Author: EVAI

Hyundai’s latest show car fits between the Ioniq 5 and the Inster, setting its sights on the Volkswagen ID.3.

Chris Baguley wanted to go out again. He didn’t insist on it, per se, but the rain had tapered off a while ago and the tarmac at the Millbrook Proving Ground was finally drying off. I was impressed enough with the Polestar 5 in the wet, but now the car’s chief engineer wanted me to experience it in the dry. 

Who was I to say no? When a top engineer, who’s also a superb wheelman in his own right, wants to show you what his 884-horsepower electric grand tourer could do on a proper track, you shut up and get in the passenger’s seat.

We had another go, and once again, I got tunnel vision from the acceleration the Polestar 5 could put down. And when Baguely completed our lap, he flashed a big grin, as if to say: “Not bad, right?”

He didn’t have to say anything. Lots of EVs are fast, especially in a straight line. But the point Baguely was trying to make came loud and clear: few fast EVs handle quite like the Polestar 5 does. And this thing has what it takes to challenge—I’m not saying beat, but challenge—the almighty Porsche Taycan. And even the likes of the Lucid Air, while it’s at it. 

If it comes to the United States, it’ll make for a fascinating match-up. But that remains a fairly ambiguous if.

(Full Disclosure: Polestar flew me to the United Kingdom last month for a preview drive of the Polestar 5. The brand covered my travel expenses.)

Polestar 5: What Is It?

The Polestar 5 makes its world premiere today at IAA Munich, Europe’s largest auto show. It’s being hailed as a big deal for the sometimes-troubled but aspirational electric luxury brand, which was spun out of Volvo and has deep ties to the rest of China’s Geely Group.

To understand why, it helps to go back to the beginning. 

The Polestar 1 was a limited-run plug-in hybrid luxury coupe that packed a lot of power but looked like a two-door Volvo S90, because under the skin, it basically was one. Then came the Polestar 2, a much-beloved electric sport sedan and early Tesla Model 3-fighter, but based on the Geely Group CMA platform that underpinned the Volvo XC40 and other cars.

Next was the Polestar 3, which offers excellent performance and style, but is again a twin to another Volvo. And finally, there’s the Polestar 4: Korean-made but also on another shared Geely Group platform used by various Zeekr and Lynk & Co. models, albeit with its own spin on things.

You get the idea. Polestar may be a newer brand, but under the skin, its cars have borrowed heavily from the rest of the family.

The Polestar 5 is where that starts to change. It’s built on an entirely new architecture exclusive to Polestar, including an all-aluminum platform and body, an 800-volt electrical architecture, an internally developed rear motor and plenty of other touches to make it something truly unique. 

“The most Polestar Polestar yet,” is how it was described to me. And that sort of thing is going to be key to making Polestar finally stand out from Volvo and the rest. 

Polestar 5: Design And Tech

And it does stand out. It’s a low, sleek sedan, angular in the right ways and perhaps echoing designs like the original Audi A7—hardly a bad thing to my eyes. You may remember the Polestar Precept Concept; this is that, taken to production with almost everything except the rear-hinged doors, which present crash-test challenges.

On the inside, it’s roomier than a Taycan, which admittedly isn’t hard to do because that car can feel more like an electric 911 than Porsche will admit. But the amount of rear headroom inside surprised me. My 5 foot, 11-inch frame never felt cramped in it, which can happen in some EV sedans like the Mercedes-Benz EQs, and I’m not even really that tall. 

How much you’ll like the interior depends on how much you like Polestar’s signature Scandinavian minimalism. (The same goes for the fact that, like most Polestar models, this one comes in Gray, Silver, The Other, Second Gray, White, Black, and who knows, down the line—Possibly Another Gray.)

Now, let’s get to the obvious: there’s no rear window. But the whole design and process is more artfully done than the Polestar 4 (and as much as I like the Polestar 4, this feels like the car it’s trying to be) and in my limited drive on the track, I can’t say I minded the camera-based rearview mirror much. It all works functionally just fine, though it’s still an acquired taste. 

In terms of software, you get Polestar’s standard Android Automotive operating system with Google built-in. While I didn’t get to play with it much on this drive, I’ve largely been impressed with that system’s speed, flexibility and voice recognition before, but more testing will be needed to render a final verdict.

Polestar 5: EV And Platform Specs

The Polestar 5 Performance—the top version and the one I tested—has a 112-kilowatt-hour battery (106 kWh usable) that powers dual motors and puts down the aforementioned 884 hp and 749 lb-ft of torque. You also get MagneRide adaptive dampers, bespoke Michelin performance tires and higher torsional rigidity from the platform than many gas-powered sports cars, Polestar says. 

But people don’t buy EVs for track days, or for performance alone. On the electric front, the Polestar 5 seems very competitive. Range for the base Dual Motor car is rated at 670 kilometers (416 miles) on Europe’s WLTP cycle, while the more powerful Performance version can go 565 km, or 351 miles. In EPA estimates for America, that equates to 330 miles for the base car, and 300 for the Performance. The max charging speed is a very healthy 350 kilowatts, and it can charge from 10% to 80% in 22 minutes. 

All in all, it’s an impressive package. And making something that wasn’t just another chip off the Geely block was the whole point. 

“There’s no group platform on which you can deliver this car,” Pete Allen, the head of Polestar UK’s R&D arm, told me. Nothing the Geely Group offered could make a car this low, or this stiff, or this light, so Polestar went out and made it alone. And the company won’t be watering it down later. “This is a no-compromise platform,” Allen said. “It’s only there to do sports, GT cars. There’s no plan to make an SUV off this platform.” 

Allen is British. So is Baguley, the lead dynamics engineer. So were a bunch of other folks who worked on the Polestar 5. The car drives like it was made by a bunch of people who’ve worked at places like Lotus and McLaren, because it was.

I suppose this makes sense. If you want AI in a car that opens your trunk when you ask it to, call up a Chinese automaker. If you want to make a car that is God’s gift to handling, call some Brits.

Polestar 5: Track Tested

For all those aluminum weight savings, the Polestar 5 still comes in at a beefy 5,518 pounds; a battery that size is heavy, and there’s no way around that. Beefier than a Taycan, for sure. But this platform affords an agility that belies its weight. Out on the Millbrook Proving Ground track—where prototype McLarens and Morgans can be seen alongside British military vehicles, hence why only Polestar was allowed to take photos—the Polestar 5 proved itself to be one of the best-handling EVs I’ve ever driven. Maybe even the best, although it’ll take more data to determine that for real.

The sedan’s steering is tight and direct. Porsche has it beaten on feel, but the 5 feels nimbler and smaller than it is. The ride quality still errs on the side of harsh, which could change if it comes to the U.S., but it’s tight and direct and handles a two-mile high-speed bank with as much confidence as it does a set of winding, off-camber blind curves. Baguley made better work of it than I could, but even a semi-skilled track driver like myself could get a lot out of it, and then some.

It’s not just a handler, either. It’s fast. Crushingly so. I did two hard launches on a straight and managed a zero to 60 mph run in 2.7 seconds, in the wet, which is considerably better than Polestar’s quoted 3.1-second time. And every launch kind of sucked the blood back in my eyes, warping my sense of reality a bit. Even by EV standards, it’s a beast. I managed to get it up to 155 mph on Millbrook’s back straight, tying it with a Cadillac CTS-V at Circuit of the Americas for the fastest I’ve driven any car on any road.

Above all, the Polestar 5’s notable for the analog vibe it has. There are surprisingly few hold-my-hand gizmos for a high-tech EV grand tourer. It doesn’t have active anti-roll-bars, or torque vectoring or an air suspension—all conscious choices, the engineers said, to make something that felt approachable and rewarding to driving enthusiasts. 

Polestar 5: Early Verdict

But as much as I liked this thing, even I’ll admit it’s a tricky sell. Polestar could use some wins lately, and what the Polestar 5 is—an expensive halo car—can’t make that happen alone. It’s targeting Porsche with a lot of the performance capability, but almost none of the brand cachet. 

The prices reflect its ambition. The base Dual Motor Polestar 5 will start at 119,900 Euro, or about $140,000, while the Polestar 5 Performance I tested is 142,900 Euro, or $167,000 at current exchange rates. That’s not what it would cost stateside—exchange rates, tax differences and tariffs mean you can’t simply convert one price to another—but it won’t be cheap.

Then there’s the fact that I’m left wondering if it can come here at all: It’s made in China, at a new sustainability-focused plant in Chongqing. Engineers said it’s borderline impossible to move the tooling for such a bespoke platform to another location, so if it’s to come to America, it would face an additional 100% tariff. 

“As with previous vehicles, we are taking a staggered approach to the launch,” a Polestar official told me. “The initial launch locations for Polestar 5 will include 24 of our 28 active markets and availability for customers in the U.S. will be announced at a later date.” 

I’ll take that as a maybe. But I hope it does. The Polestar 5 won’t be for everybody, but it’s as genuine an enthusiast car as EVs get—the kind of car where one gearhead sees it and nods to the other gearhead behind the wheel. If you know, you know. And if it previews more interesting adventures yet to come from Polestar, I’m here for it. 

Contact the author: patrick.george@insideevs.com

Click here to see all articles with lists of the best EVs

The Toyota Prius is the best hybrid on sale. It’s far more efficient than other hybrids, while offering plenty of room for four adults, ample cargo space and a responsive, refined driving experience. The real question, though, is whether you should get the plug-in hybrid version.

I spent a week with one to find out. And while I truly believe the Prius Plug-In Hybrid (PHEV) is one of the best plug-in hybrids ever, I still think the regular Prius is the right choice for most shoppers.

Read below to see why.

What Is It?

The Toyota Prius popularized hybrid vehicles in the United States, and has been a fixture of our roads since 2012. The Prius Plug-In launched in 2012 as the first plug-in version. While the Prius already offered industry-leading efficiency, the plug-in version allowed drivers to go for up to 11 miles on electric power alone. But with such limited electric-only driving range, it remained a rare option. It offered poor driving range and the same ugly design as other Prii at the time, but for more money.  

The original Prius PHEV was ugly, slow and boring to drive, with only 11 miles of range. The new one has solved all of those issues.

Photo by: Toyota

Yet Toyota never gave up. The second generation plug-in Prius became the Prius Prime, with the new name signaling Toyota’s renewed interest in the formula. But it wasn’t until this third attempt launched that people really took notice.

The new Prius offers a far more striking design and a much sharper driving experience than previous generations. Now, in PHEV guise, it gets 220 horsepower and up to 44 miles of electric driving range. Zero to 60 mph happens in 6.4 seconds (per Motortrend), and the Environmental Protection Agency says the Prius PHEV will do 52 miles per gallon combined when the battery is dead. 

For $34,445 for the base model, that’s a hell of a deal. 

What’s Good?

The value is hard to argue with. For $35,000, you get a modern, attractive car with seating for five, a generous cargo area and better fuel efficiency than nearly anything else on the market (the regular Prius is the only car that beats it). The Prius PHEV also comes standard with a ton of equipment, including all of the active safety tech you need. Luxuries like cooled seats, a JBL stereo, synthetic leather and a surround-view camera system are all available as extras.

In my real-world driving, I found the Prius to be whisper-quiet and engaging to drive. The steering is far improved over previous generations, and while I’d still prefer driving a Honda Civic Hybrid or Accord Hybrid on a twisty road, the Prius is among the most responsive and sporty mainstream hybrids ever built.

I also observed great efficiency during my test, though my sporadic level 1 charging stopped me from doing a full electric range test. Still, mid-50 mpgs and around 40 miles of EV range seems more than achievable. Since it’s a PHEV, too, you won’t have to do any special planning for road trips.

The bigger, 161-hp electric motor in the PHEV version is also great. It gives the Prius the instantaneous shove of a pure EV at low speeds. At highway pace, you’ll have to wait for the gas engine to spin up for any passing power, but I never struggled for speed. Between the seamlessness of the powertrain and the perfect blending of the brake pedal, any hybrid weirdness has been ironed out. The Prius PHEV feels like a normal, but fast, daily driver. 

It’s also plenty practical. The PHEV version sacrifices some cargo space—20.3 cubic feet of cargo with all seats in place, as compared to 23.8 cubes for the standard model—but with the hatch-back design and folding rear seats, this thing can easily swallow bikes, coolers, surf boards or other long and wide cargo. Just don’t get your hopes up about hauling tall objects: The pinched roof makes this a bit tighter than a crossover. 

What Isn’t?

There’s little wrong with the Prius. I happen to hate the clutter of buttons on the steering wheel, and in general I think the ergonomics are weird. Make sure you sit in one and play around with the controls before committing. Similarly, the awkward shape of the dash and the bizarre angles of the thing make it hard to find a driving position that offers the right mix of reachability, visibility and comfort.  

Speaking of visibility, the Prius follows Toyota’s infuriating trend of fitting driver-monitoring systems that are engaged even when you aren’t using driver-assistance features like lane-centering. If the steering wheel-mounted sensor can’t see your face—even while cruising around your neighborhood—it’s going to constantly tell you that the sensor is blocked.

I also found most of the driver-assistance tech in the Prius to be a step behind the industry leaders. The Prius also comes with Toyota’s “proactive driving assist,” which will use the car’s sensors to automatically adapt the car’s behavior to the driving situation. If you see a curve coming up or you’re bearing down on another car and let off the gas, for instance, the car will slow down more aggressively than if there’s no one ahead of you.

This is the personal opinion of Mack Hogan, who is not a lawyer: This feature should be illegal. 

Cramming 10 largely flat buttons onto the right half of the steering wheel is an ergonomic disaster.

Photo by: Mack Hogan/InsideEVs

In general, while what the car does when you lift off can be adjustable, it absolutely must be predictable. I can switch my car between one-pedal and normal driving modes, but it’s a choice I make knowing how the car will behave in all situations. With PDA enabled, however, when I let off the throttle, the car decides based on what I’m seeing. That means a bit of uncertainty at the best, and a safety concern at worst if the car behaves in a way you can’t predict. It’s doubly bad because, anecdotally, many consumers are not aware of the active safety features fitted to their cars. Because PDA is so esoteric, I could see an oblivious driver having it on for years and just not knowing why the car occasionally slows aggressively on lift-off.

Luckily this system—and most of them—can be disabled. So it’s absolutely not a dealbreaker, but something I think Toyota needs to work on.

Why I’d Still Buy The Regular Prius

The Prius may not have many flaws, but I still didn’t like it as much as I expected to. That’s for a simple reason: The last Prius I drove was a standard model. I expected the bigger battery and extra oomph to make everything better. But in reality, I think it spoils my favorite thing about the Prius: It’s seamless. 

The uphill battle of this gig is that I’m always speaking to buyers who frankly don’t want to hear it. The average American consumer probably couldn’t tell you what kind of engine is in their car—”a vee-four” doesn’t count. Almost nobody has a route-planning app on their phone, or wants to learn how to use one. Trying to coach them through living with an EV can be exhausting; most people just want to get in and drive to their destination without a second thought. They’ve never done it in an EV, and that scares them.

The Prius is the antidote. You buy one at the dealership, you use it like a regular car, your running costs are half what they used to be, and it lasts even longer. That’s the mission. The standard Prius fulfills it without further work from you.

The PHEV promises more, meanwhile, but also asks for more. It costs $5,000 more to start and, when the tax credit disappears at the end of the month, even lessees will be paying more. It gives up 3 cubic feet of cargo and hauls an extra 364 pounds around. It is not available with all-wheel drive, either, while the standard Prius is. It gets “just” 52 mpg combined, rather than 57 mpg on the regular one. 

Most importantly, the PHEV gives you more to manage. There are buttons that allow you to use up all of the electrons immediately, or to hold the charge for later. There’s a gas cap and a charging port. There’s another battery indicator to keep an eye on, another charger to carry, another gadget to plug in at the end of the day.

For what? More efficiency, of course. That is a noble goal. But the Prius is already getting nearly 60 mpg. It’s so good it’s silly. Commuting on electric power alone would be cheaper, but you’d have to do quite a complicated calculation to find out how quickly you’d make up the $5,000 difference. Remember to factor in that you’re getting worse MPG when the battery is dead.

You may come out ahead. But even if you do, you’ll run smack into the classic PHEV issue. If you have a cheap place to charge at home, and you’re willing to plug in every night, why wouldn’t you get an EV? You’d have to charge less often with the bigger battery, and you won’t have all of the compromises and maintenance that come with an internal-combustion vehicle. I just don’t think PHEVs are the right solution for most people. 

Conclusion

I know, I know, I can hear you shouting “road trips” at your screen. PHEV proponents argue they are the best of both worlds, giving you emissions-free commuting and planning-free road trips.

This idea is based on two misconceptions: One, that EVs cannot handle road trips, and two, that road trips are an integral part of all of our daily lives. Let’s tackle the second first: If you are seriously debating the merits of a PHEV vs an EV, ask yourself honestly how many times in the last 24 months you have driven over 500 miles. If you’re not doing it more than four or five times a year, you have nothing to worry about. An EV may cost you an hour of time once a year, but it will save you a hundred visits to the gas station in day-to-day life.

That puts the Prius PHEV in a weird place for me. I think it is the best PHEV you can buy, and it’s the only one I’d seriously consider. Yet fundamentally, it has the same problem: Those with home or work charging are better served by EVs, and those without charging at home or work should probably stick with a conventional hybrid.

PHEVs are for the awkward folks in the middle, those who have home or work charging, but who still road trip so frequently that they can’t make an EV work right now. To those people, I say go right ahead, snag yourself a Prius PHEV. It’ll be the best and probably last gas car you’ll ever buy.

Contact the author: Mack.Hogan@insideevs.com. 

Click here to see all articles with lists of the best EVs

Volkswagen’s next EV act has actual buttons, improved batteries and software, and doesn’t look like a spaceship.

• Reporting from the Chinese outlet Mingjing Pro suggests China may soon ban completely hidden exterior door handles.
• Globally, hidden handles have been criticized as being finicky and possibly unreliable, but also dangerous for first responders.
• If true, Chinese and Western vehicles would have to change designs to be in compliance with the regulation.

The tech-forward Tesla Model S slipped onto the scene in 2012 with dazzling flush-mounted door handles that popped out whenever the car was unlocked. Fast forward more than a decade, and self-retracting, electronic door handles are now ubiquitous—and kind of a calling card for electric vehicles. Perhaps manufacturers wanted to replicate Tesla’s success by emulating the coolest parts of its products. 

For automakers and techno-geek customers, they’re the pinnacle of tech—a quick way for manufacturers to make a kind of ordinary car feel futuristic, while also reducing drag and improving efficiency. For some drivers though, they’re just a pain. It’s not uncommon for people to complain about the reliability and usability of the handles themselves. Recently, they’ve come under heavy criticism by some regulatory boards in different countries, as some deeply question whether they’re necessary at all.

Now, China is considering banning the use of hidden, electric door handles, the Chinese media outlet Mingjing Pro reported this week, citing anonymous auto industry sources. Is that a good thing?

This comes after May’s news that the Chinese government had issued draft rules stating that cars must have a clearly marked mechanical release on the inside, and not just an electronic button. Currently, the ban is still an unconfirmed rumor, but an unnamed automotive company R&D employee told the outlet that Chinese regulators are preparing to ban fully concealed door handles entirely, and that automakers that sell in China need to get on board as soon as possible.

The rumored solution would eliminate fully hidden exterior door handles, but semi-retractable door handles and traditional ones would be fine, so long as they have a physical, mechanical redundant release.

There are plenty of critiques to be had about concealed door handles, and they’ve been cast in a negative light in China recently. Last April in China, an Aito M7 crossover rear-ended a large truck and caught on fire, putting Huawei and Aito into the global spotlight. Some blamed Huawei’s level 2 autonomous driving assistance features for not saving the car from crashing, while others were concerned at how quickly the M7 caught on fire in the crash itself. First responders reported that the M7’s door handles failed to open, making it more difficult to rescue the occupants inside. Unfortunately, three people died in the crash. 

Now, this ban, if true, could substantially change the way cars look. Both Chinese and Western brands would have to work quickly to meet regulations. Cars like the Ford Mustang Mach-E, with its exterior door release buttons, may need to have real door handles for the exterior. The Lexus RZ350e has door handle-shaped grab handles, but they’re actually electronic releases. It too might need to change to conform to this regulation.

I am curious to see how this could affect the Hyundai Ioniq 5 or Kia EV6. Although those handles (optionally, on the Kia) use electronics to keep them flush to the body when the car is locked, they’re actually a mechanical release that isn’t super different from any normal car door. It’s worth noting that it’s common for U.S.-market cars with electronic interior door releases to also have a mechanical backup. 

Should the U.S. be next? Maybe so; safety concerns aside, one of the biggest sticking points for electric cars is reliability. And it’s not necessarily the motor or powertrain that are causing problems, but rather features like super complicated infotainment systems or electronic door handles. Also, critiques of hidden door handles with obscure interior releases aren’t new. In 2019, Dr. Omar Awan died when his Tesla Model S crashed and caught fire. The door handles did not present, and first responders reported that they were unable to extract Awan before the car was engulfed in flames.

I’m all for futuristic car design, but I don’t think it should come at the expense of safety. Maybe getting rid of hidden, self-presenting electronic door handles is what’s best.

Contact the author: Kevin.Williams@insideevs.com

With a name like the Charger Daytona, you’d think that Dodge’s first-ever electric muscle car would be a champ at the charging station. That was not our experience. 

When we tested Dodge’s inaugural electric vehicle this spring, we fast-charged it twice at two different Electrify America stations in the Northeast. Both sessions went sideways in peculiar ways, and we never saw even close to the Charger Daytona’s claimed 20%-80% charge time of 24 minutes. 

That’s part of why, in his Charger Daytona review, InsideEVs Editor-in-Chief Patrick George called it a “great muscle car” and “a weird EV.” Let’s dig into exactly what happened. And to see the Charger in action, check out our charging test above. 

Our first test, at a 350-kilowatt station with plenty of power to meet the Charger Daytona’s 210-kW rating, started off fine. Video chief Mike Roselli arrived with a 15% state of charge. At 40%, the session was cruising along at around 150 kW. Suddenly, the charge rate plummeted to 2 kW, before rising back up to 150. At around 50% battery, the power output fell to a measly 73 kW, trending downward as it reached 80%. The whole session took 47 minutes. 

The final result was so far off of Dodge’s claimed charging time that we had to run the test back on a different day at a different location. 

Once again, the power rate started off strong, exceeding 200 kW at times, but whipsawed to 2 kW multiple times early on. This made for one of the strangest charging curves we’ve ever seen. The charging session cut out entirely at 36% (which may very well have been the charger’s fault). Once we resumed, the power rocketed up to a healthy 180 kW, but soon dropped to 40 kW, where it remained for the rest of the session.

This time, predictably, 20%-80% took well over an hour. 

When we asked Dodge about this, a spokesperson said the charger itself is usually to blame for the slow speeds, and that “the charge speed experience is not due to limitations on the vehicle side.”

He can’t speak to how widespread this issue is. However, according to YouTube videos, other Charger Daytona drivers have experienced similar issues across EVgo and Tesla Supercharger stations as well. Hopefully this can be solved with a software update. 

Do you own a Dodge Charger Daytona? What’s your experience been like overall, and with charging in particular? Let us know in the comments below or shoot me an email.

Contact the author: Tim.Levin@InsideEVs.com

Click here to see all articles with lists of the best EVs

Believed to preview an Audi counterpart to Porsche’s electric 718 Boxster and Cayman, this concept shows that Audi design is back, baby.

This phenomenon has kind of tapered off in recent months, but for a while there, I couldn’t go a single week without getting about a bunch of emails from Tesla owners seeking advice on how to dump their vehicles.

The issue wasn’t even with the cars themselves. Most Tesla owners I spoke to really love their electric vehicles. The problem, you see, was the man up top: CEO Elon Musk. His various antics had Tesla owners everywhere scrambling to move to something electric from a different, and less controversial, brand. And most of those people were driving a Tesla Model Y, which makes sense, since it is the best-selling EV of all time.  

The good news for those people was that their choices for Tesla alternatives are now better than ever. There’s the Ford Mustang Mach-E, the Hyundai Ioniq 5, the Kia EV6, and the value-packed Chevrolet Equinox EV, just to name a few of the top of my head. 

Much to their consternation, however, there are still ways the Model Y runs circles around everything else. Yes, even now. And that’s especially true with the Model Y’s Juniper update—the car you see tested here in this video. 

Since Tesla does not do press loaners like other automakers do, I rented this Model Y off Turo for a week. It’s a Long Range, Dual-Motor All-Wheel-Drive model, the one packing a 75-kilowatt-hour battery and good for an EPA-rated 329 miles of range. And thanks to a raft of improvements inside and out, the Model Y is now a significantly better car than it’s ever been—one with a nicer interior, better technology, more overall comfort, more range, more striking looks, and packing the best adaptive high beams I have ever tested in my career. All that and a bag of chips for around $45,000, before any incentives or tax breaks, as long as those last.

As you’ll see in the video above, the Model Y remains the total package EV. Maybe it’s not the fastest-charging EV these days. Nor is it the fastest, period. And there are many areas where rivals are beginning to outpace it, if they have not already. But can you find all of those things rolled into one car that’s as good as this one, at this price point? The answer is not really.

You can say what you want about the guy up top, or the Tesla brand in general, or how it’s settled into a kind of Apple-like groove and doesn’t really seem to be innovating in terms of the EVs themselves, the way that it used to. But none of that changes the fact that the Tesla Model Y is an outstanding buy, and still quite possibly the best EV for most people. 

Check out our video review up top and let us know what you think in the comments. 

Contact the author: patrick.george@insideevs.com

Click here to see all articles with lists of the best EVs

• InsideEVs Editor-in-Chief Patrick George drives the electric Porsche Macan 4.
• The electric Macan is not mechanically related to the gas-burning car and is quite a bit more expensive.
• It’s not perfect, but it’s a great overall package that shows Porsche has learned a lot from building the Taycan.

You see a lot of Porsche Macans around the world, driven by people with expensive sunglasses and designer handbags. It is the cheapest way to enter the Porsche universe, and it blends excellent road manners with style and practicality, making it a global favorite.

But now that the combustion engine Macan is being phased out and replaced by a considerably more expensive pure electric model, does it have what it takes to maintain its popularity? Both flavors of Macan are still on sale today, and so far this year, and it’s the electric model that has proven more popular, even despite going electric (and potentially alienating part of its buyer pool) and hiking the price.

Even though the electric Macan is proving successful, Porsche isn’t taking any chances and has confirmed that it’s working on a new midsize combustion crossover. It will arrive in 2028, and it won’t be called Macan. 

While the Macan EV is more expensive than the ICE model, it’s also a better, more grown-up vehicle. The two are not mechanically related and the electric model rides on the VW Group’s Premium Platform Electric (PPE), which also underpins a couple of Audis. Thanks to this platform, it has a big 100-kilowatt-hour battery pack and offers big luxury car features such as rear-wheel steering.

This isn’t the first time we’ve tried the Macan, but now InsideEVs Editor-in-Chief Patrick George has spent more time with the car and had mostly positive things to say about it. His tester was a Macan 4 with a dual-motor powertrain providing 402 horsepower and 479 lb-ft of torque. That’s enough to send the Macan EV to 60 mph in 4.9 seconds and up to a top speed of 137 mph.

The Macan 4 has an EPA range rating of 308 miles, but that goes down to around if you get the larger RS spider-design 22-inch wheels like the ones on Patrick’s tester. Interestingly, when Out of Spec Reviews drove a Macan Turbo at 70 mph, it actually exceeded its 288-mile EPA claim by 2 miles on 22-inch wheels. Tom Moloughney got 343 miles in the base rear-wheel-drive Macan on 20-inch aero wheels, surpassing its 315-mile EPA range prediction by almost 10%.

With a starting price of $81,600, the all-wheel-drive Macan 4 is definitely expensive. Patrick’s tester had some options, so it cost $94,855, which is a lot for a Macan, no matter what powers it. Patrick missed one-pedal driving, which the Macan doesn’t really offer, and it could also do with a bit more drama when you’re going fast in one. But overall it works really well, it’s practical, it’s well built and it’s just a cohesive package. It really shows Porsche has gained experience making EVs, and in many areas, it feels like an improvement over the Taycan.

Click here to see all articles with lists of the best EVs

Carmakers are now stuffing big batteries into their loudest and proudest performance flagships—the cars in their lineup that typically have the highest emissions—and it has created a crop of cars that are quite odd. They are absurdly quick in a straight line and can take you dozens of miles on electricity, but the heavy hybrids start to fall apart when you try to throw them into a corner like their non-electrified predecessors.

This became apparent after driving the new G99 BMW M5 Touring and then jumping into a Mercedes-AMG C63s E-Performance. One has a big V-8 complemented by a big battery that gives it dozens of miles of electric range, while the other has a small four-cylinder, with a smaller battery whose purpose is mainly to increase performance. Two very different approaches that at launch drew a lot of critcism from fans and keen drivers, but for different reasons.

The new BMW M5 feels even more gutsy than its claimed 717 horsepower output would suggest. It’s not surprising that one dyno test revealed that it was pushing almost 700 hp to the wheels, meaning the real output is probably closer to 800 hp. It pins you to your seat with its alarming pace, whether from a standing or a rolling start. There’s nothing quite like feeling the shove of a 4.4-liter twin-turbocharged V-8 engine with 737 pound-feet (1,000 Nm) of torque.

The M5’s powertrain is unequivocally brilliant. Part of that comes down to the fact that it’s also pretty great to drive without firing up the V-8. With 197 hp and 206 lb-ft (280 Nm) of torque, the electric motor, which lives inside the eight-speed automatic gearbox, is more than capable of moving the M5 on its own. Even in my hefty, 5,456-pound (2,475 kg) Touring Model, the M5 felt brisk in EV mode. 

I found myself enjoying driving the M5 most in EV mode, surprisingly. It pipes in a subtle, fun acceleration sound through the speakers. It also shifts up through the gears when the V-8 is off and you feel the shifts, although you can’t control them yourself in EV mode. The electric motor sends its power to all four wheels, meaning that even driving in EV mode in winter or low-grip conditions, you know you can rely on the all-wheel drive system’s reassuring extra traction. It’s a great around-town electric experience no matter the weather.

After driving the M5 Touring and putting a few hundred miles on it, I kind of wished I was driving the pure electric i5 Touring M60 instead, a thought I never expected. The new M5 is the first BMW M that I didn’t instantly covet after driving. Because it’s so heavy (heavier than the i5), BMW has had to tune the suspension to cope with the mass, and it results in a weirdly inconsistent ride quality. It can’t decide if it’s a Maybach or a pogo stick and you never know which of those extremes you’ll get.

Mid-corner bumps also unsettle the car, often alarmingly, and you feel the transfer of forces from one side to the other as you thread the car around a twisty road. All this mass makes the M5 feel like an athlete trying to run with ankle weights on. There’s an uncomfortable amount of inertia trying to pull the car straight into understeer when you drive it spiritedly.

Then I jumped into the still heavy but far more agile Mercedes-AMG C63 PHEV, and it really put the M5’s mass into perspective..

I know it’s one size class below the M5, so it’s not a direct and totally fair comparison, but I would honestly pick the C63. Yes, it only has four cylinders, which is half of what the BMW has, and a few dozen fewer horsepower. But it feels more special to drive. And while its engine may only be a 2.0-liter, it’s an actual AMG engine hand-assembled by someone who puts their name and signature on it.

The signed plaque is proudly displayed when you pop the hood, and you also get to see the big turbo and electric supercharger setup sitting to the side of the engine. This was a more impressive sight than what I saw when lifting the hood on the M5, whose clever hot-V twin-turbo setup is hidden by an underwhelming plastic engine cover.

The M139 engine is borrowed from the hottest versions of Mercedes-AMG’s compact offerings, like the CLA 45. It makes well over 400 horsepower on its own, and together with the electric motor, puts out 670 hp and 752 lb-ft (1,020 Nm) in the C63. That’s more torque than the BMW in a car that’s about 880 pounds (400 kg) lighter, and you can really feel it.

The force that acts on your body when you do a Race Start in the C63 is unlike anything I’ve ever felt in a combustion car. It definitely feels faster than the BMW, even though on paper, they are fairly evenly matched. Just like the BMW, the Mercedes feels quicker than the numbers suggest, but by an even greater margin. It’s shockingly quick off the line, thanks to all that torque and its all-wheel drive that does a fantastic job of putting the power to the ground.

There’s also an electric supercharger working to build boost quickly and minimize lag. The powertrain is really responsive, and the surge you feel from the combined torque of the electric motor and gas mill is really something. It doesn’t sound as bad as some have said, even if you disable the piped-in enhanced engine sound. You still hear the exhaust, which is characterful, and you get to hear the turbo build pressure and release it, which, for me, added to the fun.

It’s also much more enjoyable through the corners than the M5. It doesn’t feel like the C63s of old, which were always all too eager to turn their rear tires into shreds and smoke. The new model feels like a track car, focused on delivering the best possible corner exit with minimal drama.

Sure, the C-Class on which the C63 is based is smaller and lighter than the G61 5 Series Touring that serves as the basis for the M5. However, there isn’t an E63 that we can compare it to (yet), and the E53 plug-in hybrid that I have driven is not in the same performance league as the M5 and C63, even though its widebody treatment suggests it would be.

Mercedes could have ended up with a PHEV that was nearly as heavy as the Bimmer, but it intentionally designed a lighter system. Unlike the M5 and E53, which have a similar battery and motor configuration as lesser PHEV versions of each model, the C63 gets a smaller, bespoke setup. Its electric motor isn’t located in the gearbox but integrated into the rear axle, and its main purpose isn’t to drive the car around in EV mode (even though it can do that for around 5 miles). It’s there simply to boost performance, which it does in spades.

Mercedes’ real genius move with the C63 was giving it a smaller battery. While the M5 has a 22.1-kilowatt-hour battery, which is largely to blame for its heft, the C63’s battery only has a capacity of 6.1 kWh. That’s small by PHEV standards, but it does the job, and that job is mostly regulatory—it needs to do well in lab testing to please the European Union’s increasingly stringent emissions standards.

The heavier, more powerful of the two, the BMW, gets a WLTP efficiency rating of between 1.6 and 1.7 liters/100 km, or almost 150 mpg. However, that’s only if you keep the battery topped up, which many PHEV drivers don’t, which is why the M5’s EPA combined rating of 13 mpg (18 l/100 km) is much closer to what it actually returns in normal driving.

The C63 doesn’t get a comparable efficiency rating in Europe, with a claimed average of 6.9 l/100 km or 34 mpg. You will have to be extremely gentle with the throttle to come anywhere near that, but it is achievable, even with a drained battery. Driving it like I did the BMW to enjoy the car rather than save fuel, it ended up returning around 15 mpg, which is still excellent given the ludicrous acceleration that it can provide. The EPA rates the C63 at 20 mpg with a depleted battery, which is definitely achievable without trying to drive especially efficiently.

Look, we’re InsideEVs—we love electrons. But in performance cars, more battery isn’t always the way to go. The people who buy these cars can afford to fuel them up, and the advertised and often unrealistic efficiency numbers are not a key selling point for someone looking for a C63 or an M5. Plus, performance cars are a tiny subset of overall vehicle sales, accounting for a tiny fraction of overall emissions. We can electrify mass-market cars today, which would pay far greater dividends. But as the M5 proves, if you want the best possible driving experience, a giant battery can get in the way.

Even though Mercedes is accused of doing it wrong, I think it has the right approach to making a performance PHEV. The C63 is a better driver’s car than the M5, which is just too heavy to be fun. The C63 is still heavier than it would have been had Mercedes stuck to a V-8 without electrification, but for a PHEV, it’s still an excellent and exciting driving experience. It feels more special than the M5, even with half the cylinders.

There should be a clear distinction between electrified cars designed for efficiency and those where electrification is meant to enhance performance. Some great performance PHEVs include the second-generation Acura NSX, the Corvette E-Ray, the Ferrari 296 GTB or the new Lamborghini Temerario. Sure, electrification does enhance efficiency to a degree in any application, but making a PHEV too heavy by giving it too big a battery can make it less efficient than the same car powered solely by combustion.

What Mercedes-AMG did with the C63 PHEV is closer to Ferrari’s plug-in hybrids, where efficiency is never the key point of focus. The battery doesn’t have to be huge, and in cars like the Ferrari SF90 and 296 GTB, it’s under 8 kWh, which doesn’t overburden the chassis and keeps these cars’ handling pure. Getting a few miles of electric driving is a bonus, but the main point of the electrification remains performance.

The only catch is that if the battery runs low, the engine turns into a hamster wheel, sapping power to make electricity to replenish the pack. Unless you’re doing several laps of the Nurburgring, that likely won’t matter. I drove the C63 quite hard around a twisty road for over half an hour, and it still showed around 33% battery remaining. Maybe if you take it on a track where you keep the throttle pinned for longer, you will feel the performance loss, but in my experience, there was none.

Click here to see all articles with lists of the best EVs