CSR 154 - Round 2 (Brackets 1, 2 of 5)
September 26, 1979 - Afternoon
Next on Tony’s agenda was a dental visit. He had a bunch of health and appearance concerns after having worked a lengthy fight with a stiff jobber about 3 weeks prior, and was eager to get through as many as he could in his generous week of downtime.
In the waiting room, he just so happened to find an almost-fresh issue of The Open Road, a big-name auto magazine. With two elderly people who had appointment times prior to his, Tony decided to see if the issue had any valuable information.
There's no one strict definition for a family car. In better times, the average customer in the segment would have gone for a big conventional-frame sedan with a stout V8 and enough space for the whole family on the front seat alone; in recent years, however, skyrocketing fuel prices sent such barges packing in favor of little oriental boxes which were just barely spacious enough to fit that same family in the entire car, including the trunk. Now, with a new decade just around the corner, car manufacturers are scrambling to find a middle ground, with more efficient engine technology and experiments with aerodynamics allowing for larger, more comfortable cars to be thrifty as well. We have assembled this particular crop of family sedans to figure out whether anybody's found the sweet spot.
The SVM Savant (@abg7) is firmly in the ‘innovation’ camp: this premium midsize sedan features an advanced port-injection V6 mounted transversely, power rack steering, a three-speed automatic transmission and a comfortable premium interior with a cassette player option that our test car included. The fuel economy is a respectable 21 miles per gallon, and the Savant drives mighty well, too, tracking straight and settling into a predictable plowing mode when grip limits are exceeded. The car mostly succeeds in making a case for itself - however, it falls apart at the price tag. As the most expensive car in this comparo at AM$16,500, it should present itself as the model of robustness and quality in this crop - when instead, it’s looking almost fragile compared to the rest. The interior fittings are more squeaky than they should be, the engine isn’t as steady at full throttle as befits a port-injected system, and the suspension was tuned far too harshly for a car with no touring-sport aspirations. The faux-vinyl top is also a questionable decision for a car which otherwise presents itself as forward-thinking, doubly so because the soft covering extends all the way to the A-pillars and mirror mounts.
(Another car that did not use quality points to its great detriment. 70 reliability would have been a good value in the pre-techpool sandbox days, but it’s subpar in this competition; as is 36 comfort for a car with premium everything, power steering, and automatic and IRS.)
Opposite the Savant, the GAZ-21 Volga Mara Hussar (@AndiD) carries the torch of tradition and thrift. It’s the cheapest car of those tested here, at a knockout bargain price of AM$9920. It’s also the larges, with a 110-inch wheelbase reminiscent of US compacts from 5 to 10 years ago. Mara, the “people’s company” from Archana, has been known to offer 80% of a class-leading car at 60% of the price - and on paper, that sounds like the case here, as well. The old-school four-cylinder makes 100 horsepower and, breathing as it currently does through a variable-venturi carburetor, delivers good economy at 20 mpg. However, the Hussar fell off its horse once tested out for real. The thin tires and manual steering box make the car handle like a bottom-of-the-barrel 1974 Chevy Nova. The 3-speed automatic coupled to an engine obviously engineered for a closer-ratio manual transmission makes the acceleration and passing abilities significantly crummier than a Nova - coupled with a short rear differential that’s still not short enough to move the car quickly, but also too short for the car to sound nice and refined. And comparing the exterior of the Hussar to any Nova is like comparing a school play to Star Wars. That’s not to say, however, that the Hussar is a bad buy for the price it commands - it’s a bargain, to be sure - but if you have any expectations for your car other than perpetual tedium, then you will surely wish for it to die long before it actually does.
(The Hussar is actually a mighty impressive feat of cost-cutting and putting quality and techpool where they need to be - that sub-10k price is savage as hell, and it’s also the most reliable car in this bracket - but it gets otherwise clobbered in most other regards. Standard fare for AndiD, to be fair.)
Rear-drive cars aren’t confined to the “dirt-cheap decrepit” club, however: the Takeda Dignitary (@ChemaTheMexican), only in its second year of production, is purely in the camp of strength through technology. The engine is a twin-cam, multipoint-injected straight-six engineered for compactness, allowing the oriental midsize car to match the power of something like the Hussar with less displacement and a class-act 26.2 mpg. The car isn’t fast by any means, even with the four-ratio automatic helping it along, but it has exquisite handling that far outpaces that of the Savant - and despite the Dignitary being similarly harshly-sprung, the ride and overall comfort are better in the Japanese vehicle. It even has a better cassette player - despite being cheaper. We have just two serious complaints: the short gearing on the differential leading to a loud cruise, and the slightly too-grabby rear brakes that make panic stops less safe than they ought to be. Overall, however, the Takeda is pretty much the objectively better choice in comparison to the Savant - and oh, we forgot to mention, it looks like a spaceship. Head and shoulders above anything in this comparison.
(Good if not infallible engineering, coherent and cool design and a good price point are all strengths of this car. The powertrain is the biggest drawback, with a top gear speed of 124 mph (thus insufficient overdrive) making the car less economical and/or less powerful than it perhaps ought to be. Quality is underutilized, leading to a reliability score that is not catastrophic, but not impressive either.)
The Mitsushita Karna (@conan) is another SVM-killer. This front-driver is powered by a 2-liter four-pot with an aluminum 12-valve head - in other words, it packages the same amount of engine and breathing into a still lighter and more compact package than the straight-six in the Takeda; comes with a supplemental restraint system for amazing safety for the class; and has a fancier autobox with a lock-up clutch for better highway economy. A compelling package, to be sure - though, as with the similarly-priced SVM and slightly cheaper Takeda, the Karna is not bulletproof by any means. You do still have to deal with rear drums, steel wheels (an odd choice for a premium automobile!) and - in what we consider its most serious drawback relative to the Takeda - a very unremarkable exterior styling.
(An entry clearly made to win on engineering rather than styling - understandable, since the engineering is very good. Of the non-bin entries reviewed up until this point, this has the best quality usage.)
Speaking of unremarkable: it stings less if you paid less for it. That’s true for the Mara to an extent, and also for the Salon Companion (@Mad_Cat) - the second-cheapest car in the comparo at AM$13,300. In contrast to the Mara, the Salon is the smallest and lightest car in the mix, and honestly is more of a compact than anything else size-wise. It’s also the only one here without an automatic option - perhaps for the better, as is 2.0 OHV straight-4 is the least powerful and least advanced motor in here. That being said, it performs admirably, actually outgunning all but the last car in this comparo - the IAS Griffin - in acceleration. That said, the Companion’s humdrum cloth interior doesn’t impress even despite the new-looking cassette player, and just generally it’s a much rattier car than the more expensive bunch - resembling the Hussar in that respect.
(Another value proposition - and one on the “cheap because small, has stuff” side rather than “cheap because no stuff, but big” side. Skirts comfort for other stats with decent payoff, while being only okay in the looks department. Overall a good effort - but the cost-cutting outweighs the cost-saving here, as well.)
The final car, the IAS Griffin (@shibusu), stands out with its meteorite performance relative to the rest - 150 horsepower from an 18-valve 4-liter V6. 4-barrel-carbureted and high-compression, it almost evokes an old-school V8 image; except, of course, for the fact that it’s a six-banger. Even with the highest-overdrive automatic, it’s got both the best acceleration and worst economy in the group - though thanks to the Hussar, the difference isn’t large. It’s not beautiful, but it does project a mean and prestigious presence; it’s got great interior space; it’s among the safer vehicles in the group; and it’s ever so slightly more prestigious and cool than the rest.
(The wildcard of this group. The prestige gain proves that in my framework, not having performance/sportiness as a priority doesn’t mean you should go with the slowest reasonable powertrain. Quality is used decently; however, the highest svc of the bunch and a mediocre fuel econ compared to the other cars here both play a role in dragging it down.)
So, which one should you get? Well, it really depends on your wallet. If you only have AM$10k or 14k, then the cars available at those prices will serve you reliably enough - but you do get what you pay for. If your budget is closer to AM$20,000, then the two Japanese cars - the Takeda and Mitsushita - are a cut above due to good economy, comfort and more than acceptable reliability and serviceability.
One of the geezers ahead of Tony went to get his grill drilled, so Tony - who largely agreed with the review’s conclusion - picked up the other issues and sifted through them for relevant reviews. He didn’t find any that were quite right, but the June issue did have a big-car comparison.
After a short period of seeming resurgence, the recent unrest in Iran has put the full-size car class into jeopardy once again as fuel prices rise. With the future of gas and its guzzlers uncertain, we put four competitive large cars at the crossover point between mid- and full-size cars to the test to figure out if any of them are still worth it.
The Anhultz Dione (@Elizipeazie) is a perpetual player in the segment - it’s a solid steel brick which never stops or breaks, even in its current guise with the variable-venturi carburetor on the V6. That addition also makes the Dione reasonably thrifty at 21.3 mpg. That said, the 8-track player isn’t of the highest grade, even if it’ll last a good while; more importantly, the car is unwieldy, slow and not the easiest to control. Despite having four camshafts, the 130hp V6 runs out of steam at high speeds and makes passing difficult. And, quite frankly, it’s not exactly the classiest thing to show up in. We still expect it to sell relatively well in the next few years, though, as customers become ever more willing to put up with wheezemobiles. The new safety restraint system only adds to its appeal.
(A solid build. I like the unorthodox V6 layout and fuel system that’s still made to work well. Just one problem: You forgot to style it.)
What they might not be able to put up, though, is the god-damn Cadillac Seville Wraith Neapolitan (@Knugcab). The only genuine full-size in this test, the Neapolitan is almost as slow as the Anhultz - but it’s a whole lot more wasteful, as well, with an unapologetic 14.4 mpg fuel consumption. Why? Well, the all-aluminum 4.1-liter mill with a horribly leaned-out fuel mixture is trying to front-pull a 3700-lbs hunk with a shape so un-aerodynamic that it makes the Dione look like a rubber wedge. And because the powerplant is all-aluminum and made in America, it’s already been reported to have problems - even though it’s been out for mere months. Though the Wraith’s base AM$18,000 price - a bargain in terms of luxury cars - was enough to put the Neapolitan on our radar, it’s also likely responsible for the public perception that while this plushy, luxurious boat is comfortable, it is not an example of real quality, prosperity and prestige.
(This entry is one that, in my mind, bears the label of “fixable” - and I’m afraid it’s not a compliment. Without changing any part of this car’s identity or fundamental “hardpoints”, I was able to get it to a point where it would have been close to competitive. The only reason it isn’t is because there were serious gaffes in the tuning - such as leaning the engine down to zero while having a relatively high cam profile. The low reliability, courtesy both of the alu block and the general overstretching of the budget through parts and size, could also have been avoided without terribly much trouble.)
In a certain way, the Calcote Superior (@Tsundere-kun) is very Dione-ish. It’s just about bulletproof, it’s rear-drive and not too comfy, and their promotional color leaves a lot to be desired. However, it’s significantly lighter, pokier and more efficient. The drawbacks? Looks, including the just-about-unacceptable unstyled steelies, and the fact that the povo-spec we tested - still more expensive than the Dione - had a manual steering box. While the large steering wheel in the car makes steering manageable, the premium image that the car is going for doesn’t live past the first parking lot. It’s something you’d expect out of a Mara.
(Very strong on stats, doesn’t look too good visually, has a couple of weird but not necessarily improbable design choices. Overall, a 2800lbs car with manual ball steering would be drivable - but unlike what Automation says, there’s no shot it’d drive better than the same car with power steering.)
And then there’s the striking Bradford Syntax-Quad (@yurimacs). This novel sedan has a center differential that enables four-wheel drive, claiming to be an offroad-capable car - though from our testing, we’d say this system’s best use is helping traction on slippery roads. The big British sedan is surprisingly reliable for its origin, and is in fact on par with a Dione when it comes to comfort and reliability; the big, 24-valve 3.5 straight-six with port injection also makes the Bradford the most powerful and quickest car in this test. However, as a trade-off, you do end up with the same AM$18,000 that Wraith asks for the Neapolitan, and that price doesn’t even include crushed velour. What’s more, look a bit further under the surface and you’ll find that the Bradford is an old ladder-chassis pattern - and, unlike that same Wraith, lacks the supplemental reinforcement and safety systems necessary to make it safer.
(It’s a looker and also a reasonably good performer, but the total wipeout of the budget makes its admittedly impressive stats less game-changing than they would have been otherwise. The safety stat would have looked a lot better if you put at least adv 70s safety into it instead of making the car tera-heavy.)
So there’s your run-down of the full-size roster: two reasonably priced, solid cars which could stand to be modernized, and a pair of powerhouses - one in comfort, the other in technology - whose full potential cannot be unleashed at their existing price point. The Neapolitan and Syntax-Quad both need extra research and price leeway to fix their various kinks and deficiencies, whereas the Dione and Superior are both undercontented for their price points, even if they are rock-solid reliable. One almost has to wonder if the age of the affordable big car is coming to an end after all those years at the top.
Tony pretty much decides right away that fiddling with the two aforementioned ‘powerhouses’ is none of his business - but the two simpler cars intrigue him, the Calcote in particular. If a car is reliable and overall comfortable, maybe being ‘undercontented’ isn’t too bad. He jots down the name of the car next to the two Japanese ones from the previous review before finally heading into the dentist’s room. Inhale, exhale.
From Brackets 1 and 2, the following advance to the finals:
)
