfortable with driving a large full-size pickup, the Santa Cruz is a viable antidote. Also worth noting is how the XRT has some midly beefier tires and ground clearance raised to nine inches, allowing this little 'ute to veer off the asphalt with comfortable ease in modest use cases. Looks like be love-it-or-hate-it, but the styling lands firmly in the “rad” category for me. Truck purists will dismiss it on principle, but the look channels a moon-buggy vibe—and that’s high praise for a small adventure-oriented truck, no doubt helped by the orange paint and XRT-specific cladding. The extra utility versus a conventional compact SUV sweetens the deal: toss a washing machine in the back, haul appliances, plants, or tackle dump runs—tasks you’d never want to subject your RAV4 to. Nicks Positives aside, certain drawbacks do surface depending on what buyers want and expect. Personally, nothing about the Santa Cruz jumps out as inherently dislikeable, nor does anything stand as fundamentally flawed. Rather, where it falls short is mostly in the categories where Hyundai (wisely in my view) chose not to participate. Unlike the Ford Maverick, no hybrid powertrain exists—for now—which is a shame, since the Maverick’s base hybrid delivers comfortably over 30 MPG. While I enjoy the punch of Hyundai’s turbo engine, a more relaxed hybrid would appeal to a wider audience chasing fuel savings. Because let’s be honest: at 24 MPG, this isn’t dramatically more efficient than a new Ram 1500 with its 400-plus-horsepower Hurricane straight-six. Choosing to pursue practicality has impacted towing, one of the top reasons people who need trucks buy trucks. With a maximum rating of 5,000 pounds, the Santa Cruz does keep pace with the Honda Ridgeline and bests the Maverick, but sits far behind what “real” midsize trucks like the GMC Canyon, Chevy Colorado, or Toyota Tacoma can handle. Choosing the non-turbo Santa Cruz drops the rating further to 3,500 pounds, or what the incoming 2026 RAV4 hybrid can tow. Still, it's enough for some lake toys. Payload performance stands at an oddly specific 1,411 pounds—several hundred below a Canyon or Tacoma and a hair behind the Ridgeline. It doesn’t outperform most Mavericks either, but over a half ton of whatever in the bed will be tough to breach in the small truck bed. Speaking of the Hyundai's payload, the biggest disappointment to some will come from the diminutive bed size, measuring only 52 inches long with the tailgate up and only able to completely withhold 27 cubic feet of volume within its confines. With no other way of saying it, that's kind of tiny and pretty comparable to the cargo volume of a RAV4. However, of course you can put tall items back there in the bed as long you as secure them so they don't tip out and over onto the road. How to make the Santa Cruz make sense Evidence provides proves the Santa Cruz clearly won’t suit every prospect. Plenty of genuine strengths exist, but a week behind the wheel underscores just how specific the target audience is. Compared directly against traditional half-tons or even midsize body-on-frame trucks, it barely registers as a truck. The key realization is reframing the comparison entirely: this shouldn’t be cross-shopped against bigger trucks, but rather against the mainstream and ever-popular RAV4 and CRV-class of crossovers. Pricing aligns closely, driving characteristics match (albeit with more power), and its bed volume approximates what many crossovers offer—just in an open format. Instead of stuffing a Japanese maple or dishwasher inside an enclosed cargo area, you simply drop it in the bed, strap it down, and go. A real personality shines through here, and for anyone stuck in the monotony of yet another anonymous crossover, the Santa Cruz might be the answer—an ideal partner for regular Harbor Freight runs, Green Acres visits, and everything in between. Don't think of it as a truck, but as a competent and nice, cool-looking crossover that happens to boast a truck bed behind. Hyundai Santa Cruz photo gallery 2025 Hyundai Santa Cruz XRT — Key Specifications Price as-tested: $42,425 Engine: 2.5L turbocharged inline-4 Horsepower: 281 hp Torque: 311 lb-ft Transmission: 8-speed automatic Drivetrain: All-wheel drive 245/60 R18 all-terrain tires Fuel Economy (EPA): 18 mpg city / 26 mpg highway / 21 mpg combined Road Beat real world: 24 MPG Fuel Capacity: 18 gallons Towing Capacity: Up to 5,000 lbs Payload Capacity: 1,411 lbs Curb Weight: ~4,250 lbs GVWR: 5,798 lbs Bed Length: 52 in (tailgate up) Bed Depth: 19 in Bed Width: 54 in max / 43 in between wheel wells Bed Volume: 27 cu ft Overall Length: 196 in Wheelbase: 118 in Width: 75 in (without mirrors) Height: 67 in Ground Clearance: 9 in Seating Capacity: 5 12.3-inch touchscreen display with wireless Apple Carplay and Android Auto Warranty: 5-yr/60k-mi basic; 10-yr/100k-mi powertrain Thank you for reading The Road Beat's 2025 Hyundai Santa Cruz XRT review. Please subscribe for more of our honest and candid road tests of the latest new cars.

The most basic version of the new Land Cruiser is just too spartan 2025 Toyota Land Cruiser 1958 review by The Road Beat Words and pictures: Mitchell Weitzman I had eagerly anticipated the new Land Cruiser in its entry-level, almost attainable form. Dubbed the 1958, this basic SUV shares the same engine, clever 4WD system, and fundamental off-road chops as its pricier siblings, but skips the often unnecessary luxury. Coming in at a near-enough-to-be exact $60K, it’s significantly cheaper than higher-tier versions while interestingly intersecting price-wise with a well-equipped Toyota 4Runner. Whether intentional or not, the Land Cruiser’s biggest rival might just be its own showroom neighbor. After a week with the 1958, though, the conclusion is simple: this trim feels too bare-bones for the money. Land Cruisers have long carried luxury-level price tags while rarely delivering true contempoary luxury. Take a 2020 example for study, a nearly $90,000 SUV that wasn't any better than ten year old 4Runner with some fancy leather as a band-aid. The latest one unfortunately continues that trend for another generation, even when specced to a tear-inducing $80,000. There’s progress here, but compared to other SUVs at similar prices, the overall package still falls flat. In the case of the 1958, removing the silly pricing does help the Land Cruiser make more sense—just not enough, because the experience doesn’t rise to the price. Cloth seats for $60,000? Honestly, no complaints there—I’ll take quality fabric over cheap fake leather any day. Here the material is thick, supportive, and holds its shape well. The seats themselves are sculpted ergonomically, comfortable, and allow you to sit in them rather than perched atop them. Fantastic front seats. The rear seats are less impressive, yet the cloth adds an old-school charm and the shapes don’t detract from comfort. They even look surprisingly good and robust like a real fabric instead of an Alibaba special. Where things sour are the omissions and other material choices, with cheap, flexible plastics scattered everywhere. For example, the climate-control switches are simple to use, but a gentle press causes the entire row to flex downward and creak—imagine how that's going to hold up in a decade. Meanwhile, the gauge cluster sits in a frame that awkwardly slopes downward toward the center screen—odd in a cabin defined by boxes and straight lines. Cloth seats got a pass earlier, but the clunky manual seat adjustments do not. And yes, that does mean power seats are absent—even at $60,000. Back to that center display: at only eight inches, it looks tiny and lost in the dashboard. The surrounding textured plastic doesn’t help, and the screen’s scale feels wildly out of place in a vehicle this size and at this price. The audio system also barely rises above “fine.” I get this is the entry model, but the price is so far from entry. Rear seats fold easily to expand cargo space, but the hybrid powertrain components—shared across all Land Cruiser trims—forces a frustratingly tall cargo floor. Both space and usability suffer, especially for anyone under about 5'5" who now has to lift items much higher than expected. Even though this a big SUV, the cargo only holds 38 cubic-feet, or, exactly the same as RAV4. A heavy and decidedly old-school manual liftgate doesn't help matters. Neck surgery aside, this liftgate genuinely requires effort, and plenty of shoppers will struggle with it. Hard to justify when you’re spending sixty grand on a Toyota. Another eyebrow-raiser? The hybrid powertrain. A turbocharged four-cylinder backed by electric assistance delivers strong real-world shove thanks to 326 horsepower and a mammoth 465 lb-ft. Merging onto freeways is effortless. Noise, however, is disappointing—miles away from the satisfying burble of past V8s or even the V6 engine other Toyotas still have. Besides the casual acceleration, hammering the throttle reveals a distinct lack of top-end pull, and the heavy SUV ends up needing 7.5 seconds to reach 60 mph. Why is the cargo floor so high? More baffling is Toyota altogether skipping the excellent twin-turbo V6 found in the Tundra and Lexus GX 550 (which is essentially a rebodied Land Cruiser). That engine sounds better, runs smoother, and delivers far more urgency in all scenarios. Fuel economy isn’t even a win for this hybrid FOUR-cylinder Land Cruiser: I averaged just 19.5 mpg over a week, and the last GX 550 I tested actually beat that number. Good news does appear once you start driving. Handling is shockingly competent. Steering feels tight and direct with well-judged weighting, and lateral grip far exceeds past big SUVs from Toyota. This Land Cruiser finally drives like a modern vehicle—something that couldn’t be said about the previous generation or the outgoing 4Runner. Highway stability is excellent with zero wandering, and you can now take corners that would have sent the old model scrambling for cover like a first time player in an online Call of Duty bout. Credit to the chassis engineers for delivering a genuinely pleasant driving experience paired with a ride that avoids the punishment typical of Toyota’s body-on-frame lineup. Then comes off-roading—the Land Cruiser’s calling card for half a century. Reality check: factory off-road capability is hamstrung by compromised ground clearance. Despite sophisticated electronic aids and excellent torque management, just 8.3-inches of clearance means you’re scraping sooner than expected. Approach and departure angles of roughly 30 and 22 degrees are good, but both are behind what you get from a 4Runner TRD Off-Road, let alone a TRD Pro with its 10 inches of clearance and superb angles. Out of the box, you’re left with an off-road-themed SUV that can’t actually handle much off-roading without modifications. I mean, it's sad when you realize the incoming 2026 RAV4 Woodland has even 8.5-inches of buffer. Credit where due: the styling is and remains fantastic. Wrapped in Trail Dust paint, this Land Cruiser turns heads everywhere, and the appeal hasn’t faded in the past year. Compared again to its 4Runner stablemate, looks is the one area the '4 just cannot compete. A mixed bag overall From one angle, the newfound driving engagement, more manageable size, and (relatively) approachable price point bring real appeal. And the styling, oh boy is it a knockout. Yet this base model still asks $60,000 while missing quality many shoppers should expect. For the average consumer and mall-crawling crowd, a fully loaded Highlander or Grand Highlander offers more comfort and practicality for the same money—though with less cool factor. Meanwhile, around the same price, a top-trim 4Runner offers better equipment and greater off-road ability. My own conclusion remains conflicted: the Land Cruiser 1958 represents decent value within the Land Cruiser lineup, but weak value on its own. And spending more for a nicer trim simply pushes you into Lexus GX 550 territory—a superior vehicle in its own right. Easy to like? Absolutely. But in a market full of stronger alternatives, liking it just isn’t enough. 2025 Toyota Land Cruiser 1958 basic specifications As-tested price: $60,969 Length: 196 in Width: 78 in Height: 76 in Wheelbase: 112 in Ground Clearance: 8.3 in Curb Weight: About 5,350 lb Seating Capacity: 5 Cargo Volume (behind 2nd row): 38 cu ft Powertrain & Performance Engine: 2.4 L inline-4 hybrid Horsepower: 326 hp Torque: 465 lb-ft Transmission: 8-speed automatic Drive: Full-time 4WD Maximum Towing Capacity: 6,000 lb Fuel Fuel Tank Capacity: 18 gal EPA Fuel Economy (estimated): 22 mpg city / 25 mpg highway / 23 mpg combined Real World Economy: 19.5 MPG Warranty Basic: 3 years / 36,000 miles Powertrain: 5 years / 60,000 miles Corrosion (Perforation): 5 years / unlimited miles Hybrid Component (Traction Battery): 8 years / 100,000 miles Roadside Assistance: 2 years / unlimited miles Off-Road Specifications Tire Size: 245/70 R18 Approach angle: 30° Breakover angle: 25° Departure angle: 22° Ground clearance: 8.3 in for 1958 4WD system: Full-time 4WD with a two-speed transfer case Differentials: Electronically locking center and rear differentials Articulation aid: Front stabilizer-bar disconnect (not available on the 1958 trim, only on higher trims) Crawl Control: Standard with multiple selectable low-speed modes Downhill Assist Control: Standard Traction modes: Multi-Terrain Select with settings for mud, dirt, sand

The Prius impresses with its plug-in hybrid powertrain 2026 Toyota Prius PHEV review by The Road Beat Words and pictures: Mitchell Weitzman I almost couldn’t believe another yellow Prius had arrived on my doorstep. A standard Prius Nightshade in this same mustard hue visited earlier this summer, and I had to make sure it wasn’t back for a repeat and duplicate stay. Relief came only after spotting the extra charging port on this plug-in hybrid example, but the same unfortunately torrid, desaturated yellow remains. New Priuses look terrific themselves, but this particular dijon stands among the worst yellows ever painted on any car. And coming from a huge fan of yellow, that says everything. Beyond the appalling color, though, the Prius PHEV is a winner. Want to read more about the Prius in general? Many of the same pros and cons from the standard Nightshade edition I drove months ago still apply. Differences between that car and this new PHEV Nightshade boil down almost entirely to the propulsion system. As the acronym suggests, PHEV denotes the Plug-In Hybrid variant, formerly known as the Prius Prime. A few extra dollars add a second electric motor which bumps total output to 220 horsepower from 194. The battery pack included in the PHEV is capable of roughly 40 miles of electric-only driving. Sure, weight and complexity increase, but the added power reveals itself the moment you accelerate onto a motorway. Throttle responses sharpen, too, and even at highway speeds this bold Prius delivers a surprising punch when overtaking—something no previous Prius could ever claim. For those counting, 0-60 MPH takes about 6.5 seconds. More electrical assist also means the gas engine isn’t as stressed, slightly reducing the coarse, garbage-disposal soundtrack Toyota four-cylinders often inherently make. As someone who prefers the refinement of an inline-six or V8, this is a welcome improvement; headaches become far less likely. Charging remains strictly optional. Without ever plugging in, the Prius Plug-In Hybrid still returned about 40 MPG in my testing—right in line with the regular hybrid. Add some electrons (maximum 13.6 kWh capacity), and your gas mileage numbers will climb dramatically. Despite the added mass, wiring, and lithium, no meaningful real-world penalty seems to exist, only real gains. By all means plug it in, though, because that’s how you extract the full value of this model. Everyday driving continues to be pleasant, but the steering is still too light, and quick transitions on winding roads can overwhelm available grip and balance. Turn-in comes with a brief hesitation, and quick left-right inputs can leave the chassis lagging behind your commands, reacting a day late and dollar short when worked up. This remains the best-handling Prius ever built, just don’t be fooled by the sleek shape and wannabe performance color—sports car aspirations remain a stretch. Leather seats elevate the Nightshade’s cabin, and overall quality impresses for a sub-$40K Toyota. Rear seating and headroom suffer from the stylishly sloped roofline, making a Camry or Accord a smarter choice for frequent adult back passengers. Forward visibility is again compromised by long A-pillars, and shoulder-check blind spots aren’t great either. Further, the gauge cluster disappoints: too small, too far away, and easily blocked by the steering wheel depending on your seating position and anatomic proportions. Even without government rebates or tax incentives, this stands as the best Prius variant overall. A standard hybrid costs less and will suit many drivers, but the PHEV sits atop the lineup with its stronger powertrain and genuine electric-driving capability when you choose to use it. Comfortable, stylish, and even quick, this is the best Prius yet—just order literally any other color. If there is one single demerit against the Plug-in Hybrid version of the latest Prius, it's that there's no all-wheel drive currently offered. And as-equipped, this Nightshade costs a sad $41,304. 2026 Toyota Prius Nightshade Plug-in Hybrid specifications Price as-tested: $41,304 Powertrain & Performance 2.0-liter 4-cylinder engine with dual electric motors 220 hp combined system output Front-wheel drive eCVT automatic transmission 14 kWh lithium-ion battery (rounded from 13.6) ~40 miles EV-only range ~52 MPG EPA-estimated combined mileage 40 MPG Real world combined mileage Exterior Dimensions 181 in length 70 in width 56 in height 108 in wheelbase Interior & Cargo Seats 5 passengers 91 cu ft passenger volume 20 cu ft cargo volume (rear seats up) 27 cu ft maximum cargo space (rear seats down) Nightshade Package Features 19-inch black alloy wheels Black exterior trim and badging Black shark-fin antenna Unique Nightshade interior trim elements

The all-wheel drive Ioniq 5 sees big gains in range even on the XRT example 2026 Hyundai Ioniq 5 XRT review by The Road Beat Words and pictures: Mitchell Weitzman After driving a mildly refreshed ID.4 Pro S and noting some improvements for the German brand, Hyundai serves a reminder of just how far behind Volkswagen remains. Past Ioniq 5s tested by The Road Beat suffered from relatively weak real-world range, but recent updates bring a greatly improved and more consistent distance. With a product now better than ever, this remains the pick for everyday EVs by The Road Beat. Measuring 84 kWh in capacity and featuring a dual-motor AWD drivetrain with the familiar 320 horsepower, this model now returns a reliably consistent 270 miles of real-world range. Not quite the magic 300, but this XRT-equipped AWD version rides on mildly knobby tires intended for light off-road use—never ideal for efficiency. A recently tested RWD single-motor Ioniq 5 managed to crest the 300-mile milestone (pun intended, sorry), though the dual-motor setup here rewards you with significantly more punch when you flatten your right foot. Thanks to the added range, the Ioniq 5 feels far more competitive towards the dual motor Tesla Model Y in how far you can realistically go in the real world. Another welcome update is the adoption of the Tesla NACS port, allowing direct access to Tesla Superchargers without any adapter. Hyundai includes adapters for traditional SAE Level 2 or DC fast chargers as well. Huge win for Hyundai, especially considering the ID.4 still lacks this capability. Hyundai also continues to offer the quickest charging in its price bracket, with the ability to make use of 350-kW chargers—even if the peak never quite hits that number. Going from 10–80% takes just over 20 minutes on a top-tier charger and still lands under 30 minutes on a Tesla Supercharger. Visually, the Ioniq 5 remains beautifully fresh, and the XRT package adds a quirky digital-camo treatment to the plastic cladding that meshes well with its cyberpunk, Tron-like aesthetic. Those chunkier tires also bump ground clearance by nearly an inch over a standard Ioniq 5, giving the XRT meaningful capability for more than pure pavement—snow, mild dirt roads, and similar adventures. Still only 7 inches of clearance, but a noticeable improvement over the 6.1 inches of other trims. Concerns about handling from the extra height and tires? Hardly. No meaningful drawbacks appear in normal driving, which makes the XRT feel like a surprisingly smart and versatile configuration for the model. It’s not as upscale inside as a Limited, but still comes across as nicer than similarly priced rivals where quality is concerned. Responsive, tight steering remains intact, giving the car a confident, accurate feel. Lateral grip only starts to fade when the suspension is heavily loaded—something normal drivers won’t ever do. Interior design itself continues to impress, from the wide, well-integrated display to the cleverly packaged sliding center console. Forward visibility is excellent and outward sightlines remain solid all around. Hyundai also retains the most adjustable regenerative-braking settings in the business, including the option for none at all. Issues do exist, mostly around the fact that this Ioniq 5 XRT stickers for about $55,000. With government tax credits no longer available, leasing becomes far less attractive, and buyers should prepare for severe—and I do mean severe—depreciation. A pleasant car, certainly, but is it $55 grand kinds of pleasant? Electric vehicles simply aren’t cheap at retail, though dealerships are usually more than willing to discount to help move them. Manufacturers do seem to be propping things up with strong incentives since the credits expired, but who knows how long that will continue once quarterly earnings land in January. Price skepticism aside, this is a fabulous EV that has an edge on most of its competitors and in most ways. It's quick, nice to drive, charges fast, and now has native Tesla Supercharger support. Unless the deal is simply too good to pass up, you'd be simply foolish to consider the VW ID.4 at this point. Tesla has an excellent package in their Model Y, but then again I just do not like the looks of any Tesla, enough to not ever want to consider one (hey, looks are important. And subjective). Price skepticism aside, you’re looking at a fabulous EV that edges out most competitors in the meaningful ways. Quick, enjoyable to drive, fast-charging, and now offering native Supercharger support. Unless an ID.4 deal is too good to ignore, choosing the Volkswagen over this would be hard to justify. Tesla’s Model Y remains an excellent package, but the styling is, well, challenging and a shape only a blind mother could love (hey, looks are subjective, but they do matter). Hyundai has made the Ioniq 5 all the more appealing now with the XRT and other updates, and with the newfound range ability, addressed what easily was its largest weakness prior. Other models to consider for an EV would be the Tesla Model Y and 3 and Ford Mustang Mach-E. Hyundai has made the Ioniq 5 even more appealing with the XRT and its latest updates, and the newfound range addresses the model’s biggest previous weakness. Other similar EVs to also consider include the aforementioned Tesla Model Y, along with the Ford Mustang Mach-E and Kia's EV6. 2026 Hyundai Ioniq 5 XRT – Key Specifications Price as-tested: ~$55,000 Battery capacity: 84 kWh Motors / Drivetrain: Dual-motor AWD with 320 hp / 446 lb-ft Real world Road Beat range: ~270 miles Miles/kWh: 3.2 Charging: 800V fast-charging architecture 10–80% in ~20–30 minutes on a fast charger Supports NACS (Tesla Supercharger) Wheels & Tires: 18-inch black alloy wheels 235/60R18 all-terrain tires Ground Clearance: ~7.0 inches (about 1 inch more than standard Ioniq 5) Exterior Dimensions: Length: 183 in Width: 74 in Height: 64 in Wheelbase: 118 in Cargo Space: Behind rear seats: 26 cu ft With seats folded down: 59 cu ft XRT-Specific Features: Unique digital-camo cladding Black exterior trim and badging All-terrain tires Terrain drive modes (Snow, Mud, Sand) XRT interior accents and all-weather mats

The standard V6 version tested here is sadly no longer relevant. 2026 Hyundai Palisade Calligraphy review by The Road Beat Words and pictures: Mitchell Weitzman As beautiful as the Palisade is on the inside, this may be an instance of Hyundai simply going too far. The real trouble with the Palisade has always been the Kia Telluride, its better-looking twin sister. Styling changes have made the new Palisade nearly unrecognizable compared to the 2020 original, and its attempt to channel Range Rover vibes has backfired with over-the-top vulgarity. The same sadly applies to the Telluride, albeit to a lesser extent somewhat luckily, which also further solidifies its lead as the preeminent choice of the twins. Yet what was once a clear class leader now feels oddly out of touch with reality. While this review is for the V6-powered Palisade, a verdict on the all-new Hybrid model awaits evaluation. Picks On this top-spec Calligraphy model — a name that already fet TikTok-pretentious — Hyundai continues to succeed where it matters inside. Leather and soft-touch materials are everywhere you look and interact with. In particular, the light tan interior catches the eye and makes both drivers and passengers say, “wow.” Even if I don’t care for the exterior, the bold shape paired with the classy interior does make this SUV feel effortlessly expensive. In today’s ultra-competitive three-row SUV segment — including the Toyota Highlander and Grand Highlander, Honda Pilot, and Mazda CX-90 — the Palisade now sits at the top for interior luxury and cabin quality. In fact, it may even edge out Mazda’s best effort. At 199 inches long, the Palisade is impressively spacious in all three rows. The rear captain’s chairs offer power recline and legroom adjustment, and the cargo area features switches to electrically fold and raise both the second and third rows. No manual effort required — something even a $90,000 Volvo XC90 still demands. Convenience and packaging continue to impress. USB ports are scattered throughout all rows for passengers (and kids glued to their phones), and the center console’s wireless charging tray is excellent. Maybe not hidden well enought, but its ubberized backing keeps your phone in place and even accommodates today’s oversized camera bumps. Why hide the phone placement when most just dump their phone in a cup holder anyways. Road manners do a convincing job of a luxury machine, too. On the highway, there's minimal road and wind noise and a controlled and comfortable ride quality across nearly all normal road surfaces, even doing well on my own battered neighborhood street. Nicks Where the Palisade loses its once-commanding lead is in some very fundamental areas. A naturally aspirated V6 is always welcome, but in its default drive modes, the Palisade stumbles badly in everyday driving. It’s not that the engine lacks power; it’s the dreadful gearing from the eight-speed automatic. What happens way too often is that the transmission upshifts far too early, leaving the engine completely gutless down low. For example, pulling onto a normal 45-mph road highlights this issue. It accelerates just fine and smoothly in first and into second, but then almost instantly after dumps you in third — landing you at just 1,300 rpm with no torque and no momentum. The car then trips over itself, downshifting again to recover if you get rightfully greedy with the throttle to compensate. That kind of blundering behavior is simply unacceptable. Sport mode helps mask the problem, but then sport often makes the Palisade refuse to settle into top gear on the highway, making it an even bigger fuel hog. Which, by the way, the big V6 returned just 19 mpg in my testing — significantly worse than the turbocharged silken inline-six in a Mazda CX-90 and well below the Grand Highlander Hybrid MAX. Seriously, this engine and transmission pairing makes the Palisade feel like an absolute turd in the real world. Even at steady highway speeds, it constantly hunts between gears on mild inclines, unable to decide what it wants to do and what it needs. Despite the fancy seats with endless adjustments and a mild massage feature, I could never find a truly comfortable driving position. The relationship between leg and arm reach feels off, compounding the problem. Jumping into a Grand Highlander the same day, I dialed in a better and optimal driving position in about 15 seconds — something a full week with the Palisade couldn’t achieve. Other ergonomic choices baffle, too, like the button to activate the (extremely helpful) top-view parking cameras being placed furthest right on the dashboard, near the passenger’s knee. Was it forgotten until the end of development? Meanwhile, the drive mode and terrain controls are small and obscured by the steering wheel, largely out of sight. All of these switches could have been logically placed near the wireless charging pad, where they’d be both visible and easy to reach. For a $60,000 SUV, proximity touch-sensing door locks are only located on the front doors. So, say your hands are full with groceries and you want to easily place them in the back seats, you'll have to open the driver’s door first, then hit the interior unlock button to access the rear and then open another door; Even a mid-trim RAV4 does better here with access to all doors. Or for those with kids, you also will not be able to open the rear doors for them without unlocking and opening the front first. Hyundai choosing to limit this feature to the front doors on such a big and expensive SUV is a cheap and frustrating decision. I'm not done with the lock and unlock controls, though, because I had so many instances of placing my hand on the door handle where the mirrors would fold out, clearly indicating the car was wanting to unlock, but it actually wouldn't unlock. It instead would take a couple tries and this was frustrating on days it was raining. It's nearly 2025, this shouldn't be an issue, and I never have similar problems on any other cars it seems besides Hyundais, but this was the worst instance yet. Worse still, the unlocking itself is unreliable. In many instances, I would repeatedly grab the handle to unlock and open, watch the mirrors unfold — a clear sign the car detected the key and my hand — only for the door to remain locked. It often took multiple attempts, which was especially aggravating in the rain. It’s nearly 2026, and this shouldn’t be an issue. I’ve noticed similar behavior in other Hyundais, but this was the worst instance yet. Perhaps the flaw is in the placement for where to touch to lock the door, which coincides with the same place you open the door from. Other manufactuers place the locking sensor at the front of the handle to avoid this problem. The long combined instrument cluster and central display is a nice idea and works great in other Hyundais, but the way this design pulls and curves out away from the dashboard at the end is a strange design choice, especially when the rest of the dashboard is so flat. In other words, just too tacked-on and awkward. And finally, the value argument has evaporated. At $60,000, this is a very expensive Hyundai. There are better choices (and a hybrid option now) The Palisade — along with the Telluride — reshaped the SUV landscape in 2020. But recent updates have been largely cosmetic, and they’ve gone too far into aesthetic excess. The engine frustrates in daily use, controls are poorly placed, the door locks are unreliable, and I never once felt truly comfortable behind the wheel. The once-strong value proposition is also gone. What remains to be seen is the new hybrid version of the Palisade which adds much needed power and extra efficiency. Could this be the game changer needed? What really drove the point home in this particular instance and test was stepping straight into a Grand Highlander Hybrid MAX the same day. Instantly, the powertrain felt stronger in real-world driving, the seating was more comfortable, the controls were intuitive, and all four doors unlocked exactly as they should. It may not feel quite as luxurious inside, but it’s the better overall package — and likely the better choice for almost everyone. If the new Palisade Hybrid can compete with Toyota's or Mazda's powertrains, then I may have to eat my own words. 2026 Hyundai Palisade image gallery 2026 Hyundai Palisade Calligraphy specifications As-tested price: ~$60,000 Engine & Drivetrain Engine: 3.5L V6 Horsepower: 287 hp Torque: 260 lb-ft Transmission: 8-speed automatic Drivetrain: All-wheel drive (AWD) Dimensions Length: ~199 inches Wheelbase: ~117 inches Width: ~78 inches Height: ~70 inches Interior & Capacity Seating: 7 passengers (captain’s chairs standard) Cargo volume: ~19 cubic feet (behind third row) Cargo volume: ~46 cubic feet (behind second row) Max cargo volume: ~87 cubic feet (with all rear seats folded) Performance & Efficiency Towing capacity: Up to ~5,000 lbs Real world fuel economy: 19 MPG Notable Features on Calligraphy 21-inch alloy wheels Dual-pane panoramic sunroof Nappa leather quilted seating Heated and ventilated seats (multiple rows) Surround-view camera and advanced driver aids Remote smart parking assist Premium audio system Heads-up display

2026 Volvo XC90 T8 Ultra review by The Road Beat Words and pictures: Mitchell Weitzman I had really high hopes for the updated and supposedly improved “2025.5” Volvo XC90, but a week with it left me disappointed—mostly by how much hasn’t changed, and the fact that the few changes made actually verge on going the wrong direction. It’s easy to blindly celebrate Volvo for merely existing as a less pretentious Swedish alternative to the typical German luxury fare, but the fundamental product is plagued by ingredients that have sadly gone sour upon first opening. Picks Good news: the XC90 is as pretty as ever. The updated exterior features a sharpened front fascia that looks both thoroughly modern and thoroughly tasteful. The same beautiful interior detailing remains, buoyed by leather and metalwork crafted by skilled artisans and not outfitted by Temu. On the road, it delivers a superlatively smooth driving and passenger experience, with minimal to no wind noise making its way through the body or glass. Sculpted and leather-clad front seats offer leagues of adjustment—lumbar, bolstering, seat-bottom extension—and some delightful built-in massagers in this test vehicle. Even the seat warmers and coolers prove their worth and border on too effective. Dominating the dashboard is a huge tablet-like touchscreen with a revamped operating system. Commands are quicker, pages load faster, graphics look fresher, and—finally—you can display both the backup and top-view cameras at the same time, which is extremely helpful for parallel parking or tight maneuvers. Steering and handling don’t excite, but the XC90 is secure and confidence-inspiring for daily driving. Pick up the pace on a winding road and it doesn’t fall flat on its face, flattering itself with surprising speed and lateral grip. It’s still not as happy as a proper performance SUV from Porsche or BMW M, but it drives more than decently and fulfills its mission as a luxury barge. When it comes to raw speed, that’s where the XC90 continues to more than surprise. The turbo four-cylinder hybrid of this 'T8' example churns out a combined 455 hp, which absolutely did not need improvement. 0–60 mph happens in as little as 4.5 seconds, though in normal driving the XC90 prefers a relaxed, efficient powertrain response, only summoning the demons when your right foot is buried. As a plug-in hybrid, a full charge of the 18.8 kWh battery nets you over 30 miles of electric-only driving, adding useful commuting flexibility if you have cheap and convenient electricity at your disposal (or even free charging at the workplace). Mixed hybrid driving, however, returned a modest 25 mpg. Nicks It might sound like there’s a lot to like, and that’s true. But there’s also a lot that annoys and disappoints—especially considering this was a real opportunity for meaningful improvements from Volvo. Despite the power, a four-cylinder engine is still a four-cylinder, and it’s just not deserving of a large luxury SUV. When you press the throttle, the noises coming from under the hood are gruff and less than desirable, lacking the smooth rumble or growl of more fanciful six-cylinder units. It’s not a bad engine, but for $90K it’s out of place and undermines the outright glamor. This also has me wondering why Volvo even bothers with combustion at all versus going fully electric for their luxury SUV. A new screen and UI might be welcome, yet it’s still obviously flawed. Yes, it’s faster—but it’s still slow enough to be annoying for a brand new car with allegedly the latest technology, revealing noticeable lag. Some core interface decisions are baffling, like separating temperature and fan speed for the climate into different digital tabs. Why are those not on the same screen? Other controls are buried, and at times the backup camera refused to show up in reverse—only the top-view camera would appear. While the overstuffed screen also controls the heated/cooled seats like most modern cars, in order to initiate those lovely massagers you must first press a physical button on the seat just to even bring up the on-screen menu, then the screen takes over - there is zero workaround. Why does one hand need to poke the physical switch while the other immediately taps the screen? It makes no sense and I think many drivers will never know how to start the massagers they paid for. If the screen adjusts the massaging feature, why can't you start them from there, too? An electronic gremlin hit me when the estimated driving range suddenly zeroed out: miles-to-empty dropped from about 150 to double dashes—zero. The trip computer also freaked out, tanking the average mpg from 24 to… 4. The range eventually returned on its own, but a brand-new car losing and skewing data like that is concerning and goes right in line with my history of new Volvos all having some kind of electronic glitch one way or another. Enabling cruise control automatically activates a semi-autonomous steering assist by default, and there’s no way to change that after digging through the menus. A quick click of the unlabeled right arrow on the steering wheel disables it, but it seems that you must do that every single time you use cruise. And you will want to, because the steering assist drives like it’s drunk—making small corrections and swerves that will absolutely get you pulled over. If someone can correct me on this being a default, please let me know. For a $90K vehicle, the third-row seats must be folded and raised manually with no electric assist. Normally I wouldn’t care because I’m not lazy this way, but the real issue is how there’s no convenient pull or latch to use. Once those third-row seats are down, the only way to get them back up is having a Michael-Jordan-in-Space-Jam arm length or crawling into the cargo area to reach the release lever. For something supposedly practical, this is just inconvenient. Also, cheaper SUVs have buttons to electrically raise and lower their third-rows. Further worth noting is the subpar 35 cubic feet of cargo space behind the second row, which is actually less than a RAV4. Even though the leather and metalwork are exquisite, Volvo bizarrely adds an extra raw material in the form of woven canvas—or maybe wool?—across the dash. It looks randomly placed and totally out of sync with Volvo’s clean Swedish ethos where minimizing the amount of materials or textures is prioritized. Further, the big center screen could be better integrated and flush in the dash, not tacked on and awkwardly and slightly raised. Quite a lot to say then Yes, there’s plenty to say about the latest XC90—some of it good, but plenty that leaves me wanting more and comes across as a huge missed opportunity. I was eagerly awaiting this refresh, but the modest facelift hasn’t advanced the vehicle in any tangible way besides a bigger screen that nobody really needed. The real issues with the XC90 remain its livability problems, annoying electronics, and clunky interface. If not for the bigger screen, you could mistake this cabin for something straight out of their 2015-catalogue, and not in a good way. I still like the XC90—it’s a pleasure to be in—but it’s a bummer they didn't try harder, especially considering the exorbitant premium it commands at $88,695 as-tested. 2025 Volvo XC90 T8 Basic specifications Price as-tested: $88,695 Powertrain Engine: 2.0-liter turbocharged inline-4 Plug-in hybrid with rear electric motor Transmission: 8-speed automatic Combined output: 455 horsepower Combined torque: 523 lb-ft Battery & Charging Battery type: Lithium-ion Battery capacity: 18.8 kWh total (approx. 14.7 kWh usable) Performance & Efficiency 0–60 mph: As quick as 4.5 seconds Top speed: 112 mph (electronically limited) Electric-only range: ~32 miles (EPA) Real World fuel economy: ~25 mpg combined Capacities Towing capacity: 5,000 lbs Fuel tank capacity: 18.8 gallons Curb weight: ~5,100 lbs Dimensions Length: 195 inches Width (without mirrors): 79 inches Height: 70 inches Wheelbase: 118 inches Ground clearance: ~8.8 inches Cargo Space Cargo volume behind 3rd row: ~11 cu ft Cargo volume behind 2nd row: ~35 cu ft Maximum cargo volume: ~86 cu ft Chassis & Suspension Front suspension: Independent control arms Rear suspension: Independent multi-link Brakes: Four-wheel ventilated disc brakes Wheels & Tires Wheel sizes: 19", 20", 21", or 22" Interior & Technology Upholstery: Leather seating surfaces Trim materials: Real metal accents, wood inlays, optional fabric dash trim Front seats: Power-adjustable with lumbar, bolstering, extension Seat features (trim-dependent): Heating, ventilation, massage Infotainment: Large vertical touchscreen with Google-based OS Camera systems: Rearview camera with 360-degree surround-view Warranty & Maintenance Basic warranty: 4 years / 50,000 miles Hybrid battery warranty: 8 years / 100,000 miles Roadside assistance: 4 years Complimentary maintenance: 3 years / 30,000 miles

This electric crossover is ballistically fast and reasonably priced, but that's it 2025 Volvo EX30 review by The Road Beat Words and pictures: Mitchell Weitzman Well, that wasn’t on my bingo card for 2025 — but then again, neither was cervical disc replacement. For some, especially the unsuspecting, the sheer speed of the Volvo EX30 may be enough to cause potential disc issues of their own. Insurance companies likely won’t love the rapid spread of hypercar‑quick, mainstream electric vehicles — but at least the neurosurgeons will. Pros How fast exactly is the all-electric Volvo EX30? This Twin Motor Performance Ultra edition emits 422-humming horsepower. That might not sound outrageous on paper, but it’s just 22 horses shy of the legendary Porsche 959 — except this power now lives in a commuter‑spec Volvo crossover. Unlike the multi‑million‑dollar icon, the EX30 would leave it in its metaphorical, mummifying dust. Zero to 60 mph takes a scarcely believable 3.3 seconds. Zero to 100 mph is dispatched in under nine seconds, and the quarter mile flies by in under 12. If you’re running late getting your kids to school in the early hours, the EX30 might make it genuinely difficult to ever be late again. Except for speed cameras that is. So yes, it’s an everyday ballistic missile — a short‑range one, admittedly, which we'll get to soon — but also seriously challenges what’s acceptable on public roads. Those shocking performance figures don’t fully illustrate just how disruptive this car is to the sub‑$50,000 EV landscape. A Toyota bZ4X? Hopeless. An entry‑level Hyundai Ioniq 5? No chance. That's well before considering the average Honda CR-V. Based on initial impressions alone when it came to the shocking speed it taps into, I was convinced this Volvo had to cost north of $70,000. Instead, I was genuinely stunned to see this well‑equipped example sticker just under $50,000, landing at $48,395 as-tested. Despite that punch, efficiency is commendable, hovering a touch above three miles per kWh in mixed driving. That puts it right inline with most other AWD electric crossovers like the Ioniq 5 albeit with gobs more power. Range isn’t headline‑grabbing due to the relatively compact ~69 kWh battery pack, but it will still just clear the 200‑mile mark. And with fast DC charging peaking around 150 kW, the smaller battery means you spend less of your life tethered to a cord. A compact size may be a downside for some, but I appreciate the diminutive footprint. Thanks to smart EV packaging, the interior feels roomier than the stubby 167‑inch overall length would suggest. Parking and maneuvering are effortless, and the EX30 simply feels less wasteful on crowded roads. The sparse interior will appeal to fans of minimalist Scandinavian and Bauhaus‑inspired design, too. Rather than by mistake, it’s intentionally barren, and while that won’t be to everyone’s taste, there are highlights — chief among them the interior door handles, which might be the best‑looking and best‑feeling I’ve ever used. Tesla introduced the vacant interior design language for modern cars, and Volvo's designers have at least made it feel more welcoming and attractive. Cons As fast as the EX30 is and at such a relatively attainable price, such vast pace is entirely unnecessary in the real world. It also feels less like a meaningful benefit and more like a one-trick marketing tool — one that distracts from the EX30’s fundamental shortcomings as a vehicle to drive and live with. And in classic modern Volvo fashion, it all boils down to deeply frustrating electronics and controls. One could safely assume a clueless Volvo committee decided the best way to build an EV interface was simply to copy Tesla. But in a stroke of questionable creativity — perhaps to differentiate themselves — they instead made a version that’s worse in nearly every conceivable way. By fully committing to Bauhaus minimalism, physical controls have been almost entirely eliminated and relocated to the central tablet. Want to adjust your mirrors? Don’t bother looking at the door. Instead, dive at least two menus deep into the touchscreen — only to then have to actually adjust the mirrors using unlabeled steering‑wheel buttons. Intuitive, right? Totally not distracting at all, literally feeling like a Tim Robinson skit. Despite the vast, unused dashboard space in front of the passenger seat, there’s only a microscopic glovebox . And yes, opening it also requires multiple taps on the central touchscreen. A cleverly hidden button would be so much better, and just wait until that electric connection and motor to open the glovebox fails. Turn signals and wipers are awkwardly combined into a single left‑hand stalk behind the steering wheel. Turning the wipers on is simple enough, but adjusting their speed during rain requires — you guessed it — several touchscreen interactions. Left hand for activation, right hand for menu diving. Brilliant again! Somehow there's also not a single, central page for climate functions, thus requiring separate pages and clicks of the screen to access the fan speed and then a different click and page to be able to adjust the temperature. I'm sorry, but who the actual f*ck thought of any of this? Not done yet, between the front seats sits some underfloor storage covered by clunky, awkward flaps finished in a truly hideous radioactive yellow. Above that are centrally mounted window switches that lack dedicated rear controls — meaning you must manually toggle between front and rear every single time. The center console itself is mostly an armrest, offering little in the way of meaningful storage. You can at least extend part of the console to reveal hidden cupholders, also drenched in that bile‑yellow accent, but even those are ungainly to deploy and stow. Add in a strange rubberized dash material that eagerly collects dust, and the cabin experience starts to wear thin very, very quickly. At least the door handles remain excellent — small mercies. Volvo also incorporated a driver‑monitoring camera. In turn, it chimes whenever it thinks you’re distracted — which is frequently, because you’re forced to look at the touchscreen to perform nearly every basic task to operate the vehicle. Oh, irony is rich! I earlier praised the MPG-equivalent of efficiency, but with the small battery in this Volvo, range is compromised and will be considered unacceptable to many drivers. On long-distance freeway driving, which hurts EV ranges the most, you can expect below 200 miles even which is a real usability handicap. Further, this Volvo relies on slower and older150 KW tech for fast charging. In the real world, a faster charging Hyundai can fill up its larger battery in the same time as the Volvo; That's a real problem. Other brands also have adopted native Tesla charging ports to use Tesla Superchargers  — easily the most available and most reliable in the world  — without any funky and ungainly adapter. For a tech-forward car, it fails quite abundantly in the very tech that defines living with an electric car. Solutions to problems that did not exist Volvo is trying far too hard to solve problems that never existed in the first place. In doing so, it has created an entire suite of new annoyances that are only worse. Good news is here: The price is competitive and the speed is astonishing. But, and this is fatal but, the EX30 isn’t actually engaging or interesting to drive, and its user interface represents a genuine regression in how humans interact with cars. A plague has infected so much of modern tech in cars, because it's obvious now that designers ask, "How do we make this more interesting?" instead of, "How do we make this better." Interesting here has ruined the user experience. Past Volvos I’ve tested have indeed suffered from tech gremlins — frozen screens with laggy responses, door lock issues, and general digital misbehavior. Now imagine that happening here, where nearly everything depends on the screen functioning properly. Volvo is absolutely on the right path when it comes to blending efficiency and outrageous performance at a reasonable price. Unfortunately, it’s heading in the completely wrong direction when it comes to user interface design and driver interaction — and that matters far more than a 3.3‑second sprint to 60 ever will. 2025 Volvo EX30 image gallery 2025 Volvo EX30 Performance Ultra AWD main specs As-tested price: $48,395 Powertrain & Performance Dual electric motors All-wheel drive (AWD) 422 horsepower (combined) ~400 lb-ft of torque 0–60 mph: ~3.3 seconds 0–100 mph: under 9 seconds Quarter mile: ~11.8 seconds Battery, Range & Charging Lithium-ion battery pack (~69 kWh usable) EPA-estimated range: ~250 miles Real world mixed range : ~200 miles Efficiency: ~3.0+ miles per kWh (real-world mixed driving) DC fast charging up to ~150 kW 10–80% DC fast charge: ~26–30 minutes Dimensions & Weight Length: ~167 inches Width: ~72 inches (excluding mirrors) Height: ~61 inches Wheelbase: ~104 inches Curb weight: ~4,150–4,200 lbs Maximum towing capacity: ~2,000 lbs Interior & Cargo Seating for 5 Cargo space (rear seats up): ~30 cu ft Minimalist interior with recycled materials Central tablet-style infotainment interface Google built-in (Maps, Assistant, apps) Wireless Apple CarPlay Panoramic fixed glass roof (Ultra trim) Chassis, Wheels & Brakes Front suspension: MacPherson strut Rear suspension: Multi-link Wheel size: 20-inch alloys (Ultra trim) Performance-oriented AWD torque distribution Safety & Driver Assistance Automatic emergency braking Blind-spot monitoring Lane-keeping assistance Adaptive cruise control Pilot Assist (Ultra trim) 360-degree camera system Driver monitoring camera

2025 Volvo EX40 Twin Motor Ultra review by The Road Beat Words and pictures: Mitchell Weitzman Don’t get me wrong—there are  positive aspects to the new Volvo EX40, a compact all-electric crossover. But it’s the drawbacks that unfortunately define the experience. This is an EV assembled in Belgium by a Swedish, Chinese-owned company using a majority of parts sourced from China. Yes, modern Volvos are global products, but the lack of outright cohesion here feels deeper than its complicated logistics would even suggest. The end result is a car so uncomfortable that it’s hard to believe anyone truly drove it before signing off. And yes, you read that correctly: my primary issue with the EX40 is comfort. While the interior initially impresses and the seats look minimalist and futuristic, the reality is grim; These are among the worst seats I’ve encountered in any new car at any price. In fact, the EX40 was so uncomfortable that I parked it with multiple days left in my test loan because I simply had enough. How can seats go this wrong? Excellent question. The head restraints—their correct name, not “headrests”—have virtually no adjustment. Resultingly, they aggressively push your head forward at all times, forcing a posture best described as “desk neck”: hunched, craned, and unnatural. Only here, the restraint itself actively makes it worse. Try to relax and your face simply angles downward and comfort is never achieved. The forward push also disconnects your upper back and shoulders from the seatback, eliminating lateral support entirely. Even at modest speeds through mild corners and bends, your torso slips out of position as you grab and hold on to the wheel. If you wear your hair in a ponytail, the uncomfortable head angle will only amplify the problem. If this sounds exaggerated, consider the context. The EV and compact crossover space is now packed with genuinely well-rounded competitors that perfectly comfortable and with increased range, making the EX40 feel completely irrelevant. There are simply no excuses, and dot even its insane performance can save it. While this EX40 Twin Motor Ultra can hustle from 0–60 mph of 4 seconds dead, it's all for naught. Because when you do floor it, your neck just hurts more, and if you carry speed through corners, you'll fall out of the seat. There are  some wins. You can finally display both the reverse camera and the top-down camera simultaneously. The air vents feel excellent in operation, and the Harman Kardon sound system impresses. But the positives stop there. Real-world range barely clears 200 miles, well below the EX40’s EPA rating of 260 miles and about 25% short of what key competitors achieve now without effort. That’s last-decade EV tech. Charging doesn’t help either. DC fast-charging tops out at 200 kW, not the 350 kW now common elsewhere. As a result, a 10–80% charge takes closer to 27–30 minutes, versus roughly 18–20 minutes in a Hyundai Ioniq 5 under similar conditions. Ten extra minutes may not sound like much, but do that once a week and you’re looking at over 500 minutes a year—more than eight hours of your life spent waiting for your car to charge. That’s an entire workday, annually, lost to inefficiency. Then there’s the price. Ringing the register at $62,045 as-tested, the EX40 Twin Ultra is objectively worse than rivals in nearly every measurable way all while costing extra. It isn’t even meaningfully nicer inside, either. Not to mention just how small is compact really is: measuring only 175 inches long while boasting a poor 16 cubic feet of cargo space behind the rear seats. Despite carrying a luxury price tag, there are glaring design shortcuts. Most offensive is the large, blank circular button where an ignition switch would be in a gas car. For a vehicle that is exclusively electric, continuing to reuse the old XC40 dashboard is starting to feel lazy and tone-deaf. I like small cars and they have a great purpose, but for over 60 grand and it's uncomfortable and not particularly luxurious? It's a total joke. Cruise control performance is another weak point. On freeway grades, it regularly sheds about 3 mph before aggressively accelerating back to the set speed at the crest. That behavior is not only annoying but terrible for efficiency by constantly having to accelerate uphill . Volvo gives consumers no compelling reason to choose the EX40. With underwhelming range, outdated charging performance, and the worst seats I’ve experienced in a new car, this one is a complete pass. And that’s before mentioning the dated screen graphics, slow load times, and a radio system that never reliably connected to my phone nor remembered my last SiriusXM station. As Randy Jackson would say: “It’s a no from me, dog.” More photos from the 2025 Volvo EX40 Twin Motor Ultra review 2025 Volvo EX40 Twin Ultra – Specifications Price as-tested: $62,045 MSRP Powertrain & Performance Drivetrain: Dual-motor with all-wheel drive Combined output: 402 hp Combined torque: 494 lb-ft 0–60 mph: 4.0 seconds Battery & Charging Battery capacity: 82 kWh (approx. 79 kWh usable) Battery type: Liquid-cooled lithium-ion AC charging: 11 kW onboard charger DC fast charging: Up to ~200 kW 10–80% DC fast-charge time: ~27–30 minutes EPA-estimated range (Twin Motor): 260 miles Road Beat Real World Range: 210 miles Dimensions Length: 175 inches Wheelbase: 106 inches Width: 75 inches Height: 65 inches Curb weight: 4,600–4,800 lb (depending on equipment) Rear cargo: 16 cu ft Rear cargo (rear seats folded): 57–58 cu ft Front trunk (frunk): ~0.7 cu ft Chassis & Suspension Front suspension: MacPherson strut Rear suspension: Multi-link Brakes: Four-wheel ventilated discs Wheels & Tires Standard wheels (Ultra): 20-inch alloy wheels Tires: Performance-oriented all-season EV tires Towing Maximum towing capacity: 2,000 lb Specs comparison against class leaders: 2025 EX40 Twin Ultra vs. Hyundai Ioniq 5 vs. Tesla Model Y – Key Specs Volvo EX40 Twin Ultra Hyundai Ioniq 5 AWD Tesla Model Y Long Range AWD Drivetrain Dual-motor AWD Dual-motor AWD Dual-motor AWD Horsepower ~402 hp ~320 hp (approx) ~420+ hp Torque ~494 lb-ft ~446 lb-ft (approx) Tesla doesn’t publish exact 0–60 mph 4 sec 4.7 seconds ~4.5 sec or quicker Battery (usable) ~79 kWh ~77–84 kWh ~69–82+ kWh EPA Range ~250–260 miles ~269–282+ miles ~327 miles DC Fast Charging Peak ~200 kW ~250–350 kW ~225–250 kW Charging 10–80% ~27–30 min ~18–30 min ~20–30 min Cargo Behind Rear Seats ~16 cu ft ~26–27 cu ft ~29 cu ft Length ~175 in ~183 in ~187–189 in Towing Capacity ~2,000 lb ~2,300 lb (some trims) ~3,500 lb Typical Price ~$62,000 ~$55,000–$62,000 ~$50,000–$60,000+

A thrilling electric sports car, the Ioniq 5 N has terrible range 2025 Hyundai Ioniq 5 N review by The Road Beat Words and pictures: Mitchell Weitzman This is the quickest-accelerating car to 60 mph I’ve ever driven. If you want to melt faces at legal speeds, the Ioniq 5 N considers that mission accomplished in three fleeting seconds. What sets the Ioniq 5 N apart from nearly every other EV on the market is what it does—and how it does it—when you’re not just blasting along in a straight line. Speed is everything for many EVs, a trend that kicked off when Tesla unveiled the original “Insane” mode on their early Model S sedans. But the Ioniq 5 N is different: this hot hatch is a legitimately and staggeringly brilliant sports car. Yet in doing so, it’s not exactly a great EV by traditional standards. Whichever way you slice it, this car proves one vital truth: EVs can be fun. Picks This is one hell of a fun time. Explosive acceleration is old news for EVs—been there, done that. Where enthusiasts are concerned, the glaring ingredient missing from most attainable electric cars (sorry, Rimac doesn’t count) is genuine, old-school fun. No matter how accomplished the regular Hyundai Ioniq 5 is, it often has the charisma of a washing machine. There will always be fanboys for certain models and gimmicks, but a true, modern electric sports car? That’s been largely missing until now. Instead of trying to make an electric car “more fun,” Hyundai went back to the roots and asked, “How can we use electricity to make a better sports car?” That’s the attitude carmakers should adopt, and by doing so, Hyundai has crafted an incredibly fun retro hatch with performance that obliterates its contemporaries and most muscle cars. The standard Ioniq 5 dual-motor setup is already plenty quick with 320 horsepower, but the N division said, “Hold my beer,” and cranked it up to 641 horsepower at peak performance, with nearly 600 horsepower available at all times. The result? Face-warping acceleration. Being electric, there’s no pause or wait for power—it hits instantaneously with a prod of your right foot. With dual motors front and rear, plus the ability to adjust torque split for optimal traction or glorious slippage, this car is built for hot-lapping and attacking canyons at devastatingly illegal speeds. Grip is immense when you want it, and smart power distribution quells understeer. Flip a few switches, push some buttons, and you can transform this AWD hot hatch into a RWD-biased drift machine with a penchant for Mountain Dew-fueled, cotton-candy oversteer. What impresses most is how this machine changes direction so flatly, aided by batteries that keep the bulk of its not-insignificant mass low in the chassis. Despite weighing nearly 5,000 pounds, the Ioniq 5 N dances around like it’s a ton lighter. It might wear a Hyundai badge and look like a boxy grocery-getter with some puffed-up jewelry to some, but this EV is a sensory blast, delivering the joy and adrenaline of driving a fast car fast. There’s no real engine sound (more on that later), but the tactile sensations are dialed up well past the usual domesticated levels. The main takeaway from a week with this menacing Hyundai is that it’s a properly, righteously fun car. Unconventional? Sure. But it tickles all the right feelings in conventional ways through its blistering speed, razor-sharp control, and driver involvement. That last bit is crucial—other EVs often lack engagement or even prefer (and are designed) to drive themselves. The Ioniq 5 N, however, demands its driver take the helm to extract its full potential. Nicks By crafting an incredible sports car, Hyundai has also made a pretty lackluster EV by (admittedly recent) traditional metrics. Standard Ioniq 5 AWD models average about 2.7 miles per kWh in previous testing, but the N drops that to a dismal 2.1. Even with a full charge, I never saw more than 200 miles of estimated range, and with the heater lightly on during winter, that quickly plummeted to around 150 miles all-in from its 84 kWh capacity battery park. A real-world range well under 200 miles makes this car highly impractical for many drivers because of how limiting it is, not to mention how you'll constantly need to have charging planned (and time allocated for charging). Compare that to a gasoline-powered sports car like the BMW M3, which can easily surpass 300 miles in daily driving and averages about 20 MPG in mixed driving. This poor range hampers outright usability, forcing frequent charging stops. Long journeys will be a hassle, even driving 120 miles to San Francisco from home would leave me with just morsels of energy remaining, necessitating a charging stop en route or upon arrival. Utilizing 350 kW chargers helps (though it actually maxes out at about 200 KW), but the need to recharge so often is a bummer. And on the track? A 20-minute session of hard driving will significantly drain the battery, requiring a recharge every session to keep things on the boil. Then there’s the fake engine noise. It’s amusing at first but quickly feels overdone, like Hyundai’s admitting that EVs are inherently boring. I’d prefer a raw, mechanically electric sound—think TIE Fighter—over this artificial snapping, crackling, and popping of a faux four-cylinder. Thankfully, you can tweak those noise settings to be as fake or silent as you desire. The Ioniq 5 N’s cornering prowess comes at the cost of everyday comfort. The ride is firm and jiggly at low speeds, though it settles at moderate paces. This is a sports car, and it can beat you up like one. Plus, unlocking its best performance requires navigating menus and settings—lots of them. Remember when a BMW M3 didn’t even have a screen or adjustable dampers? Just key in, shift to first, and go. I miss those days. The right direction for electric vehicles Let’s face it: as an EV, the Ioniq 5 N isn’t great. Its efficiency is laughable—a car with this big a battery (84 kWh) failing to hit even close to 200 miles in real-world conditions, especially in colder weather, is disappointing. But focusing on its strengths, it excels in its fever-dream levels of speed and intensity, laughable in an entirely positive way. Other EVs may be as fast—or even faster with a large bank account—but few match the Ioniq 5 N’s fun factor when the road gets twisty. Accelerating, braking, turning, repeat—it’s a blast. Whie not close to perfect, the Ioniq 5 N is a massive stride forward for EVs, proving hypercar-level performance can be attainable at its price point and also be genuinely fun to drive. Price as-tested: $67,685 Pros: Outstanding performance in every direction; Looks great Cons: Poor range; Stiff ride 2025 Hyundai Ioniq 5 N basic specifications. Powertrain: Dual electric motors, all-wheel drive Power Output: 601 hp (641 hp with N Grin Boost) Torque: 545 lb-ft (568 lb-ft with N Grin Boost) Battery Capacity: 84 kWh Electric Range: 221 miles (EPA) Real World Range : About 175 miles 0-60 mph: About 3 seconds Top Speed: 162 mph Transmission: Single-speed direct drive Charging Time (240V): 7–9 hours Fast Charging: 10% to 80% in 18 minutes (350 kW charger) Dimensions: Length: 186 in Width: 76 in Height: 62 in Wheelbase: 118 in Curb Weight: about 4,900 lbs Cargo Capacity: About 26 cubic feet Wheels: 21-inch forged aluminum with P275/35R21 Pirelli P-Zero tires MSRP: Starting at $66,100 (US) Thank you for reading The Road Beat's 2025 Hyundai Ioniq 5 N review. Please subscribe for more new vehicle reviews featuring our honest and candid commentary and high quality image galleries.

This aging lite pickup has its charms, but can't hide its age 2025 Honda Ridgeline Trailsport review by The Road Beat Words and pictures: Mitchell Weitzman Honda’s Ridgeline is not a truck that excites upon first greeting, but instead grows on you over time. I haven’t exactly given glowing reviews of Ridgelines in the past, but a reintroduction to Honda’s midsize pickup was welcome after recent drives in Toyota’s new Tacoma—a truck that has ballooned in price with its latest generation. Honda, on the other hand, has kept things simple for another year, which is both good and bad. What still stands out most to me is how easy the Ridgeline is to drive and use, as well as the sheer value it continues to bring in 2025. Picks Easy drivability and comfort remain at the forefront of the Ridgeline’s strengths. On the road, it never feels like a traditional pickup, instead shrinking itself down into an easily maneuverable crossover. Handling and steering both impress, too, as this is a truck that never really drives like a truck and can carry alarming speeds down country backroads. On the highway, it’s remarkably civilized with low wind and road noise, paired with a plush ride quality that rarely feels anything less than composed. Too many SUVs and trucks bounce around endlessly as if riding on blown shocks, or they’re tuned too stiffly to chase payload and towing bragging rights. True, the Ridgeline doesn’t boast headline-grabbing figures in terms of utility, but the tradeoff is a beautifully smooth ride across any surface—far better than the overly firm Toyota Tacoma. This TrailSport trim adds some useful features and performance attributes, including suspension tuned for mild off-road use and knobby tires to match. It also gets unique trim pieces that pair nicely with certain colors (though this flat blue isn’t one of them, in my opinion). Inside, it’s fully loaded with all the bells and whistles, along with nice leather seat coverings, yet still retails for about $47,230. That may sound steep, but a TRD Sport or Off-Road Tacoma with faux -leather seats will cost at least $5,000 more. Unlike the Passport TrailSport SUV, where I noticed powertrain hiccups and sluggish throttle response, the Ridgeline has none of those concerns. Its V6 is a smooth operator at all times and speeds, and the automatic transmission rarely feels lost when accelerating or needing it to kick down. My observed fuel economy was 21 MPG, which matches Toyota’s new turbocharged four-cylinder Tacoma, a fair result for an old big V6. Put your foot down from a standstill, and the Ridgeline’s sonorous V6 will launch you to 60 mph in a surprisingly brisk 6.5 seconds. Another clever touch is the dual-action tailgate, which can swing open sideways as well as drop down. It makes bed access easier depending on your needs and circumstance, and the built-in storage bin adds real utility with an additional 7 cubic feet. You could even use it as its own cooler. Nicks The drawbacks, unfortunately, are familiar. The interior is heavily dated, with a small screen angled awkwardly upward. In simpler terms, this cabin feels very much from Trump’s first term rather than his second. Many of the knobs and buttons look bulky and old, not befitting a brand-new 2025 truck. And even though the Trailsport is the off-road oriented of the range, it only has 7.6 inches of ground clearance, a frankly abysmal figure that is less than a basic Toyota RAV4. Most annoying is the transmission’s operation. The slow-reacting PRND buttons always introduce a delay that gets in the way of progress when leaving a parking stall or at home. Adding to that is another lingering Honda issue: The absence of strong engine braking from the nine-speed automatic transmission. For example, when descending even a moderate slope, there’s a pronounced lack of engine braking, compounded by lethargic downshifts. That becomes especially unsettling if you’re towing its maximum 5,000 pounds downhill. Styling is subjective, but the Ridgeline is not the most attractive truck, lacking the purposeful stance and classic proportions of its rivals. A major design flaw is the obscenely high bed height. For a truck that’s supposed to be approachable, you end up lifting cargo higher than normal into its bed, not to mention the short surrounding walls that don’t offer much protection for keeping your cargo. As for that clever tailgate, while I like the functionality, the hinge panel gaps are god awful—lopsided and asymmetrical. Before realizing the tailgate swung out, I honestly thought it was just bad manufacturing. Chances are, most people following you on the road will think the same. A crossover that happens to be a truck Despite complaints, I still find myself liking the Ridgeline. Its strongest points are clear, especially the standout chassis performance when driven like a normal car. Other trucks simply aren’t as easy to live with, and that’s the single biggest factor in the Ridgeline’s success. It doesn’t demand the same level of commitment as other pickups, because this is a Honda—and it behaves like one at all times. It’s also a terrific value in an age of inflation and increasingly expensive Tacomas. Sure, it’s old inside, but that very datedness may help explain the attractive price point. At the end of the daily commute, it's best to think of the Ridgeline as a crossover that happens to have a truck attached behind, offering a useful alternative to the common SUV, but is also compromised as such. After a week behind the wheel, though, I cam to enjoy its simple and good-willed demeanor. 2025 Honda Ridgeline Trailsport As-tested price: $47,230 Key Specs Engine: 3.5-liter V6 (SOHC, i-VTEC, 24-valve) Horsepower: 280 hp Torque: 262 lb-ft Transmission: 9-speed automatic Drivetrain: All-wheel drive (AWD) Towing Capacity: 5,000 lbs Payload Capacity: ~1,500 lbs Fuel Economy (EPA): 18 city / 24 highway / 21 combined mpg Dimensions Overall Length: 210 in Wheelbase: 125 in Overall Width (without mirrors): 79 in Overall Height: 71 in Ground Clearance: 7.6 in Bed & Cargo Bed Length (tailgate up): 64 in Bed Length (tailgate down): ~83 in Width in Bed at Wheel Wells: 50 in Bed Volume: 34 cu ft In-Bed storage bin volume: 7 cu ft Thank you for reading The Road Beat's 2025 Honda Ridgeline Trailsport review. Please subscribe for more of our candid and frank reviews.

Just over a year ago I purchased an S15 Silvia from Japan. Here's part 1 of its journey. 1999 Nissan S15 Silvia Spec R by The Road Beat Words and pictures: Mitchell Weitzman There’s no shortage of guides and advice online about importing a Japanese classic under the federal 25-year rule, and this article isn’t meant to be another one of those. Instead, consider this an update on what it’s like occasionally driving a 26-year-old Japanese car that was never sold in the United States. Against my own expectations, I’ve grown to genuinely love my Nissan S15—converting this longtime skeptic of a drift-era icon into a true S-chassis enthusiast. I never thought I’d own an S-chassis Nissan. I’ve admired the occasional well-built S13 or S14 from afar, but S15s always felt reserved for Gran Turismo fantasies. In fact, I did  own one in Gran Turismo 5: finished in yellow, big wing and all, earning a place in my virtual garage. Still, they never compared—at least in my mind—to the six-cylinder RB-powered Skylines of the same era. R32s and R33s remain somewhat attainable, but the R34 market has jumped the shark by a skyscraper-sized margin. And besides, could I ever really own a four-cylinder car? My real-world garage history had never dipped below a V6, from a 370Z to the silky BMW inline-sixes of E36 and E46 (non-M, unfortunately) lore. So why did I buy an S15? Simple: my buddy accidentally bought two. Two S15s, the day they arrived to their new home He was only trying to purchase one, but after going zero-for-ten on previous attempts, a pair of automatic high bids placed on two cars in the same night resulted in two unexpected wins. Having grown accustomed to losing auctions, he suddenly had a surplus. I was offered the “reject” of the pair—which I was perfectly happy to accept, especially since it was cheaper and had fewer miles. A couple of months later, two Silvia Spec Rs arrived stateside, both equipped with six-speed manual transmissions, right-hand drive, and the legendary SR20DET. To my surprise, aside from a mild body kit, my car was mechanically stock—a rarity for a platform so often modified into oblivion. It was even in decent cosmetic shape, save for a cracked front bumper, some dashboard damage, and four unfortunate holes in the trunk where a generic Fast and the Furious  wing had once lived. The body kit was later discovered to be by Impul, the legendary Nissan racing team famous for the classic Calsonic Skyline in Super GT.  It was technically auction grade R (couple areas repainted), but overall very good shape! After some basic maintenance—oil change, spark plug inspection, new brake pads, and a full system bleed—the Silvia revealed itself to be exactly what it appeared to be: a healthy, fully functioning car. So what were my first impressions of a stock Silvia Spec R? Very good. The steering immediately impressed, offering quicker responses than an E36 or E46 BMW of the same era—closer in feel to the coveted ZHP rack. Handling was balanced, favoring mild understeer unless provoked. Mash the throttle like a game of whack-a-mole, however, and the car’s drift heritage reveals itself instantly, delivering wide, controllable slides with excellent modulation. Many modern performance cars feel edgy and nervous when oversteer arrives on public roads or spacious, abandoned intersections, but the Silvia remains remarkably relaxed. It didn’t take long to understand why these cars became drift legends. Pushed hard on back roads, the suspension reveals its softness, allowing a fair amount of body roll. This wasn’t helped by the 215/55 economy tires mounted on the white Work wheels it arrived with, though they did at least provide clear communication at the limit. The rear subframe also exhibited noticeable internal pitch and roll, occasionally making the rear end feel as if it were moving laterally and vertically at the same time. Even so, the car remained a joy to drive—just with lower limits than a modern sports car, or even a contemporary commuter on decent rubber. And the engine—the infamous turbocharged SR20DET? Honestly, it sounded like a vacuum cleaner. The stock exhaust and restrictive airbox certainly didn’t help. There were no turbo noises to speak of, just appliance-like sounds from both ends of the car. Four-cylinders have always sat at the bottom of my personal totem pole, lacking the sonorous smoothness of even an average inline-six or flat-six. That said, the SR20 itself was surprisingly smooth in operation, free of the gnarly trash-compactor noises that plague some modern Toyota engines. It may not sing, but at least it doesn’t sound like it’s shredding itself internally. As for power—eh. Despite its quoted 246 horsepower and relatively light curb weight of around 2,850 pounds, it didn’t feel particularly quick. In fact, it felt noticeably slower than the last Volkswagen Golf GTI I tested, despite similar power figures and a significant weight advantage. Of course, the SR20’s reputation for making big power is well-earned, and that’s a problem easily solved—perhaps already in progress. One pleasant surprise was just how quiet and comfortable the Silvia is on the freeway. Road noise is well controlled, and the suspension soaks up bumps with ease thanks to its soft spring rates. Interior rattles were largely absent, too, with late-model Nissan interiors representing a clear step up from the S14 and R33 era in both build quality and materials. I also genuinely enjoy the six-speed manual transmission. Shifting with the left hand becomes second nature after only a few drives, and each gear is clearly defined. It’s a satisfying gearbox to row through, even if the clutch pedal itself feels a bit too light and spongy. Despite my lukewarm first impression, each drive in the Silvia steadily nurtured a deeper appreciation for this unlikely hero because how good it was at so many things. Before long, the urge grew to replace tired suspension components and elevate this Spec R into one of the best examples in the country. Then I lost the battle to not help unleash a few more horsepower and boost pressure. The original auction photo from Japan Simply put, at under $30,000, the Spec R is a more engaging and capable car than any E36 M3 I’ve driven—and it offers enormous upside potential to surpass not only those cars, but many modern BMWs as well, all while promising greater long-term reliability. Rather than follow the well-worn path of slammed ride heights and drift-only setups that so many S-chassis cars are subjected to, my goal is to build a Silvia analogous to a Porsche GT car or BMW CS/CSL: a focused, back-road and track-ready weapon. Stay tuned for more updates on The Road Beat Silvia, as we dive headfirst into the seemingly endless aftermarket—and some surprisingly accessible factory support—right here in the United States. Why the Silvia Spec R Matters 1999 Nissan Silvia S15 Spec R (JDM) Engine: SR20DET2.0-liter turbocharged inline-four Output: ~246 hp (gentlemen’s agreement era) Transmission: 6-speed manual (Spec R only) Drivetrain: Rear-wheel drive Differential: Helical limited-slip differential (Spec R) Curb Weight: ~2,850 lbs Steering: Hydraulic power steering Suspension: Front MacPherson strut; Rear Multi-link Brakes: Four-wheel disc Production Market: Japan-only (200SX exported Australia and a handful of other countries) U.S. Availability: 25-year import eligible Spec R vs Spec S: The Spec R was the enthusiast’s choice, pairing the turbocharged SR20DET with a six-speed manual and factory LSD. Lower trims (Spec S) made do with a naturally aspirated engine, five-speed gearbox, and open differential—fine cars, but missing the hardware that cemented the S15’s reputation.

Great gas mileage is not enough to take this hybrid over the amazing inline six version 2025 Mazda CX-90 PHEV review by The Road Beat Words and pictures: Mitchell Weitzman TL;DR: Don’t bother with the PHEV version of the otherwise excellent CX-90 SUV. For a deeper dive into why, check out my review of the standout CX-90 powered by its glorious inline-six engine. Otherwise, stay here for comments and criticisms explaining how the pricier plug-in hybrid ends up being the worst version of an otherwise brilliant SUV from Mazda. Clunky operator Unlike other automakers who’ve spent decades perfecting hybrid systems, Mazda is still learning—and it shows. While the setup is improved upon from the CX-90 PHEV’s debut, the hybrid powertrain remains hesitant and clunky in daily use. The roughness is most noticeable during transitions from braking or coasting to light throttle inputs at low speeds. These unpredictable surges and jolts of power undermine the refinement you’d expect at this $60,000 as-tested price point and from Mazda in general. There are also some odd noises from the drivetrain, and turning the wheel to full lock during a tight three-point turn sounds as if the power steering goes under serious strain. Foul soundtrack Instead of six silky cylinders performing in perfect harmony, this CX-90 delivers a gruff and coarse four-cylinder tune. It’s not terrible for what it is, but when the alternative is so sweet, you’d have to be out of your mind to choose this soundtrack after hearing and prodding the (cheaper) inline-six. Inline-sixes are legendary for their smoothness and rich tone—there’s a reason so many classic and revered BMWs and other sports cars used them for decades. They sound and feel special, while this four is a symphonic and mechanical compromise. Fuel Economy doesn't add up Driven purely as a hybrid (without plugging in), the PHEV returns only about a 10% improvement in fuel economy over the six-cylinder—25 MPG versus 23 MPG overall. For the downgrade in engine character, that modest gain is entirely underwhelming. You can, however, achieve far better results if you do regularly charge the battery. If plugging in is convenient and cost-effective for you, the PHEV may make sense—and you won’t have to listen to the four-cylinder as often if you keep the battery topped up for the maximum 25ish miles of electric driving. It's not actually faster Despite boasting similar horsepower and the same torque on paper, the four-cylinder PHEV feels easily slower under heavy throttle. Acceleration tapers off noticeably past 50 MPH, leaving the standard CX-90 feeling stronger in real-world passing and highway situations. Further, the powertrain feels strained when asking for it. The off-the-line getaway is decent from the instant torque of the electric motor, but it fades fast. What it does right The same beautiful exterior shape is present and so is the lavish interior. Filled with lots of leather and love, it's a beauty among generic and cheapened competitors. Oh, and the handling is absolutely fantastic and begs to be driven like a sports car on backroads. Every CX-90 trait that impressed before remains intact: the gorgeous exterior styling, a richly trimmed and luxurious interior, and stellar steering and chassis dynamics. Handling is genuinely fantastic—more reminiscent of a well-sorted sports sedan than a family SUV—and it encourages spirited backroad driving in a way rivals cannot match. Quirks are still here Shared across all CX-90s (and CX-70s) are a few peculiar quirks: hollow-feeling exterior door handles, a touchscreen that’s just out of easy reach, and no proximity-sensing locks for the rear doors. You also can’t open the rear liftgate from the driver’s seat unless the car is both in Park and  after you click unlock on the door (pressing unlock on the key fob did nothing in this case). I discovered this the hard way picking up a friend from the airport—they kept asking me to open the liftgate, and I kept saying, “I’m trying!” while desperately holding the in-cabin button above my left knee. My solution at the time? Turning the car off entirely. Ridiculous. A terrific car underneath, with a less than terrific powerplant Few midsize SUVs can match the CX-90’s blend of luxury, handling, and craftsmanship. Yet the PHEV version falls short, offering too little efficiency gains and too much unpolished hybrid awkwardness to justify its added complexity let alone cost. If you have convenient, inexpensive charging at home or work, the PHEV might fit your lifestyle. But once you experience the inline-six CX-90, you’ll realize there’s simply no substitute. More photos of the 2025 Mazda CX-90 2025 Mazda CX-90 PHEV Premium Plus basic specifications As-tested price: $60,000 Powertrain & Vehicle Specs Engine: 2.5 L inline-4 + electric motor Combined output:~323 hp and 369 lb-ft of torque (with premium fuel) Transmission: 8-speed automatic. Drivetrain: All-wheel drive (i-ACTIV AWD). Battery: 17.8 kWh lithium-ion pack. Electric-only range: ~25 miles. Fuel-economy when operating as hybrid: 25 mpg combined in gasoline-only mode. Towing capacity: Up to ~3,500 lbs (when properly equipped). Vehicle dimensions / other key specs: Fuel tank capacity: ~18.5 gal. Cargo volume behind 3rd row: ~15 cu ft; 40 cu ft behind 2nd row, and maximum 75 cu ft with all seats folded Interior & Tech Features (Premium Plus trim) Seating layout: 7-passenger standard (with 2nd-row captain’s chairs) and optional 8-passenger. Upholstery: Nappa leather-trimmed seats. Front seats: Heated and ventilated. 2nd-row seats also heated. Steering wheel: Heated. Infotainment: 12.3-inch center display; wireless Apple CarPlay and Android Auto; Bluetooth connectivity. Audio: Premium sound system (e.g., Bose with 12 speakers available). Connectivity: Wireless phone charging pad; full Mazda Connect system with voice commands and vehicle-status features. Climate control: Three-zone automatic climate control. Driver assistance & safety: Standard advanced driver-assist suite including front & rear Smart Brake Support, Blind-Spot Monitoring, Rear Cross-Traffic Alert, Lane-Keep Assist, Traffic-Sign Recognition. Convenience features: Hands-free rear power liftgate, power-folding side mirrors, windshield-wiper de-icer, second-row window shades. Charging/EV tech: Supports Level 1 & Level 2 charging; portable 120 V cable included. Thank you for reading The Road Beat's 2025 Mazda CX-90 PHEV review. For more candid road tests, please subscribe below.