not leave the 12-foot lane during the fade-test stops. During the minimum-distance stops from 60 mph, however, the car slewed sideways on two attempts, leaving its 12-foot lane, and stopped-sideways-at 180 feet (the other intermediates given this test stopped within 160 feet under adequate control). On the basis of our findings in two Chevelles last year and two Chevelles this year, it seems reasonable to conclude that their standard drum brakes are subject to severe fade under our test conditions. However, we have not been able to determine whether the directional instability we encountered in the 1968 samples is inherent in the design of these brakes or is an irregularity intrinsic to the samples we tested. But when two samples demonstrate such instability-in addition to severe fade-a rating of Not Acceptable is warranted, in our opinion. We therefore rate the Chevelle sedan with basic V8 engine Not Acceptable. Not all Chevelles, however, use the brakes we tested on our cars. GM is using finned front-brake drums and different brake-lining materials on Chevelles with 327-cubic-inch V8s equipped with four-speed manual transmissions, and on all Chevelle station wagons. We have not tested the higher-powered Chevelles, but we do have a 1968 Chevelle station wagon under test. Its brakes behaved better than the sedans', though there was some fade and weaving. There is also a power-assisted disk-brake option available. Other disk-brake cars we've tested usually stopped straight, and perhaps the Chevelle might if equipped with this option. But we could not get one in time to check, since diskbraked Chevelles must be ordered from the factory. The Pontiac Tempest's brakes echoed some of the Chevelle's deficiencies, though to a considerably lesser degree. Initial pedal effort was relatively high, a slight glaze developed during repeated brakings, and recovery from fade was slow, although the degree of fade was low enough so that the brakes still rated fair-togood. The Buick Skylark rated good in braking; the Dodge Coronet and Mercury Montego, fair-to-good. Brakes on the three GM models (Skylark, Tempest, Chevelle) tended to "chatter" during light braking at higher speeds-the brakes set up vibrations over the whole car structure. This was particularly pronounced on the Tempest during break-in. The dealer lightly machined the Tempest's brake drums, a factory-recommended solution for chattering brakes, and the chatter ceased. PERFORMANCE: SOME STARTING PROBLEMS CU's test drivers break in each engine by driving the car over normal roads for a minimum of 2000 miles, familiarizing themselves with its performance in normal use. Next we measure fuel consumption on a level road. Then, at a sportscar track in Connecticut, drivers test each car's acceleration and passing ability (listed in Facts and Figures, page 93). A car's engine should start readily and run smoothly; acceleration should be predictable and quick enough for reasonably safe entry onto freeways and for safe passing; the engine's response to the accelerator pedal should be smooth and progressive. These five intermediates, like their bigger brothers tested last month, all have new V8 engines that include internal modifications to reduce emission of carbon monoxide and unburned hydrocarbons, which are harmful compounds in automotive-engine exhausts. Combustion-chamber design, carburetor calibration and ignition timing have all been changed, sometimes with unfortunate effects on the engines' performance. The Mercury Montego was the most troublesome, particularly on cold mornings. Even when it was fully warmed, the Montego engine ran erratically, and until it was warmed up it had to be started and rerestarted. The Dodge Coronet and the Buick Skylark were balky in starting, too, but less so. The engines are of larger displacement than last year's in all but the basic Coronet. Yet they performed no better in our tests than last year's smaller ones, probably owing, at least in part, to the effects of the smog-control modifications. Acceleration and passing ability, which should increase with engine size, were about the same as last year's. The Skylark and Pontiac Tempest engines, indeed, are larger than those in all the full-sized cars rated in January except the bigengined Pontiac Catalina. And the Chevrolet Chevelle's engine and power train are virtually identical to those of the Chevrolet Impala reported on last month, though their tire sizes differed. Dodge Coronet; Plymouth Belvedere and Satellite: V8, 383 cu. in., 330 hp., premium fuel. Mercury Montego; Ford Fairlane and Torino: 6 cyl., 200 cu. in., 115 hp., regular fuel, standard. V8, 302 cu. in., 210 hp., regular fuel? V8, 302 cu. in., 230 hp., premium fuel 4. V8, 390 cu. in., 265 hp., regular fuel. V8, 390 cu. in., 325 hp., premium fuel. Buick Skylark and Special Deluxe: 6 cyl., 250 cu. in., 155 hp., regular fuel, standard. V8, 350 cu. in., 230 hp., regular fuel 2. V8, 350 cu. in., 280 hp., premium fuel. Pontiac Tempest and Le Mans: 6 cyl., 250 cu. in., 175 hp., regular fuel, standard. 6 cyl., 250 cu. in., 215 hp., premium fuel.. V8, 350 cu. in., 265 hp., regular fuel 2. V8, 350 cu. in., 265 hp., regular fuel. Chevrolet Chevelle: 6 cyl., 230 cu. in., 140 hp., regular fuel, standard. 6 cyl., 250 cu. in., 155 hp., regular fuel. V8, 307 cu. in., 200 hp., regular fuel 2. V8, 327 cu. in., 250 hp., regular fuel V8, 327 cu. in., 275 hp., premium fuel. V8, 327 cu. in., 325 hp., premium fuel. 13-speed manual transmissions are standard equipment on most listed models. Overdrive (O.D.) and 4-speed manuals, where available, are extra-cost options. Automatic transmissions are available, at extra cost, on all models and are 3 speed on all but Buick, Chevrolet and Pontiac models, which offer only a 2 speed. 2 Engine in CU's test car. 3 Standard in Coronet 500 model. 4 Available in Montego only. Standard in Skylark Custom model. The Coronet and the Montego offer the most satisfactory compromise between quick acceleration and good fuel economy (see Facts and Figures). Those two accelerated about as well as the other three cars tested, and were appreciably more economical. The Montego gave greater economy at turnpike speeds, the Coronet at 30 and 40 mph. Note that the Coronet and the Montego are the lightest of the five cars we tested and light weight helps both overall fuel economy and acceleration. Our Coronet, by the way, had a 273-cubic-inch V8 engine, rather than the 318-cubic-inch engine that became standard in the two top-price models of Coronet on November 10. But we don't think the bigger engine would significantly change our performance data. The box on engine transmission options on page 87 lists the wide variety of power plants available in this group of cars. In our opinion, V8s more powerful than the standard engines are not necessary for any of these cars; they may even turn a car with ample power into a grossly overpowered one. Indeed, the intermediates should be adequate (and more economical) performers with sixcylinder engines. We found them so when we tested many of them two years ago, and some six-cylinder intermediates are a bit more powerful now than they were then. HANDLING: MEDIOCRE AT BEST We take each car over a selected 20-mile circuit of roads ranging from smooth, level highway to “washboard" roads and broken and bumpy pavements. In the course of this ride test, we also evaluate the car's general stability and its response to lane-changing maneuvers. Then, on the test track, we drive them through a series of right- and left-hand turns to evaluate their response to steering and throttle changes at critical speeds. A car should behave stably and predictably during maneuvers at higher speeds; response to the steering wheel in both normal driving and emergency situations should be quick, controllable and completely predictable, and should require no undue effort. The intermediates' smaller size and lower weight do not necessarily result in crisper, more precise handling than in the heavier, full-sized cars reported on last month. This month's group of cars, in fact, proved less competent at nego tiating corners at high speeds on the test track. Intermediate V8's do need power steering, and all our test cars were so equipped. The top-rated Dodge Coronet was only fourth best in handling; it rated fair. Like the full-sized Plymouth Fury and the intermediate Plymouth Belvedere, the Coronet does not come equipped with an antisway bar on the standard V8 model (an antisway bar can be purchased only as part of a heavy-duty suspension package for $22). The Coronet needs one for the same reasons the Fury does. Response to initial steering on entering a turn was too drastic, making frequent steering corrections necessary to maintain a stable cornering attitude. Also contributing to the car's initial steering response was its very low steering effort and quick steering ratio. We judged the Coronet's steering response fairly unpredictable; the transition from mild understeer to controllable oversteer was smooth but somewhat difficult to anticipate. Our Mercury Montego handled without caprice, albeit somewhat sluggishly. It rated fair-to-good overall. Steering response was judged fairly slow, with mild oversteer occurring only if power was suddenly cut off. The natural reaction in an emergency (to take your foot off the accelerator) proved to be the right one for this car. By doing so, the driver could tighten his turn and possibly prevent running too wide and leaving the road on the outside of the turn. Unwanted changes in direction occurred only over severe bumps during cornering. The Buick Skylark handled poorest of the group. The passenger compartment and the chassis often seemed to be trying hard to go separate ways. Going into a turn, the body lagged noticeably behind the turning of the wheels; coming out of a high-speed turn, the front end hunted around for the new direction as the driver unwound the wheel. The power steering transmitted little "feel" to the driver-little sense of what the car was doing or would do when he turned the steering wheel. And while negotiating bumpy corners, the car wallowed considerably. All this queasy behavior means that drivers will find the Skylark relatively difficult to handle precisely and predictably in high-speed emergency maneuvers. The other two GM body twins, Chevrolet Chevelle and Pontiac Tempest, chalked up fair-to-good handling ratings. The Tempest performed slightly better than the Chevelle, whose steering exhibited a trace of the Skylark's lag in response. Overall, the response of both the Tempest and the Chevelle was judged fairly quick and fairly predictable, without rubbery oscillation or unusual wallowing. CONTROLS: GENERALLY HANDY By and large, we found the controls on the intermediates handy to operate and well separated as to function. We especially liked the Dodge Coronet's, most of which were easy-to-work rocker switches grouped logically by function-light controls to the left of the steering column, wiper and washer controls to the right, with the washer button mounted alongside the wiper's on-off switch and working independently of it. Heater slide levers were within easy reach and moved in different planes to help assure accurate selection by feel alone. One poor bit of design in the Coronet: The speedometer's index lines were printed on the inner instrument face, but the indicating numbers were printed on a clear plastic lens at considerable distance out from the index lines, making the speedometer particularly difficult to interpret accurately. The Mercury Montego's instrument panel offended somewhat. Its headlight and wiper/washer controls, with identical knobs, were located side by side to the left of the steering column. You could accidentally push the control in and turn off your headlights when intending to wash the windshield at night. The Chevrolet Chevelle was also afflicted with adjacent, similar-looking controls for wiper/washer and lights. All the Chevelle's controls, like those on our Chevrolet Impala last month, were deeply recessed into the instrument panel, in the interest of safety. But they were difficult to operate with gloved fingers; and, as with the Impala, turning the ignition key presented a particular challenge. The controls on the Pontiac Tempest were satisfactorily arranged and distinguishable from one another, but we judged the horn control too small for sure-fire operation. The Tempest (and other Pontiac models) has two tiny horn bars placed on the horizontal steering-wheel spokes. You may find them hard to locate in a hurry until you're accustomed to the car. Other cars we've bought this year have much broader, longer horn bars, and some have three instead of two-much easier to find. The Buick Skylark's controls were satisfactorily separated by function, but the washer, wiper and two heater controls-all roller wheels, turned by thumbwere annoying to say the least. To move the heater temperature control and mode selector from one end of their range to the other required no less than 20 full thumbing motions and, for the mode selector wheel, considerable force. You must divert your attention from driving and the road for an unconscionable time while working the wheels. Furthermore, the roller wheels to the right of the steering column roll up to turn on and increase, while the rollers to the left roll down to turn on-contrary to normal practice. Another annoyance: It was difficult to find the ignition lock and insert the key; the lock is deeply recessed, and hidden at the bottom edge of the instrument panel besides. The Skylark's controls require a good memory and an even temper. Toothed, rack-type bumper jacks were located in each trunk. We found them all easy enough to assemble and operate (or as easy as jacking ever is). Don't forget to get yourself a wheel chock with which to block the wheel diagonally opposite the one to be hoisted. Not all these cars' jacking instructions call for wheel blocking, but CU considers this additional safety precaution essential. The Tempest and Chevelle spare tires were mounted so that you'd have to remove them from the trunk in order to check the tire pressure-an annoying design lapse, in our view. None of our cars was delivered to us with the spare tire correctly inflated, by the way. DEFECTS: ANOTHER BUMPER CROP Last month, we refrained from listing all the defects with which our test cars were afflicted, because the list was so much longer than the space we had available. We must do the same this month, for the list is longer still. (Keep in mind that any defect that could affect test results was corrected before testing, unless it was a design defect.) Some of the defects were, to put it mildly, bizarre. Every time the Dodge Coronet accelerated, the windshield washer nozzles dribbled small quantities of washing fluid into the heater air intake, producing an objectionable odor. Our Plymouth Satellite station wagon also dribbled washer fluid; the problem is apparently one of design in these Chrysler Corporation intermediates. Less obvious but just as serious: The Coronet's distributor shaft wobbled severely, causing ignition dwell to vary 20°. We found 21 other significant defects in this car. Our Chevrolet Chevelle came with a printed circuit board for its main electrical system. The circuit board shorted out not long after delivery, producing a panoply of impressive lighting effects suggestive of a psychedelic nightclub. As if the electrical phenomena were not startling enough, the Chevelle's windshield glass was so distorted in the driver's field of view that we had to have the dealer replace it so that we could continue testing. And our Chevelle was delivered with a deficiency in its throttle linkage: the spring tension was insufficient to close down the throttle when the accelerator pedal was released. Such a defect is a potential danger in emergency situations, since the engine and the brakes are fighting each other at the very time maximum braking efficiency is demanded. With the dealer's assistance, we improvised a spring mounting that relieved the problem. Again this year we found that the tire-inflation instructions in the Chevelle owner's manual disagreed with the instructions printed on the glove-box door sticker. Besides these annoyances, we found 24 other significant defects. Apart from the Mercury Montego's stumbling engine, discussed on page 87, our test sample had a loose and knocking left engine mount; the driver's seatback springs permanently collapsed with a twang at 1000 miles, and the exhaust system banged on the rear-axle housing over bumps. We found 27 other significant defects. We had troubles with the Buick Skylark's engine, too. It died frequently during warm-up and surged at part throttle when fully warm. The transmission kickdown switch failed to provide any downshift. We found 21 other significant defects. The brakes on our Pontiac Tempest sample required overhauling before testing to eliminate severe chattering and rear-wheel locking. We had to contend with a loud snapping noise in the right front suspension, excessive wind noise and 28 other significant defects. In short-brace yourself for dealer visits and aggravation if you buy one of these cars. TO SUM UP In general, the intermediates tested for this report are inferior in comfort, capacity, ride and handling ability to the full-sized cars tested last month. The two groups of cars are much on a par in braking and engine performance, but some intermediates can offer savings in fuel over some, but not all, of the fullsized cars tested. As for price-it's possible to pay less for a full-sized car than for an intermediate. At most, the difference should be no more than about $200, and the two top-rated cars in each group may be priced only about $75 apart. In our judgment, then, you can get appreciably more automotive value, for family service, in a full-sized car than in an intermediate. But there are circumstances in which an intermediate can be the better choice: If you need a smaller car to fit your garage or cramped street-parking places, or if in your particular marketplace you can get a substantially better deal for an intermediate than for a full-sized car. Should you decide on an intermediate, first consider the Dodge Coronet and its Plymouth twin, the Belvedere. The Coronet rode better with full load than any of the other intermediates, its fuel economy was superior, and its acommodations and braking were better than the group average. It handled less well at high speeds than the others, but its reliability, as evidenced by our Frequency-ofRepair Records, has been better than average for several years. The Mercury Montego rates in second place largely because its merits predominate and its main deficiency, poor load-carrying ability, is shared by the other lower-rated cars. Otherwise the braking, handling and comfort ratings were all competitive. The Montego is new, of course, but the Frequency-of-Repair Record of its twin, the Ford Fairlane, has been average. The Buick Skylark was smooth and quiet on the better roads, and braking performance best in the group. But again this year, it rode badly when fully loaded. Its rubbery and unpredictable handling was an unhappy new development. And a worsening Frequency-of-Repair Record also counted against the car. After testing two Pontiac Tempests in three years, CU wonders just what need this car was designed to fill. It has so little ground clearance that it strikes the ground on all but the smoothest roads at the lowest speeds. The ride is only fair with three occupants, and deteriorates drastically as load is added. Braking performance was also only fair, and the Tempest's Frequency-of-Repair Record has been worse than average. For the second year in a row the Chevrolet Chevelle came up with badly fading brakes. This year, directional instability was added. The combination resulted in a rating of Not Acceptable. The Chevelle's fully loaded ride was poor and its Frequency-of-Repair Record remains worse than average. SAFETY: IMPROVED, BUT WILL IT MEET THE STANDARDS? We bought our intermediate cars, of course, long before January 1, 1968, the deadline for compliance with the first set of Federal auto-safety standards. So we can say no more than this: In our opinion, if some intermediates manufactured after January 1 are identical in certain areas to our tested cars, they may fall short of meeting either the wording or the obvious intent of some of the Federal standards. On the Coronet, for instance, the shiny chrome steering wheel hub may not meet standard No. 107, which treats of glare and reflection in the driver's field of view, and specifies that the reflectance of wheel hubs be limited to reduce glare. And the other tested cars, except the Skylark, all had various glareproducing surfaces such as turn-signal and shift levers, radio knobs and instrument bezels, all of which add to the glare the standard is intended to limit. The sun-visor mounting blocks on the three General Motors cars, which protrude far enough to cause injury if struck, may not meet the requirements of standard No. 201, which covers some hostile interior projections. Standard 101 requires that the driver be able to recognize certain operating controls in the daytime but does not apply at night. We have already noted the need to strengthen this standard to include lighted identification for nightime use. The Coronet lights none of its operating controls, and the other four cars light only the heater-defroster controls. We were also concerned with the position of the outboard mounting of the front-seat lap belt on the three GM intermediates. Standard No. 210 specifies that the mounting be located so that "a line from the anchorage of the occupant's |