Trafikjournalen (Test: 1955 TORSHALLA POESY KOMBI)

[Knugcab]

REPRINT FROM #26 2013
REVIEW OF HANSEUNG SATURN

ANONYMOUS BUT GOOD

Downsizing? Not at Hanseung. The Saturn has a large V6 and weighs almost 1.9 tonnes.

Maybe the glory days of the large luxury sedan are over. A rising popularity of SUVs, along with the tendency to downsize engines, are partly to blame there. But there is some of them left. The Saturn from korean Hanseung for example.

DRIVING CHARACTERISTICS
Front wheel drive have never been seen as an advantage in this class, it also features a relatively conventional strut suspension up front instead of the more advanced types found on some competitors. At least Hanseung have managed to keep torque steer and wheelspin at rather tolerable levels. The car is absolutely not a bad handler at 0.96 Gs, and as usual for front wheel drive cars, it is predictable understeer, secure but not very exciting. Should it still go very wrong, it has electronic stability control - would be a shame nowadays if that wasn’t included.

Driving this almost 5 metre long and 2 metre wide car in city traffic is of course far from optimal. At least the electric PAS setup works well, and offers more road feel than they did some years ago.

Brakes have short stopping distance with 37.3 metres from 100, and the fading is almost nonexistant.

VERDICT: ****

PERFORMANCE
As with many other modern cars, the speed is limited at 250 km/h - more than enough, though. 0-100 is done in a not too shabby time of 7.7 seconds and the quartermile is done in 15.66 seconds. 80-120 takes 4.92 seconds. Far from the fastest car in its class, but still performance that should be more than adequate for most of us.

VERDICT: ****

COMFORT
The engine whispers on low RPMs at highway speeds and is quite muffled by itself, also, there is pretty good insulation from other noises too. Seating comfort is absolutely good enough - not excellent, some other cars in the class are better. Long wheelbase and a suspension set up for comfort means that the ride quality is good. Though, a car in this class needs to be comfortable. The Hanseung is - but not the best. Some competitors are even better, but maybe not with such a far margin.

VERDICT: ****

ROOMINESS AND PRACTICALITY

A sedan is maybe not the first thing you think of as “practical” and sure, as a such it has its limitations. But the luggage space is large at 620 litres, and the interior has impressive amounts of room. Here, you have all the space in the world to stretch out your legs. Even the width is large. If you find the Saturn cramped, you should maybe look at a tourist bus instead.

So, despite the usual drawbacks with a sedan, we give it a good score here.

VERDICT: ****

EQUIPMENT
It is not exactly loaded with gizmos, but you get the most important things, like climate control, leather upholstery (that feels a bit cheap, but still), electrically adjustable seats with memory, a high end infotainment system with bluetooth connectivity, a limited slip differential, alloy wheels and much more. There is more loaded vehicles in this class but the Saturn still offers most that you will expect. The equipment you need is there while they have saved on some bells and whistles.

VERDICT: ****

ENGINE AND DRIVETRAIN

By todays standards, 260 hp out of a 3.5 litre V6 may sound a bit conservative. But it runs smooth, reasonably quiet and has a good low end grunt. Still, it likes to rev and shouldn’t the limiter cut off at 7000 RPM, it would probably still have some more to give.

Behind it is a 7 speed auto, of the conventional type, but of course with modern electronic management, and it seems to work well together with the engine.

By no means a fantastic drivetrain, but harmonic and well suited to the car.

VERDICT: ****

QUALITY AND RELIABILITY

Some cars in this class feels like rolling bank vaults. Not the Hanseung. Sure, it feels decently bolted together, but that’s about it. There is a more “hollow”, “plastic” feeling than some of its competitors have. That does not necessarily mean bad reliability- predicted reliability for the Hanseung is about average, though, and not much more. But extensive use of aluminium means that it keeps the rust away quite well.

VERDICT: ***

ECONOMY
For what you get, the sticker price is not too bad ($47700). But sure, still lots of money and second hand value is questionable. 8.2 litres per 100 km is not bad for a huge V6 in a huge car, but when it comes to servicing it’s still kind of expensive at $1143.20 AMU. A fairly economical choice for its class, but that’s about it too.

VERDICT: **

Probably as safe as a nuclear shelter.

SAFETY
If there is one single modern day passive safety device you can think of - the Saturn has it. It even has active safety systems like AEB etc.

And inside the large amounts of metal you are well protected, and the fact that extensive amounts of AHS steel is used in the body structure of course makes it even better.

It gets a 5 star Euro-NCAP rating with flying colours, and we think that there would be hard to find a much safer car on the market today.

VERDICT: *****

FINAL VERDICT: 34/45

It is a bit hard to judge the Saturn. It is probably not best at anything in its class. Still, a very good allrounder with no major weak points. But anonymous design, front wheel drive, lack of that feeling of top notch build quality you can get in some other cars, lack of the latest comfort equipment, lack of anything that makes it stand out in this crowd…

We understand that the Saturn may not speak to the heart and soul of luxury sedan buyers, even if the brain says yes. That may be the reason for the somewhat slow sales figures that it has.

But the buyer that still opts for a Saturn will be rewarded in many ways, also with a car for a price that is sane for what it is.

---

Thanks to @BannedByAndroid for the car!

---

[Knugcab]

REPRINT FROM #26 2019
FIRST LOOK: WELLS I6

THE BULBASAUR OF CARS

We ask ourselves - where do Wells intend to find the buyers for the i6? Unfortunately, it seems to miss the mark in most segments.

The headline needs some explanation. Even if you haven’t played Bintendo’s success game Bokemon, you have probably heard of it. And when it first was introduced for the PlayGuy handheld console in the late 90s, one of the original Bokemons was called a Bulbasaur. And it was green, just like the Wells i6. Also the i6 is bulbous. And feels like a dinosaur.

Historically, Wells have been known for building cars that is robust but not always very exciting. Often primitive, and lacking in the handling and comfort department. But also more or less impossible to kill. A success in developing markets, not as much in western Europe.

With the i6, they are aiming more towards the top. The futuristic looks shows that they are at least trying to not look like every other car on the market. Some people may like the looks, other may hate it, and we can’t decide for you there. Let’s just say that the i6 won’t get lost on the parking lot.

Propelling the car forward is a turbocharged inline six that feels dead more or less over 3000 RPM. The power output gives a hint of that. 220 hp was what competitors managed to get out of N/A 3 litre engines 20 years ago. It also shows when it comes to performance. In this class, a top speed of 242 km/h and an 8.23 second time 0-100 is not competitive anymore, yet it has a horrible fuel thirst of 16.8 litres per 100 km and we really wonder what is happening to all the expensive drops. Also, it feels dated to only get a 5 gear automatic in this class nowadays.

However, it drives better than some Wells models have done in the past, a bit tail happy but still relatively easy to control, and there is both a limited slip diff and electronic stability control. Brakes have a good bite, it is fairly comfortable, has good safety rating and you get lots of buttons to play with for a cost of $50 000 AMU.

Still, we wonder, if someone is in the market for a luxurious 4 seater sports sedan, why would he opt for a horribly thirsty, dated and not very fast one?

With an updated driveline, the i6 could maybe be competitive. Maybe.

Depending on what it would cost, of course.

---

Thanks to @DuceTheTruth100 for the car!

---

[DuceTheTruth100]

Thanks for the review I really appreciate that!! I will redevelop the engine in the coming days with the new info I have about building them. I will try to revamp the engine while still keeping it at 50K.

[Knugcab]

OOC:
Well, I am by no means some kind of engineering expert so I am not trying to put your skills down, all I can say is that I clearly see that you are improving both when it comes to engineering and exterior design, so you certainly should be proud of yourself anyway. And maybe tuning for Automation vs. Beam as you mentioned earlier is one key here. As I have said, I can not run beam anymore, unfortunately, because of weak graphics card etc. which is a bit sad (but now it is like it is, so…if that is disturbing to anyone, I haven’t banned anyone from starting a fundraiser )

From the experiences I have had from Beam in the past, though, it seems like it does not always behave like the automation stats says, for example, it seems like FWD cars will often have crazy amounts of understeer there even if they should work well according to the Automation graphs. That’s a bit disturbing in one way (but on the other hand, it was said that it should be impossible to even drive automationcars at all until just some years ago, so one should not complain).

So, if anyone is upset that they don’t recognize my descriptions from how their car behaves in Beam, well, I can’t do any better now unfortunately.

[Knugcab]

REPRINT FROM #1 1979
REVIEW OF SCHNELL L4

NICE ATTEMPT, MEDIOCRE EXECUTION

The L4 is interesting as it is the first front wheel drive car from Schnell. But is it any good? Let’s find out!

Schnell have found its place in the automobile universe, as a bit of an oddball brand but with a steady consumer base. Now, Schnell is also one of the manufacturers that have went for the front wheel drive layout. The new L4 is their first front wheel drive car ever, which of course makes it an interesting candidate for a test.

DRIVING CHARACTERISTICS
As usual for a front wheel drive car, the handling is secure and predictable but also gives a fair amount of understeering. Torque steer and wheelspin are more or less eliminated, and at 0.85 G the skidpad rating is absolutely acceptable.

The size means that it is no city car, but it has standard power steering, which is good.

A 42.3 metre stopping distance from 100 is a good result, and we noticed some fading only with heavy cargo. They pull straight and has no tendency to lock up the rear wheels.

Maybe it does not have the sporty characteristics that was found in the now almost classic 1700 model, but it is a good drivers car nonetheless.

VERDICT: ***

PERFORMANCE
A car this size, 88 hp and a 3 speed automatic - doesn’t sound impressive, right? Well, fact is that the L4 is lighter than one may think, which somewhat saves the situation. A 13 second time 0-100 is acceptable, 10.7 seconds 80-120 maybe a little bit on the slow side. 166 km/h is not a top speed to brag about today - but adequate on our speed limited roads. It manages to do the quartermile in 19.26 seconds.

VERDICT: ***

COMFORT
Automatic transmission and power steering, sure. Other than that, the Schnell is not overly impressive. The ride is a bit on the harsh side, the seating comfort is nothing to write home about even if it’s adequate. Engine is well muffled but runs at quite high revs at highway speeds. In this class, there is competitors offering better comfort than the L4 by margins.

VERDICT: ***

ROOMINESS & PRACTICALITY
Our two door test example of course has a drawback in its lack of rear doors. But when you finally have gotten yourself in place, you can sit well in the backseat as well as up front. Also, it has a very large luggage compartment and the load capacity is good for a passenger car. So, except for the two door body, we could not find any major drawbacks actually.

VERDICT: ***

EQUIPMENT
The L4 is neither a bare bones affair or a luxury cruiser. The standard power steering is, as we said before, very welcome, and among other features there is a decent AM/FM stereo with tape player, carpeting on the floor, cloth upholstery, (manually) remotely controlled mirrors, tinted glass, a rear centre armrest, electric clock, and other things we have grown accustomed to lately. There is nothing important missing, but forget the gizmos.

VERDICT: ***

ENGINE AND DRIVETRAIN
88 hp out of an 1.7 litre engine ain’t too shabby, but the unit in itself is not really exciting. A cast iron lump with a single overhead camshaft and a single 2 barrel carb, it does its job and not much more.

The 3 speed auto works well but eats some power and does not really add to an amusing driving experience.

All in all it’s hard to complain too much, but is the driveline worthy of the “Sport” moniker on our test example? Absolutely not.

VERDICT: **

QUALITY & RELIABILITY
The L4 body is far from well protected against rust. If you’re in the market for one, make sure to give it an undercoating and treatment as soon as you get it. Other than that, we could not find anything that felt remarkably cheap or flimsy, but on the other hand nothing that impressed us either. Our experiences says that predicted reliability will be mediocre. Buying one is maybe not a gamble but there is more reliable cars out there.

VERDICT: **

Nice and blue, but how fast will it turn brown instead? The truth is not really amusing here.

ECONOMY
At $12800 AMU the L4 is not expensive to buy. At $643.5 it is not expensive to service. But 18.8 litres per 100 km means that it is not cheap to fill up. For some reason the engine can run on fuel with such a low octane rating as 87. Totally pointless here and many people would probably like if Schnell should for example raise the compression a bit to improve fuel economy. Unfortunately the fuel thirst will probably affect seond hand values too. Not acceptable.

VERDICT: *

SAFETY
The L4 is a modern design that passes all american and european tests with flying colours. You are relatively safe, surrounded by large crumple zones inside a strengthened passenger cell. Though we are not sure about the strength from the sides, it is lacking door beams as well as some other of the equipment you find in the very best cars, like rear headrests. Still, it beats many of the other cars on the market that probably barely passes legislations. The low weight might be a disadvantage in a crash aagainst a larger car, though.

VERDICT: ***

FINAL VERDICT: 23/45
The Schnell L4 is not a bad car, and for the money it costs, it gives great value. But we would maybe have expected even a bit more. It really does not excel at anything and all in all it feels a bit bland. The weird engine tune hampering fuel economy only confuses us too, and is a major drawback.

To put it like this, we don’t expect this to be the sales success that will move Schnell to the top of the sales charts. The competition is too strong for that and nothing puts the L4 at an advantage.

---

Thanks to @interior for the car!

---

[Knugcab]

REPRINT FROM #11 2020
FIRST LOOK: AT 722R

NOT A MAGIC NUMBER

The AT 722R surely has potential to be nailed to some teenager’s bedroom wall. Unfortunately, it does not really shine in some of the more important areas.

Is the AT 722R a 9600 bps modem from the 90s, or is it a space ship? Well, it’s closer to the later. Behind the rather anonymous letters and numbers there is a wicked 685 hp sports car, with bad ass looks and lots of interesting technology.

The powerplant is a rather small V10, only 3.3 litres. Of course it is turbocharged, and the turbo gives a horse kick that nobody thought could have survived the 80s. Everything this engine has to offer comes in the range between 5 and 6000 RPM, it seems like, before that it is rather dead. It’s mated to a 6 speed DCT, and an electric diff as well as ESP and AWD is there to make sure that the power gets down to the ground.

And sure, it is fast. 0-100 in 2.9 seconds, 10.39 seconds on the quartermile, 353 km/h top speed. Most of all it is very expensive at $137 000 AMU. And with that kind of performance, for that price, we really start to wonder how AT have been thinking about some things.

The power steering, for example, is of the electric, non-variable type, hardly anything sporty about that. What’s even worse is the brakes. Sure, they have good bite. Once. But since they seem to be more suited for a sporty family sedan from the 90s than for a supercar (290 mm rotors with 2 piston calipers up front, 300 mm with 1 piston calipers in the rear), they fade a lot. On a car capable to reach over 350 km/h, that’s alarming.

In this class there simply is no room for mistakes as big as the ones we find on the AT, so unfortunately, we think that not only the name itself will stay anonymous, there is a big risk that the car will do so too if they don’t sort out some of the flaws.

---

Thanks to @T0M for the car!

---

[T0M]

thanks for the review, I’ll keep improving the car further more. but, I have a few questions, what is AMU? if it’s in USD, my car wouldn’t be too expensive , it got the same acceleration as the laferrari, and a similar top speed. I would say it not that expensive in that class

[Knugcab]

Sure, I can give you that the car is maybe not expensive for what it is (but no car in this class is cheap), and that it is fast. However, in this class, for this money, you could really have given it bigger brakes and a variable ratio steering IMO. It’s not really worth cheapening out on such things.

And it is absolutely a looker, kudos to you for the design!

[interior]

AMU is basically the Automation Universe equivalent of the US Dollar.

[T0M]

so it’s the same as USD in value?

[interior]

Yeah

[T0M]

i see, thanks

[Knugcab]

From what I remember, it is not really comparable to USD?
I have some memories of hearing that it’s loosely based on 2013 AUD, though still a currency on its own that’s only good for comparing cars inside the game, but I can be very wrong there too.

[SketchyKeeps]

I’ve been treating AUM as 2012 USD for benchmarking my cars against irl models, but of course IRL MSRP have Mark up.

Anyway, Knug are you still open for submissions?

[Knugcab]

I am.

[Knugcab]

REPRINT FROM #24 2000
REVIEW OF HIROCHI EXATIMA

BETTER LUCK THIS TIME?

The old Exatima impressed us in 1993, but when doing an in depth look, it was far from flawless. Now, after 8 years, we take a look at its successor.

The previous generation Hirochi Exatima was kind of a diamond in the rough. When it came out in 1993, it was a very pleasant car to drive to a very competitive price. The tradeoffs were, among others, disappointing crash test results and a build quality on the early examples that left much to be desired. When all those bugs finally were sorted out, the Exatima was actually a very good car - to a price much higher than it originally was. The buyers were a bit reluctant. Hirochi probably learned a lesson or two, at least we hope so, but to find out we have taken a closer look on the new Exatima, a car you probably haven’t missed. By now we have probably all seen the campaign where Hirochi is celebrating its 75th birthday by giving away 75 new Exatimas. But is it a car worth buying if you’re not lucky enough to get one for free?

DRIVING CHARACTERISTICS
A bit disappointing is that Hirochi now have abandoned their earlier double wishbone setup up front, and gone for McPherson struts. That generally means a bit more bland driving dynamics. A 0.89 G skidpad rating is by no means bad - but the previous generation felt more sharp here, and more well balanced. Also, the brakes are weaker than in the previous generation. 40.6 metres to a complete stop from 100 is still a good result, but the fading problems from the previous generations are still there. ABS is of course standard equipment.

Relatively compact dimensions and an easy to handle electric power steering means that the Exatima feels well suited to city driving. It is not as easy to drive as the most tiny cars on the market, of course, but still by all means pleasant in conditions like that.

VERDICT: ***

PERFORMANCE
107 hp and a 4 speed automatic may not sound impressive, and the car weighs in at almost 1300 kg, but fact is that its performance is adequate. 0-100 takes 12.3 seconds, top speed is 208 km/h, 80-120 takes 8.76 seconds and the quartermile is done in 18.91 seconds. Hardly a rocket, but you will keep pace with traffic without any major troubles.

VERDICT: **

COMFORT
Comfort is fair. Suspension has a rather soft tuning, the engine is well muffled and sound insulation is adequate, but it is a bit rev happy at highway speeds. Seating comfort is nothing remarkable, they are doing their job, but power steering and automatic transmission of course contributes to a quite relaxed driving experience.

VERDICT: ***

Small, stubby boot means that the space for luggage ain’t overly large. Of course, the upcoming station wagon version may solve that.

ROOMINESS & PRACTICALITY
While the luggage space is a bit small at 380 litres, but like the previous Exatima, the passenger compartment is roomy. Maybe the sedan body hampers some flexibility, but we still think that the Exatima is a decent performer here.

VERDICT: ***

EQUIPMENT
There is nothing special about the standard equipment here. It has most of the things you will take for granted today, but nothing more than that. The sound system has a quite tinny sound but at least features a CD player. ABS and power steering could more or less be considered standard in this class today, and is of course included here, too.

VERDICT: **

ENGINE AND DRIVETRAIN
The 1.5 litre inline 4 is maybe not impressive when it comes to pure numbers. However, it features all the latest technology like double overhead camshafts, VVT and VVL. It runs smooth, quiet and is very flexible with an usable powerband. A shame, though, that it could not be mated to anything else than an old fashioned 4 speed automatic, with no electronic management whatsoever. Also, the gearing makes it annoyingly revvy at highway speeds.

VERDICT: ****

QUALITY AND RELIABILITY
Gone is the questionable build quality of the past - the current Exatima appears to be about as well built as most of its competitors. It should not cause any major problems. What is amazing, though, is how well protected it is against rust. Probably among the best cars on the market regardless of class.

VERDICT: ****

ECONOMY
Even if the Exatima by no means is the price fighter it was once upon a time, $21500 is a sane purchase price. $640.95 for servicing is not too bloody and 7.7 litres per 100 km is an acceptable fuel economy figure. Ownership of an Exatima is probably not going to break the bank.

VERDICT: ****

SAFETY
Hirochi probably didn’t want to flop in crash testing this time too. This time, they seem to be almost sure about a 4 star Euro-NCAP rating. We almost dare to say that things like 4 airbags, headrests and 3 point belts all around, well engineered crumple zones etc. makes this one of the safest vehicles in its class.

VERDICT: ****

FINAL VERDICT: 29/45
The previous generation Exatima was generally a good car when it was released in 1993, but not without some major flaws. The flaws got sorted out as the years passed by, but at the same time competitors raised the bar and Hirochi couldn’t keep the pricing down.

Now 8 years later, competition have catched up, the new Exatima is not much of an improvement and it has a risk of being just one compact sedan among others. Absolutely not a bad car, just a bit anonymous, and if it will live for 8 years like the previous Exatima, we wonder how fresh it will feel by then?

Still, the Exatima is a good allrounder, and a bit cheaper than the outgoing model, so - why not?

---

Thanks to @nicholasrams774 for the car!

---

[Knugcab]

REPRINT FROM #16 1976
USED CAR REVIEW: THREE SPORTS CARS

THE CHEAP SPORTS CAR: A DISASTER OR PURE JOY?

Three good representatives of what a wallet-friendly used sports car could look like: A 1965 Mayster triumf (yellow), a 1969 Keystone Q2600 GP (dark green) and a 1970 RAUK PM3 (light green).

For most people, a sports car is of no use as a daily driver. Sure, if you don’t have a family, don’t care about practicality at all, and is willing to abuse yourself a bit to get that pure driving experience, it may be fine. Most of us won’t apply for that, though, and most of us aren’t made of money either. That means that a sports car is something that is out of reach, because it is simply too much money for something that is just a toy for adults. That is, of course, if you buy a new one.

But what if you are willing to sacrifice some of the new car smell and get one as a second car that might fit your budget? Is that actually a sane thing to do, or will it end up as a disaster? After searching through some used car lots, we found three good examples of what an used sports car could look like. A six year old RAUK PM3, a seven year old Keystone Q2600 GP, and the veteran of the gang, an eleven year old Mayster Triumf. How do they stand up when looking at them today?

Mayster Triumf: Sporty but sane

Thanks to minimalistic and timeless design, the Mayster still looks modern despite its old roots.

Despite its 11 years, our Mayster looked great on the outside. The reason is simple - its fibreglass body means that it simply can’t rust. Of course, nothing lasts forever, not even fibreglass, but repairs can be done quite easily, should for example a crack occur. It is also resistant for minor dings, since the material more or less springs back.

The fibreglass body covers a chassis that is of a space frame design, which is also quite resistant. Another interesting thing is that even the rear axle carries a double wishbone suspension. Other than that, it is more or less tried and true technology chassis wise. And results for the annual safety inspection shows results that are about average - except for better than average results on rust and steering related components.

The engine is a flat four, 1.6 litres and 87 hp. It is important that the twin carburetors are properly synchronized for the engine to run like it should, it should also be noted that since it features overhead camshafts, there should be no rattling noises from the valvetrain - that can be an expensive thing to fix.

Overall reliability is about average - the car is old and anything can happen, but on the other hand it is generally a simple car to work on. Our test example still felt fresh and could sort of be a testimony to a not too shabby build quality. It is not a very risky bussiness to buy an used Mayster Triumf, as long as you buy the right car.

For its time, the Triumf had impressive driving dynamics, being able to corner 1.03 G. It is a bit tail happy at slow speeds but can be driven very hard before something serious happen, and then it will be warning you in time by understeering. Brakes (discs up front, drums in the rear) stops the car in a short 35.6 metre distance from 100 km/h but are somewhat (not seriously) fading sensitive.

Top speed is 172 km/h, 0-100 is done in 10.6 seconds and it does 18.07 second times on the quartermile. On our test track, it managed a time of 2:42.07.

Comfort is not amazing but adequate for a sports car. It is not too cramped, seats 2 adults and 2 kids, 467 litres of luggage. Fuel economy is not too shabby either, 14 litres per 100 km, servicing and purchase price not the cheapest for an old car, but still not alarming for a competent sports car either.

If it is as nice as our example - not even an 11 year old Mayster Triumf is something you should be afraid of buying.

Keystone Q2600GP: Rusty but fast

Not everyone accepted the futuristic looks of the Keystone when it was released, but today they make the car look newer than what it is.

Unfortunately, we could already find rust on our Keystone. That is not too uncommon either. There is a regular steel body, on a steel unibody chassis and no efforts were done at all to improve the rust protection. If you are looking at an example, check it through for rust. Twice.

Other than that, the Keystone might not be the worst buy possible. Except for chassis rust, the annual safety inspections says that the results are about average. The feeling of build quality is quite average too, and it probably won’t fall apart in your hands. The six cylinder engine is a bit above 2.5 litres in displacement (2600 being a stretch for marketing), and is quite an ordinary lump, probably won’t cause any major troubles but the 90 degree V6 layout makes for a rough running engine.

Unfortunately, it feels less like a sports car than the Mayster. Being front heavy, the front end is plowing when cornering hard. 0.83 G on the skidpad is a joke compared to the Mayster, even if it is by no means dangerous. The brakes could not be compared either. 47.7 metres to a stop from 100 km/h is only considered average nowadays, and there is some fading problems.

The Keystone does not feature some overly advanced technology that makes it hard to work on, but servicing is more expensive than for the Mayster. On the other hand, fuel economy is better at 12.6 litres per 100 km, but keep in mind that it requires premium. But you can get a Keystone that is a couple of years newer for the same price as a Mayster, that should not be forgotten.

Compared to the Mayster, the interior of the Keystone feels like a crypt, and even the luggage area is smaller at 258 litres. The interior is more well appointed than in the Mayster, but overall the comfort is not better in the Keystone. Also, the Keystone is a pure 2-seater.

Performance wise the Keystone is fast, though, so it is maybe more of a gran turismo than the Mayster. 213 km/h top speed, 0-100 in 9.43 seconds and a 17.1 second quartermile time. However, it does the test track a bit slower in 2:44.63.

Our warning is to watch out for rust, but other than that, the Keystone might be worth a look.

RAUK PM3: Sporty swede

The Swedish pride has a more classic look than the other two cars, but many people finds it handsome.

The RAUK with its fiberglass body, and being the newest car in the bunch, still looked fresh of course. The pressed steel unibody underneath was not showing any sign of rust, either. It should be said, though, that RAUK bodies are of lower quality than Maysters. Look for cracks and shoddy repairs.

RAUKs generally pass the safety inspection with flying colours. They are better than average regarding rust, brakes and suspension related problems. Watch out for cracked windshields, failing seatbelts and door locks, though. The feeling of build quality is a bit kit car like, but there are no more troubles with the RAUK than with the Mayster or Keystone.

The RAUK has absolutely no comfort at all, though, saving weight has been their only priority. There is no comfort equipment, not even a radio, and the passenger compartment is even more cramped than in the Keystone. At 366 litres it offers more space for luggage, too.

The B20 engine is known from the Volvo Amazon and 140-series. That might sound like a safe bet but keep in mind that the tuning from 82 to 125 hp done by RAUK has not made the reliability of the 2 litre inline 4 any favours. It’s loud, runs rough and is nothing like the humble Volvo in your driveway.

Also sourced from the Volvo Amazon is the suspension. A bit more primitive than in the Mayster, which limits the cornering ability to “only” 0.99 G, and the tuning has made it a bit unpredictable. It feels like if it’s gradually turning towards understeer but the tail can snap out at quite high speeds - the RAUK is best suited for the hands of an experienced driver. Especially considering that there is absolutely none of the passive safety of modern cars to be seen anywhere inside it. But the brakes are good. Only needing to stop a much lighter vehicle than the Amazon, there is no fading and the car stops in 37.8 metres from 100.

Accelerating to 100 in 9.66 seconds and with a top speed of 219 km/h, the PM3 is decently fast. Quartermile is done in 17.34 seconds. And around the test track, it is quite obvious that the RAUK is the real sports car of the trio, 2:34.58 is 10 seconds faster than the Keystone.

The RAUK can be had for about the same money used as the Keystone. Servicing is a bit cheaper, but don’t buy the “RAUKs are made of Volvo and Olsson parts so you can get them everywhere” talk. So much special tuning is done that in most cases you can’t buy Volvo or Olsson parts and expect the same performance. The fuel economy is the worst of the bunch, though. 16.9 litres per 100 km.

So here they are. Three affordable used sports cars that you can buy without risking any major disaster. Which one you choose is really up to you, since they are completely different personalities.

---

Thanks to @AndiD for the Mayster and @VicVictory and @HighOctaneLove for the Keystone!

---

Player, choose your weapon!

• Mayster Triumf
• Keystone Q2600GP
• RAUK PM3

[Knugcab]

REPRINT FROM #16 1990
REVIEW OF HINODE TEMPEST GT

This is probably how most motorists will find themselves. Being passed by the Tempest GT.

“A wolf in sheep’s clothing”. We bet that most people are tired of hearing that cliché. But when it comes to the Hinode Tempest GT Turbo, that’s sporting an updated engine for this year, it’s at least close to the truth. Because absolutely nobody can accuse it for having an avantgardistic styling. But what’s worst, the bite or the bark?

DRIVING CHARACTERISTICS
For an unexperienced driver, the Tempest may feel a little bit scary to start with. It is easy for the wheels to spin loose and it is prone to wag its tail when accelerating from low speeds. However, the skidpad rating is pretty high at 1.01 G. When pushed hard it will gradually turn more and more against understeer, warning its driver in time.

What’s impressive, though, is the brakes. Stopping in 36.1 metres from 100 and with absolutely no fading, they are among the very best on the market. ABS is standard too.

When it comes to city driving, it is a bit less clumsy than the largest behemoths on the market. The power steering is of the variable type, giving it good feedback from the road and yet being easy to maneuvre in tight spots.

VERDICT: ****

PERFORMANCE
274 hp from its 2.5 litre inline six makes the Tempest a fast car. 0-100 is done in a fast 5.82 seconds, 80-120 in a blazing 3.31 seconds and it manages 13.98 second times on the quartermile. A 240 km/h top speed may not beat any records but with our speed limits, it is enough to lose your drivers license by great margins. The Tempest’s performance should really be more than enough for everyone.

VERDICT: *****

COMFORT
Of course, a sporty car like the GT Turbo has a quite stiff chassis setting. But the adaptive damping does help a little bit. Also the seating comfort is great, sitting inside well bolstered, supportive bucket seats. The engine is very quiet for being an high performance engine, and there is a fair amount of sound insulation. Steering is light, the clutch maybe not as much, as the high performance engine it is.

VERDICT: ***

ROOMINESS & PRACTICALITY
Being a 4 door sedan, it has an advantage over a sports coupé, which maybe would be the alternative for many buyers. The amount of room is not impressive, though, but fair, and even if it may not be comfortable for longer trips, the rear seat CAN fit three adults, it is not as contoured as in many other sporty cars.

At 460 litres, the luggage space is fair, if not excellent, but of course the sedan body means that there is not a lot of flexibility.

VERDICT: ***

EQUIPMENT
All you need and some extra gizmos over that is standard in the Tempest GT Turbo. Thick carpeting on the floor, nice velour upholstery, a leather wrapped steering wheel, electric mirrors and windows, a simple air conditioning system, a tape player with premium sound, ABS, alloy wheels, variable ratio power steering, limited slip differential and adaptive damping are just some examples. Sure, you miss out on the very latest and most advanced gizmos, but that’s more or less to expect in this class a drop below the most exclusive luxury cars. To most people the amount of equipment in the GT Turbo will be more than enough.

VERDICT: ****

ENGINE AND DRIVETRAIN
The inline six puts out 274 hp at 6600 RPM and 331 Nm at 4000 RPM. It is also very quiet and of course smooth, as the inline six it is. But there is still some turbo lag evident even if it is a lot tamer then some of the turbocharged engines in the 70s and 80s were. Overall, a very pleasant engine, almost a bit too civilized in a performance car.

Of course, being a sports model, the GT Turbo features a 5 speed manual. It works well but is nothing special above average when it comes to the feeling. With a quite close ratio it felt kind of sporty though and overall gearing seemed to be sane.

The standard limited slip differential is absolutely necessary, wheelspin is evident even with that one in place.

VERDICT: ****

QUALITY AND RELIABILITY
We predict the reliability to be about average. A buyer probably knows that it is kind of a risk to buy a car with lots of advanced technology. But the Tempest gives a feeling of being well built, and there was no squeaks or rattles present from the nicely finished interior. A galvanized structure and many body panels made of aluminium also makes it hard for the rust to get any grip of this car.

VERDICT: ****

ECONOMY
Honestly speaking, for what you get, $30100 AMU is not a bloody amount of money, and it will probably keep its value well. 9.7 litres per 100 km is also a good figure for a performance car like this. But the servicing is expensive at $1013.50 AMU. Maybe it should be said that a car like this rarely is a wise buy when it comes to economy anyway, but the Tempest GT Turbo is at least good for what it is.

VERDICT: **

SAFETY
The Tempest does not have all of the latest safety equipment, it lacks things like rear centre headrest, airbags and pretensioning seatbelts. But being a modern and well engineered body with decently large crumple zones, it should still be a relatively safe car, considering that it is larger than many other cars on the road too.

VERDICT: ****

FINAL VERDICT: 33/45

One of our favourites on the market at the moment. Strong words, but the Tempest deserves them.

No car can do everything, but for what it is supposed to be, a sporty family sedan, the Hinode Tempest GT Turbo is about as good as a compromise will get. The only major drawback we found was the expensive servicing, but there will never be any free lunches in this world. We are willing to go so far now, that we want to call the Tempest GT Turbo one of our favourite cars at the moment, and one of the best purchases you can make in its class.

---

Thanks to @S_U_C_C_U_L_E_N_T for the car!

---

[Knugcab]

REPRINT FROM #14 1987
REVIEW OF HAYAKU SEIKO

THE BLUE/WHITE CAR FROM KONSUM *

Both are basic, cheap transportation and both are the same colour. And while the bicycle isn’t without its good sides, the Hayaku has weather protection and a radio.

No, we’re not 100% serious here. You can’t buy a generic car in a generic blue and white box branded “CAR” for a low price at Konsum. At least not yet. But if you want to come close, the Hayaku Seiko may be the car for you. You don’t need to look twice to come to the conclusion that this is a car you buy for rational reasons and not out of passion. The question is however, is it rational enough to justify a buy?

DRIVING CHARACTERISTICS
They could be described pretty accurate with one word. Bland. The front wheel drive car understeers heavy already at slow speeds. Pushing it hard is out of the question. It manages no more than 0.76 G on the skidpad. It should be noted that it by no means equals a dangerous car - at least the Hayaku is warning its driver early and it is highly unlikely that most drivers will be pushing this to the limits since it is by no means inspiring.

For its class, the brakes are fair. By no means excellent, but fair. The stopping distance from 100 is 45.9 metres and they are somewhat sensitive to fading when loaded. There was no signs of premature rear lockup either.

In city driving, one could maybe complain a little bit about the lack of power steering, but the car weighs under a tonne, so it’s really not something that bothers a lot. Relatively compact dimensions are of course a good thing.

VERDICT: **

PERFORMANCE
The car is geared for economy rather than performance. That means that it eventually can reach a top speed of 178 km/h, but it takes forever to get there. 15.9 seconds to 100 is kind of sluggish by the standards of today, a 12.6 second time 80-120 also means that passing other cars requires some planning. The quartermile is done in 20.41 seconds. But with only 62 hp propelling the car forward, better should not be expected.

VERDICT: *

COMFORT
The suspension has a relatively stiff setup, making for a harsh ride. It doesn’t get better by the simple, kind of back-wrecking seats that does not offer much support. The sound insulation is sparse so the wind- and road noise will get annoying in the long run, but on the other hand, the engine runs pretty quiet and isn’t overly revvy. For shorter trips as a city runabout you can appreciate the Hayaku for what it is, but it is clearly not the car one would take on a long drive if there was another choice.

VERDICT: **

Big boot can swallow decent amounts of luggage

ROOMINESS & PRACTICALITY
Four doors is of course a good thing since many economy cars only have two - but maybe a hatchback would have offered better flexibility than a sedan body. On the other hand, the luggage space is decent at 458 litres, and the passenger space is not overly cramped either, considering the size of the car. At 551 kg, the cargo capacity is high for its class.

VERDICT: ***

EQUIPMENT
The only thing that you get, more or less, is a not too shabby tape player, that saves the car from scoring nothing at all in this area. Other than that there is absolutely nothing. Manual adjustment of the mirrors, vinyl upholstery, rubber floor mats and not even equipment we often take for granted today like a clock, interval wipers or reclining seatbacks. Flashy equipment like alloy wheels or technical advancements like anti lock brakes or power steering? Forget them. But on the other hand, this is an economy car so it is hardly surprising.

VERDICT: *

ENGINE AND DRIVETRAIN
The 62 hp, 1.4 litre inline four may be a bit gutless but it has a quite wide powerband at least. Fuel injection means less struggle with cold starting in a class where some cars still features a manual choke, and for what it is, it runs reasonably smooth and quiet. Technology is otherwise on par with most competitors, an all iron lump with a single overhead camshaft and 2 valves per cylinder. It has a catalytic converter, but of the old 2-way type so it is doubtful if it will cope with the more stringent regulations that is coming in a year, it is also less efficient, but of course, cheaper.

The gearbox is a 4 speed manual, but since the 4th gear is an overdrive, highway cruising is still pleasant, but it also means that there is a wide, almost truck-like spacing between the ratios. Not the most fun gearbox in the world - but it gets the job done.

VERDICT: **

QUALITY AND RELIABILITY
The Hayaku is all tried and true, simple technology. Things that does not exist will not break, and by now all the bugs should be sorted out. It will probably be as durable as a cockroach. Despite its low price, there was no signs of shoddy build quality anywhere. But we question the lack of rust protection a bit. Expect the car to be crusty around the edges in a few years if not being taken care of.

VERDICT: ***

ECONOMY
The purchase price is low at $12500 AMU, considering that it is a notch or two above the superminis in size. A low second hand value does not matter when there is not much to lose from the start. Servicing is also cheap at $421.20 AMU. But for a 62 hp engine we would maybe have expected even better fuel economy. 8.8 litres per 100 km are not really amazing figures - even if still good.

VERDICT: ****

SAFETY
Hayaku has not been cutting corners safety wise, it has the equipment that could be expected from a modern car, nothing less but on the other hand also nothing more. It is also probably a safer place to be in, should an accident happen, than the very smallest cars on the market. It fulfills all the european and american regulations at the moment, even if it hardly could be called a tank.

VERDICT: ***

FINAL VERDICT: 21/45
Don’t get blinded by the relatively low rating - the Hayaku Seiko is an appliance. It does its work and there is actually no major drawbacks that makes it a bad purchase, as long as you know what you are buying. But it is hardly more than an average car in any aspect at all either - and a very simple mode of transportation that should be treated as such.

But in our eyes, the Hayaku Seiko fills an important niche, an economical car that slots in between the superminis, that are too small for many people, or the old fashioned offerings from for example eastern europe, that may be larger but instead are crude and primitive. And as such, it is also a good buy in our eyes.

---

Thanks to @Hilbert for the car!

• = “Blåvitt” (Blue-white) was a cheap, generic brand that was sold by the Swedish grocery store chain “Konsum” in the 80s and 90s, and the reference would have been spot on in a Swedish automotive magazine at the time.

[Knugcab]

REPRINT FROM #18 2015
CLASSIC CAR PAGES: HESSENBURG H100 T2

CAREER CHANGE: BUS DRIVER?

Some people will tell you that it’s not the right time to buy a H100 van anymore. That’s simply not true. Any time is the right time - it will not be cheaper the next time you look.

“A H100 T2? Sounds expensive, right?”

Yes, you are right. The chances of buying a cheap H100 T2 are gone since decades. But on the other hand, we wonder if every classic car has to be cheap? If you want to have a certain model that have gained in popularity, you probably have to accept that your wallet will be emptied too. Even if the hipsters would probably scream of joy, we won’t dedicate our classic car pages purely for obscure Mara models or faux woodgrain panelled IP Icarus station wagons spewing diesel smoke all over the highway. So, if you can’t accept our buyers guide of this popular and expensive model, browse some pages forward. We have an article there about how to do if you have gotten a faulty parking fine, and it will probably give a cheapskate like you some ideas how you should lie the next time you get a non-faulty one.

People are in love with the H100, and it’s no wonder why. In the 60s they were everywhere. From simple workhorses to the luxurious sunroof version pictured here. Everyone running a bussiness, small or large, seemed to have one. They were the obvious choice for anyone with a large family. And the Swedish army had lots of them well in use into the 90s, so most older and middle aged men have probably experiences from them, from when doing their service there.

But today it is different, like most workhorses, they have generally been abused to death. That have raised the value of the examples that’s left, since there is a cult surrounding this boxy van. But what are they like to live with, and what should you watch out for?

To start with, the comfort is actually decent for a 60s van, at least in the more luxurious variants. The coil sprung rear end is a notch above the leaf springs used by most vans, and in some of them you even got power steering. It should probably not come as a surprise that it is one of the more practical classics you could buy, either, and if you are running some kind of bussiness, think about the possibilities as a rolling billboard.

Boxy but hip. One of the most recognized shapes in the vintage car world.

Of course, it won’t be carving any corners but are more suited for relaxed cruising. The front-heavy front wheel drive layout means that it mostly wants to plow forward on its skinny crossplies. Neither does the engine want to go fast. Having fun is about other things than pure driving experience in a H100 (and if you want to use your wild imagination there, it is by no means our fault since this is a family friendly magazine). On the other hand, it is secure and stable on the road compared to many of its competitors, due to the front wheel drive layout.

Generally they are reliable, but of course, in 50 and more years, anything can have happened. The flat 4 is great in its simplicity, but servicing was not a fun task, crammed in under the front seats along with the transaxle as it was. Other than that, it is mainly tried and true technology. And most parts are still available from Hessenburg, since it’s not even 10 years ago when production finally ended in Brazil.

Rust? As in the case with any old car, yes. But the BOF layout means that the rust at least is “honest” most of the times. If the van is rusty, you will notice it.

Maybe the trap you should watch out for falling into is mainly owner related more than anything else. The H100 has been customized to suit the owners needs since new, with various results. Sometimes decent, sometimes a disaster, but we recommend you to look for one that is as stock as possible.

And the chances to find bargains when it comes to panel van or super bus versions are slim. The more regular passenger van versions are the ones that haven’t reached silly prices yet. So if you don’t want to pay an arm and a leg for one, that’s where you should look.

Who would have expected this in 1965?

---

Thanks to @BannedByAndroid for the car!

---