MotorTrend: Americas Best Drivers Cars

[ree]

The past two years, we've engulfed and entertained you with Motor Trend's "Best-Handling Car," an exhaustive multipage feature replete with in-depth analyses and qualitative data on the year's most imposing crop of high-performance machines. We've spent hundreds of hours driving an array of curve-carvers along challenging public roads and, with a little help from pro racers Max Angelelli and Randy Pobst, around the infamous 2.3 miles of Mazda Raceway Laguna Seca. We've not only recorded such standard MT stats as lateral g and figure eight, but also utilized a bevy of contraptions, sensors, and measuring devices to calculate such dynamics as step steer, swerve stability, and ride quality -- all in our best efforts to quantify optimal handling. In order to narrow down the field to the Best-Handling Car, we examined, filtered, and hotly debated over all the objective and subjective bytes. While no magazine had ever attempted testing this detailed, we knew there was room for improvement.

Enter 2009's test. For this go-around we addressed a shortcoming that now seems obvious to us. In our efforts to ascertain the best-handling car, we overlooked some vital data: our expert subjectivity. Sure, we'll continue to keenly heed every observation made by Pobst, who graciously joins our team again, but this year we're going to listen to ourselves more, considering such nuances as a car's ability to induce driver confidence and its prowess at enveloping our judges in ergonomic delight. We even deemed it important to examine not only steering feel but also steering-wheel feel: That's right, how well does the shape of the helm satisfy the fingers? These and other criteria are all scrutinized in the following pages.

Best-handling car? That's history. From here on out, this yearly epic of rubber-scorching, driver-centric nirvana will be known as Motor Trend's Best Driver's Car. Per editor-in-chief MacKenzie, "Motor Trend is not looking for the quickest car over the quarter mile, the car that pulls the highest lateral g through a turn, or even the fastest lap time around a racetrack. The Best Driver's Car award process looks at expert qualitative feedback as well as quantitative data. The winner will be a car that delivers a balance of useable performance, accessible handling, and driver-friendly design; a vehicle with a multidimensional personality that will delight and reward the enthusiast driver on any road at any time, regardless of weather and traffic conditions."

We've brought back our Best Handling champ from last year as the benchmark and lined it up alongside nine new-for-'09 thrill rides. May the best driver's car win...


2009 Motor Trend Best Driver's Car - Best driver's car competition - Motor Trend

 

[ateekt]

Yet another interesting read! Either, R8 or Zr-1 for me please!

 

[Merc1]

Delicious group of cars....I'll have the Jaguar, Audi, Ford and Porsche please.


M

 

[ree]

I would go with the Jaguar, Porsche and Corvette.

 

[Giannis]

Yet another interesting read! Either, R8 or Zr-1 for me please!

Why can't people not spell the Jag's name properly? It's XFR, not XJR...

 

[ateekt]

^^^ Hummm, this made you panic! Sue them up for this & we'll share the wealth!

 

[CarGuy]

Wow, nothing over there comes close the overwhelming power of the Vette!

 

[cawimmer430]

Fun to drive is a such a subjective category in my opinion. A Mazda MX-5 is a fun car, but is it "fun" after you change cars and hop into a Boxster or Audi R8?

I think that category such really be left out of most reviews. "Fun to drive" really just depends on the person reviewing the car - and they have their biases too.

 

[bum-man]

^Agreed.

The MX-5 needs a more ballsy engine to truely hang with the rest of them.

 

[Guibo]

Not too surprised by the Miata's showing. The original was a giant-killer in British driver's car tests.

Fun-to-drive is a subjective category, but it's not just one guy giving his assessment. The Motor Trend team rates these cars, and a general consensus is reached. Often times, it's those subjective qualities that can really separate a true driver's car from one that is fast in the numbers, efficient, but ultimately flawed in many areas. This is a good effort by Motor Trend to quantify what they think is a good driver's car, but if it comes down to purely objective measurements like steering wheel angle required to produce a certain # of g's, then it gets a bit pointless. From their ratings, I see missing 2-3 important areas that have a great impact on separating a great driver's car from an appliance: steering feel and brake feel, and mid-corner adjustability. They have a test for ride comfort, but don't tell you how these cars react to mid-corner bumps. And it does seem excessively track-focused.

It's also puzzling to me that BMW, knowing their car would be subjected to a test that places emphasis on handling and sporty driving characteristics, would supply to Motor Trend a 135i, knowing how Motor Trend have criticized it for its leaning and understeer in the past. A Z4 or 128i with factory performance options would be a more balanced, controlled, and engaging drive, I think.

 

[Mr Robert]

"The fun to drive" category should have been the only category needed in determining the best drivers car

BMW should of course have supplied an M3...

 

[Guibo]

BMW should of course have supplied an M3...

They had an M3 w/DKG last year, which placed 2nd. So to have it go up against the R8 again would likely produce a predictable outcome.

 

[Mr Robert]

They had an M3 w/DKG last year, which placed 2nd. So to have it go up against the R8 again would likely produce a predictable outcome.

Ok, then I think you are right. A 128i with the Performance kit would have been perfect. The Z4 would not have fared any better than the 135i...

 

[Guibo]

The Z4 would not have fared any better than the 135i...

I can think of 3 areas where the Z4 should be better than the 135i:

Roll - the 135i, even with its standard sport suspension, is too soft. Higher CoG probably hurts here too. Z4 rolls too, but it's probably less than the 135i and being seated lower, it would feel like less too.

Balance - unlike the 135i, the Z4 is actually rear-biased in weight distribution (by BMW specs), like you'll find on the better-handling front-engined cars. 135i also has staggered tires, so it resists oversteer. Standard Z4 tires are same-sized all around.

Powerband characteristics - they complained that the turbocharged 35i engine is fat in the midrange, but ultimately weak and unsatisfying at the top. Base Z4 and 128i would fare better in this regard, with their freer-spinning engines.

 

[ateekt]

Imo, Rx-8 would have been better pick, instead of the Mx-5! However, Mx-5 does somethings better!

 

[Mr Robert]

I can think of 3 areas where the Z4 should be better than the 135i:

Roll - the 135i, even with its standard sport suspension, is too soft. Higher CoG probably hurts here too. Z4 rolls too, but it's probably less than the 135i and being seated lower, it would feel like less too.

Balance - unlike the 135i, the Z4 is actually rear-biased in weight distribution (by BMW specs), like you'll find on the better-handling front-engined cars. 135i also has staggered tires, so it resists oversteer. Standard Z4 tires are same-sized all around.

Powerband characteristics - they complained that the turbocharged 35i engine is fat in the midrange, but ultimately weak and unsatisfying at the top. Base Z4 and 128i would fare better in this regard, with their freer-spinning engines.

Thanks, great post there.

But the Z4 is set up as a softer car than the 135i. Maybe I should add, that is as far as I have experienced it.

 

[PanterroR]

YT Video:

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies