bmw the future of dynamic boost with us makes …it shares with the c4 hatch is a disappointment....

Character traitsARGUMENTS over

the character of the

polarising M4 were never

resolved. Some love the

new twin-turbo six for

the immediacy of its

performance and improved

economy while others still

yearn for the excitement

and special occasion-ness

of the previous high-revving V8 M3.

77wheelsmag.com.au

76 wheelsmag.com.au

Scooter powerBMW doesn’t like this being pointed out, but the engine of the i3 Range Extender is manufactured in Taiwan by scooter specialist Kymco. The 647cc twin is a BMW design, used in the company’s C600 Sport and C650 GT maxi-scooters, detuned from 44kW to 28kW. It drives the wheels and cannot recharge the battery pack.

BMW 4 SeriesBODY

Type 2-door coupe/2-door convertible/5-door hatchback;

4-5 seatsBoot capacity 220-480 litres

Weight 1450-1790kg

DRIVETRAINLayout

front engine (north-south), RWDEngines

1995cc 4cyl turbo-diesel (135kW/380Nm);

1997cc 4cyl turbo (135kW/270Nm);1997cc 4cyl turbo (180kW/350Nm);2979cc 6cyl turbo (225kW/400Nm);

2979cc 6cyl twin-turbo (317kW/550Nm)Transmissions6-speed manual;

7-speed dual-clutch; 8-speed automatic

CHASSISTyres 225/45R18 – 275/35R19

ADR81 fuel consumption4.6-8.8L/100km

Greenhouse emissions121-213g/km

Collision mitigation n/aCrash rating 5-star (Euro NCAP)

Prices $69,500 – $178,430

DYNAMIC BOOST MAKES FOR MORE

THAN JUST A PRETTY FACE

BMW 4 Series

BMW’s 4 Series goes beyond being just the coupe and convertible versions of the 3 Series.

Following BMW’s new naming policy that allocates even numbers to sporting model lines (with one glaring exception in the 2 Series Active Tourer MPV), the 4 Series presents an almost bewildering choice of body styles and drivetrains that essentially mirror the 3 Series, yet place a greater emphasis on dynamics.

Buyers can choose from four turbocharged petrol engines and one turbo-diesel in hardtop-convertible, five-door ‘liftback’ and two regular coupe body styles if you count the mighty M4, with its different bonnet, wider tracks and flared guards, as an additional variation.

There is no denying the efficiency of BMW’s new petrol engines, nor their performance: even the humble 420i returns 6.0L/100km and is capable of 0-100km/h in 7.3sec, while the brilliant 428i (a hot version of the same 2.0-litre four) is even more impressive with 6.4L/100km and only 5.8sec to 100km/h.

As proof of the incredibly rapid progress in petrol engine development over the past five years, the twin-scroll turbo 3.0-litre six in the muscular 435i drinks just 7.4L/100km, yet its 5.1sec 0-100km/h time is quicker than an E46 M3’s.

The Coupe’s stiffer body structure and

added braces may account for our belief that the Four eclipses the Three for handling and ride, at least from our memory of the sedan during COTY testing two years ago, when it became obvious that the optional M Adaptive suspension (specified by only five percent of buyers) was a must-have if the 3 Series was to live up to our expectations of a BMW. The dead steering and the wallow, float and pitch that we found so disappointing on the base F30 3 Series are banished on the 4 Series Coupe, which gets adaptive dampers standard.

But what are we to make of the Gran Coupe? Yes, the hatchback tailgate ensures it’s more practical than the 3 Series sedan, but actual boot volume is identical, it weighs 100kg more, and doesn’t offer as much rear-seat space. Then there’s the lack of individuality in its ho-hum styling, which must be an even bigger marketing problem for BMW. This is no Audi A5 in the beauty stakes.

What’s even harder to ignore is the question of value: the 4 Series Coupe is about $10K more expensive than the 3 Series sedan and the Gran Coupe is up to $8K dearer than the more accommodating (and more stylish) 3 Series Touring. Paying more for less is always a tough sell in COTY.

PETER ROBINSON

“ Thank God the ESC is diligent; with so much power and grip, limits are sky high”

GLENN BUTLER ( M4 )

THE i3 is one of the most avant-garde cars to ever contest COTY. With its plastic-clad and carbonfibre-reinforced-plastic body topping an aluminium chassis that doubles as a protective barrier around its lithium-ion battery pack, the BMW made our other electric contender, the Tesla Model S, seem almost conventional.

The i3’s lightweight construction is designed to enhance driving range and performance. Its layout is also logical; its rear-mounted motor drives the rear wheels, giving the front wheels the freedom of movement for a turning circle of less than 10m.

For those wanting more driving range than the claimed 130-160km the 19kWh battery pack alone can provide, there’s the option of a distance-doubling range-extender (see sidebar). It adds $6000 to the $63,900 base price of the i3.

The BMW is expensive, and the design quality of its four-seat interior reflects the price tag. The i3’s cabin showcases materials that are both recycled and sustainable to create a unique and appealing ambience.

The car’s exterior is distinctive, too, in the sense that it will never be mistaken for anything else. But the car’s easy-to-replace plastic panels contribute to low repair costs after minor impacts. This, in turn, lowers insurance premiums.

With typical Australian retail electricity prices making the price of a full recharge about $5, BMW’s claim that the i3’s total running costs will

be lower than a 1 Series with a small turbo-diesel are credible.

While the i3’s 2013 four-star Euro NCAP rating was duly noted, our initial testing at Ford’s You Yangs Proving Ground didn’t expose any dynamic concerns. The BMW’s key driver aids, notably its electronic chassis stability system, were found to be properly effective.

The instant responsiveness of its 125kW electric motor makes the lightweight i3 amusingly potent. The motor delivers 250Nm from zero revs, and can spin to 11,400rpm, explaining why nothing more than a single-speed transmission is needed.

However, the two i3s provided for COTY weren’t perfectly behaved. The battery-powered car developed a fault that lit up the instrument panel with a variety of warnings, including loss of electronic stability control. It was traced by the technician sent by BMW to a low brake fluid level, and was rectified (never to return).

Later, a different judge discovered what happens when the battery of the i3 Range Extender is fully depleted. Performance is greatly reduced when the car is being propelled only by the 23kW electrical output of the range-extender.

These events couldn’t be ignored. But the i3’s brilliant interior, strong performance and here’s-what-the-future-feels-like appeal mount a strong argument judged against the COTY criteria.

JOHN CAREY

THE FUTURE OF MOTORING IS

WITH US

BMW i3BODY

Type 5-door hatch, 4 seatsBoot capacity 260 litres

Weight 1270-1390kg

DRIVETRAINLayout

Rear motor (east-west), RWDPropulsion

Hybrid synchronous electric motor (125kW/250Nm);

Optional range-extender 647cc 2cyl (28kW/56Nm) with 23kW generator

TransmissionSingle speed

CHASSISTyres 155/70R19-155/60R20 (f),

175/60R19-175/50R20 (r)ADR81 fuel consumption

0-0.6L/100km Greenhouse emissions

0-13g/kmCollision mitigation Optional (included in

Driving Assistant Plus package) Crash rating 4-star (Euro NCAP)

Prices $63,900 – $69,900

BMW i3

“ Ride too hard on 20-inch wheels, but fun to drive”

BRUCE NEW TON

“ The most convincing BMW I’ve driven in a very long time”

BY RON M ATHIOUDA KIS

79wheelsmag.com.au78 wheelsmag.com.au

The short of itJOINING the Grand Picasso here in 2015 will be the smaller C4 Picasso. Slightly different from the B-pillar forward and completely changed behind, the five-seat Picasso rides on a 55mm-shorter wheelbase and will feature a

121kW 1.6-litre turbo-petrol four with a six-speed auto.

THE French have a rich history in carting folk around in comfort, often clad in high-design sheetmetal that ensures ‘fashion’ and ‘family’ aren’t mutually exclusive. And Citroen’s Grand C4 Picasso upholds this tradition admirably.

Riding on PSA’s strong-yet-light EMP2 platform, the striking new Grand Picasso isn’t just a futuristic-looking design cloaking yesterday’s mechanicals. It’s genuinely new, squeezing an extra 110mm of wheelbase into the same length as its predecessor, while offering a weight saving of more than 100kg. Considering its seven-seat capability, it’s deeply impressive that Citroen’s 1440kg MPV weighs less than a Holden Cruze.

Indeed, low weight is fundamental to the new Grand Picasso’s abilities. Its punchy turbo-diesel four is Euro 6 compliant and averages an exceptional 4.5L/100km on the combined cycle, mated to a new six-speed automatic that removes the laughable element from ‘French auto’. The Picasso’s drivetrain may not be quite as refined or as brisk-shifting as the same combo in a Peugeot 308, but its torquey efficiency is perfectly in tune with this seven-seater’s station in life.

So is its ride. Wearing 205/55R17 Michelins, the Grand Picasso lopes along with pliancy and

control at all speeds, even in the strong winds lashing You Yangs. Decent handling, too, despite plenty of body roll, though the bulky steering wheel it shares with the C4 hatch is a disappointment. So, too, is the Citroen’s wet-surface braking, stopping neither as short nor as straight as it should.

At least most other safety boxes are ticked (front and rear sensors, rear-view camera, deft ESC, airbags galore), though a collision warning and seatbelts that tense if the car thinks an accident is imminent are part of a $2000 Driver Assist pack that doesn’t include autonomous braking.

Where the Grand Picasso really excels is inside its expansive cabin. Seven individual seats, the rear pair capable of seating adults, and a multi-adjustable middle set blessed with easy-folding mechanisms. Kids will love it.

Once you’ve mastered the complexity of the central control interface, this quirky Citroen truly does feel like a slice of tomorrow. A surprisingly good value slice, including a six-year warranty.

So it turns out the Grand C4 Picasso is a really good egg, without looking like one. For all the Francophiles out there, here’s hoping it’s the beginning of more to come.

NATHAN PONCHARD

CITROEN GRAND C4 PICASSO

BODYType 5-door wagon, 7 seats

Boot capacity 632 litresWeight 1440kg

DRIVETRAINLayout

front engine (east-west), FWDEngine

1997cc 4cyl turbo-diesel (110kW/370Nm)Transmission

6-speed automatic





Prices $43,990 – $55,490

PICASSO WOULD BE PLEASED, AND NOT JUST WITH THIS

CITROEN'S ARTISTIC STYLING

Citroen

Grand C4 Picasso

“ Great ride, suspension on bumps the best yet”

SA LLY DOMINGUEZ

“ It’s a Tardis that looks like the Enterprise”

GLENN BUTLER

Awesome oilerWOULD you prefer one, two or

three turbos with your 3.0-litre

diesel six? The X5 is possibly the

world’s first vehicle to offer such

a choice, with little detriment to

fuel economy. Both 30d and 40d

claim 6.2L/100km, and the

tri-turbo M50d 6.7L/100km.

HOW many ways can you re-skin a platform? If you’re carrying over all the hard points – stuff that’s expensive to alter, such as door openings, pillar placement and the like – then you’re hardly working with a clean sheet, but I don’t think anyone could’ve predicted BMW’s third-generation X5 would end up like this.

Carrying over much of its predecessor’s architecture, the new X5 rides on the same 2933mm wheelbase and identical track widths, which in itself is no bad thing seeing we’d hardly encourage SUVs to keep on growing. It gains 30 litres of boot space and is slightly more aerodynamic, but the disappointing part is that it’s such a super-safe, super-predictable evolution of what was quite a game-changer in 2007.

BMW will tell you that weight has dropped by up to 40kg, but the volume-selling xDrive 30d is actually 40kg heavier (at 2070kg) than its 30d predecessor was at launch. The only new X5 to limbo under the two-tonne mark is the entry-level sDrive 25d – a rear-drive four-pot turbo-diesel weighing 1995kg – and it’s this unlikely sweet spot that best showcases what Munich has achieved with its bulky SUV.

The sDrive 25d not only upholds the X5’s reputation for dynamics, but it proved massively more capable than the Mercedes ML250 did at You Yangs two years ago. Its relatively tiny engine

tries hard and performs remarkably well (0-100km/h in 8.2sec, with a miserly 5.8L/100km fuel figure), and its chassis grips admirably on 255/55R18s. Its interior isn’t bad for a base BMW, either, though the options list can greatly enhance this.

Cue the test X5 30d with optional M Sport package ($5600). Its up-specced interior offers all the colour and texture we’ve come to expect from Audi, not BMW, and the three-spoke M steering wheel must surely be one of the best in the world. The 3.0-litre turbo-diesel straight six is a strong engine, with a slight refinement improvement over the four and a big jump in performance. And then there’s the triple-turbo M50d brute with its much meatier induction note.

A common sentiment was that the M50d’s incredible engine really belonged in a 1600kg sports sedan, not a two-tonne Toorak tractor. And beyond its superb engine, the M50d’s additional value appears questionable. It handles, as does the 30d on M Adaptive suspension, but it also feels its bulk when driven hard. Wearing such big wheels, X5’s ride is only acceptable with the suspension in Comfort mode, while tyre noise is excessive.

At base level, you really can see the practical abilities of an X5. But as ambitions climb and the price rises, its breadth of talent seems to diminish in equal measure.

NATHAN PONCHARD

“ Physics-defying dynamics, up to a point, but ride is firm, even in Comfort”

BRUCE NEW TON

“ Doesn’t move the model forward one millimetre!”

JOHN CAR EY

SUV GAME-CHANGER TAKES THE LESS-ADVENTUROUS ROUTE

BMW X5BODY

Type 5-door wagon, 5-7 seatsBoot capacity 650 litres

Weight 1995-2190kg

DRIVETRAINLayout

front engine (north-south), RWD/AWDEngines



2993cc 6cyl twin-turbo-diesel (230kW/630Nm);

2993cc 6cyl triple-turbo-diesel (280kW/740Nm);

2979cc 6cyl turbo (225kW/400Nm);4395cc V8 twin-turbo

(330kW/650Nm)Transmission 8-speed automatic





Prices $83,900 – $148,400

BMW X5


We pity the fuelTHE big Hyundai’s value

equation is helped in Australia

by five years of free servicing.

In real terms, though, that may

only pay back some of the money

lost feeding its fierce thirst.

A PREMIUM REAR-DRIVE IMPORT THAT CARRIES ITSELF LIKE A LOCAL

Hyundai GenesisTALK about trying to sell ice to the Eskimos. Hyundai’s decision to bring the rear-drive Genesis luxury sedan to Australia may be as much a brand statement as a sales opportunity, but at COTY brand aspirations count for nought.

The Genesis can only be measured against the criteria, one of which would turn out to be both its biggest strength and greatest challenge: performance of intended function.

The Genesis is a credible first attempt at a genre Australia has made its own – affordable and accomplished rear-drive sedans – but Hyundai wants to position the Genesis as a half-price rival to the BMW 535i and Mercedes E400. However, it’s hard to see Europhiles crossing Asia to buy from the Korean Peninsula.

A more direct rival is closer to home. Much closer. This Korean-built five-metre behemoth rides on a massive 3010mm wheelbase that shades even Holden’s stretched Caprice.

Despite carrying 1890kg, more beef than its European and Australian rivals, it’s surprisingly energetic to drive, thanks in large part to suspension localisation work carried out by Hyundai Australia. But this dynamic competence hides beneath a clumsy ESC tune; its intervention is early and crude, not unlike

fledgling ESC systems of a decade ago. Once the ESC is disabled, the car’s innate

mid-corner confidence is on a par with Australian-made Commodore and Falcons… of a decade ago. Not as sharp or engaging as contemporary fare, but enjoyable nonetheless. The ride, too, is more than a match for B-grade Australian tarmac, and the in-car refinement on the move is serene.

Sadly, the drivetrain also feels a decade behind the main game. The 232kW 3.8-litre V6 is willing enough, but lacks refinement. The transmission – a Hyundai-made eight-speeder – is sublime in its action, but often lethargic in its response. The combined fuel figure of 11.2L/100km is equivalent to Falcadores of the 1990s – if you can achieve it.

And what of Hyundai’s traditional strength: value? By far the best Genesis is the entry model, which has the cabin quality and equipment to match imported sedans twice its price. Stepping up through two specification levels asks a fair chunk of coin each time, and degrades the value equation.

As for the rest of the Genesis’s COTY credentials, there’s very little to report. It’s a competent large sedan that may push boundaries for its maker – particularly build quality – but not for the market. And especially not in Australia.

GLENN BUTLER

HYUNDAI GENESISBODY

Type 4-door sedan, 5 seatsBoot capacity 493 litres

Weight 1890-1995kg

DRIVETRAINLayout

front engine (north-south), RWDEngine

3778cc V6 (232kW/397Nm)Transmission

8-speed automatic


ADR fuel consumption11.2L/100km

Greenhouse emissions261g/km

Collision mitigation STDCrash rating 5-star (ANCAP)

Prices $60,000-$82,000

“ Brilliant interior quality; surpasses $60K C-Class for materials and finish”

PETER ROBINSON

Direct actionRETAINING the old-tech engine from the previous Jazz helps explain the low price. But in the US, the Fit/Jazz gets an all-new twin-cam engine, with direct injection and variable valve timing, that is more powerful (97kW/155Nm), uses less fuel and is tied to a new six-speed manual.

GREAT VERSATILITY IN A SMALL PACKAGE, BUT DOES IT DELIVER ON THE ROAD?

Honda Jazz

ON PAPER, there is so much to like about the new third-generation Jazz. No other supermini approaches Honda’s baby for interior space, versatility and practicality.

The seats fold to 18 configurations, including one that provides a flat floor from the tailgate through to the rear of the front seats. For extra-long luggage, the front passenger seatback folds flat, and the total boot capacity can be 1495 litres, brilliant for a hatchback that’s just under four metres long.

Nor can you question the equipment levels. The Jazz is the first car in its class to make a reversing camera standard, even on the entry-level $14,990 VTi, and it’s viewed via a large 7.0-inch touchscreen. Bluetooth, cruise control, six airbags and hill-hold assist are included in the VTi to validate the Jazz as a value-for-money proposition, though the value becomes less compelling the further up the three-tiered range you go. For all its leather-faced trim, 16-inch alloys, parking sensors, climate control, keyless entry and leather steering wheel, the VTi-L struggles to justify the extra $7500 when it’s still powered by the same 88kW/145Nm 1.5-litre single-cam four as the base car.

Wheels is a magazine for people who love cars and driving, and here the Jazz struggles.

The engine needs plenty of revs, but is coarse and noisy when pressed, and lacks the refinement we once took for granted from Honda. The gearchange is typically Honda – slick and fast – but the clutch pedal is too far off the floor, while the CVT never disguises its technical compromises. Worse, the now electric power steering is sloppy around the straight ahead, slow and vague off-centre, and far too light.

Small cars should be fun and eager, a delight to drive. Sadly, the Jazz simply doesn’t point like a Fiesta or Mazda 2. Nor is the ride class-leading. And the Jazz swaps the previous generation’s rear discs for drums, further proof that this model is a product of GFC development.

Even the packaging isn’t the miracle it seems at first sighting. The front buckets offer limited rear travel, so tall people – anyone over six feet (183cm) – struggle to be comfortable on flat seats that offer little lateral support.

Finally, we can’t overlook the car’s appearance. We can only agree with one critic who described the Jazz as dorky. The nose, in particular, is clumsy and awkward, the rear too busy, and the flanks are a contrived distortion.

The third-generation Jazz, it's clear, has not built sufficiently on its predecessors' successes.

PETER ROBINSON

HONDA JAZZBODY


Weight 1048-1130kg

DRIVETRAINLayout


1497cc 4cyl (88kW/145kW)Transmissions5-speed manual;CVT automatic





Prices $14,990 – $22,490

“ CVT sounds, well, CVT-ish, but it pulls hard and is not that annoying after a while”

BY RON M ATHIOUDA KIS

Driving its ’ring offENGINEERED in Europe, the GT spent 480 laps (8000km) at the Nurburgring Nordschleife, resulting in faster electric steering, increased damper rebound and compression rates, stiffer springs and a bigger rear sway bar compared to the 5dr Ceed on which it is based.


JEEP CHEROKEEBODY

Type 5-door wagon, 5 seatsBoot capacity 700 litres

Weight 1738-1862kg

DRIVETRAINLayout

front engine (east-west), FWD/AWDEngines

2360cc 4cyl (130kW/229Nm);3239cc V6 (200kW/316Nm);

1956cc 4cyl turbo-diesel (125kW/350Nm)Transmission

9-speed automatic




Collision mitigation n/aCrash rating 5-star (ANCAP)Prices $33,500 – $49,000

DisconnectionCHEROKEE offers three 4x4

systems with one-speed or

two-speed power transfer

units: Jeep Active Drive I, II

and Active Lock. In a claimed

industry first, the 4x4

system disconnects the rear

axle to reduce energy loss

and improve fuel efficiency

when not required.

NO SHORTAGE OF CRED OR KILOS WITH

KOREA’S FIRST DECENT DRIVER’S HATCH

Kia Proceed

GTKIA’S first performance hatch may not quite hit the GTi heights of the better European runabouts, but the Proceed GT certainly has the power to surprise in a couple of key COTY criteria.

Positioned as a Megane RS-sized driver’s car for smaller Clio RS money, the $30K Slovakian-built three-door starts off strongly with attractive coupe-like styling, a properly roomy cabin for four adults (or five if an Olsen twin squeezes in), lovely Recaro buckets, brilliant instruments, the practicality of a massive hatch and heaps of kit for the cash, including a full suite of safety gear.

And speed kings aren’t forgotten thanks to a 150kW 1.6-litre direct-injection turbo that proves downsizing doesn’t necessarily mean downgrading. Yes, a stompy right foot is mandatory to really get things moving, but with the rorty engine spinning past its 265Nm mid-range torque zone, a long enough stretch of road will yield 230km/h.

Further plus points include a decent six-speed manual gearbox and a honed chassis that is fun to play with. For a warm hatch, the Kia is capable and grippy in corners, and demonstrates solid body control. Fettled for Aussie roads, the chassis

certainly turns, handles, grips and brakes with a tenacity that will appeal to the first-time buyers the company hopes to woo.

So, a competent warm-to-hot hatch, and from Korea no less. Kudos for that. But viewed through a European GTi prism, the picture is not as compelling. The Proceed’s steering is muted, missing the tactility of more beguiling rivals. And when pushed really hard, its chassis feels too ragged around the edges to worry the class champions.

Furthermore, all that new tech is squandered by the Proceed’s porky engineering elsewhere, resulting in a car some 140kg heavier than an equivalent Golf. Consequently, the jack-rabbit throttle response critical to the breed is absent. Economy suffers, too. Finally, the ride is too stiff and tyre drone from the rear is, well, tiresome.

If you’re 25 and after something quick, affordable and roomy, the GT kicks butt, and it has Australia’s longest warranty and capped-servicing package.

So, while one of Korea’s best-ever cars struggles to score COTY kudos for efficiency and overall finesse, in its own rough-and-ready way, the GT delivers. Make no mistake: the Koreans are coming good.

BYRON MATHIOUDAKIS

KIA PROCEED GTBODY


Weight 1448kg

DRIVETRAINLayout


1591cc 4cyl turbo (150kW/265Nm)Transmission

6-speed manual

CHASSISTyres 225/40R18

ADR81 fuel consumption7.4L/100km

Greenhouse emissions171g/km


Prices $29,990 – $33,490

“ Much better dynamically than a Veloster Turbo”

NATH A N PONCH AR D

“ The harder you drive it the less impressive it becomes”

PETER ROBINSON

TOOTHY YANK SUV BRIMMING WITH WELCOME IMPROVEMENTS

Jeep Cherokee

CALLING the latest KL Cherokee a great improvement by Jeep standards isn’t damning it with faint praise. But we’re headed in that direction. The previous KK was an ordinary bit of gear, so it makes sense that its replacement retains little apart from the name.

Appropriately, in these days of crossovers and soft-roaders, the fourth generation eschews a body-on-frame chassis for the new Fiat Chrysler CUS-wide (Compact US) monocoque architecture that can trace its origins back to the Alfa Romeo Giulietta and Dodge Dart.

That’s combined with a new family of drivetrains beginning with the Tigershark 2.4-litre four, progressing through the 3.2-litre V6 Pentastar and topping out (price-wise) with a 2.0-litre Fiat turbo-diesel. All of them are tied to a nine-speed automatic that more than doubles the old Cherokee’s cog count and helps slash fuel consumption. In the base model Sport, only the front wheels are driven, while the Trailhawk is the only ‘trail-rated’ model.

The result of this shift of focus is a more refined and car-like driving experience. There are price rises, but also a lot more equipment.

For the most part, the Cherokee steers, brakes and grips with some capability, although the level of competence of each of those characteristics varies across the five-model range: the electric-assist steering rack displays

old-fashioned load-up when challenged by the demanding You Yangs durability course; the brake pressure varies from weak to wildly over-servoed and the cornering ability goes from quite composed to the laughably low for the cone-scattering Trailhawk on its Yokohama Geolandar rubber. Because of the heavy rain that saturated the venue, the gravel road section was out of bounds, so there was no chance for the Trailhawk to perhaps balance that ledger.

There was a broad spread of views about the drivetrains: some liked the Tigershark, some didn’t (“fizzy” was one description and “shallow” another); the V6 was pretty much glossed over, with more admiration expressed for the diesel. The new auto doesn’t seem that modern, inclined to hunt and kick down with some rudeness, and throttle response was deemed to be too sharp.

More consistent was the praise for the quietness of the cabin and the significant step up in refinement and space. Apart from the awful urethane-trimmed steering wheel in the Sport, materials gain a big tick, too.

Perhaps this is the KL Cherokee’s most significant improvement. Certainly the inside gained more praise among the judges than the controversial nose and unusual tail grafted onto an otherwise orthodox body. BRUCE NEWTON

“ The worst, most horrible-to-touch steering wheel I have ever experienced”

NATH A N PONCH AR D

RAVagedLEXUS claims it modified

90 percent of the RAV4 platform on

which the NX is based, with rigidity

rising some 20 percent. But with

Camry running gear and an RX

rear motor set-up on AWD versions,

the 300h feels – and drives – like a

Toyota parts-bin special.


Not 2 smallUSING Mazda’s ‘SkyActiv’

modular platform that

underpins everything up to

the CX-5 and 6, the DJ-series

2 is significantly longer than

the previous DE version with

an 80mm and 160mm stretch

in the wheelbase and body

length respectively. Yet,

unusually, cabin space has

shrunk in several key areas.

WHY THE SMALLEST OF THE NEW-GEN MAZDAS IS ALSO ONE OF THE FINEST

Mazda 2

SMALLEST and equal cheapest it may be in this year’s COTY, but Mazda’s mighty little 2 tackled the You Yangs proving ground with stupendous ease.

From its pert, yet mature styling to its perky handling, the sixth Mazda supermini since 1986’s 121 original won us over from the first press of its push-button start.

Admittedly, at the time of testing there wasn’t a single base $14,990 Neo in the country for us to drive, so we were denied the ‘standard’ engine with its scant 2kW and 2Nm output deficit. Additionally, the entry car lacks the cruise control and reversing camera that Honda’s identically priced Jazz VTi includes.

Though road and tyre noise properties seem two generations ahead of its seven-year-old predecessor (and palpably better than the current 3’s), a cloud remains over whether Mazda has finally licked that problem. There are also concerns regarding the 2’s low-speed ride, with some unwanted firmness on the 185/60R16-attired Genki.

On the flipside, belting along the durability circuit, Mazda’s naturally aspirated 1.5-litre ‘High Spec’ SkyActiv four is nothing short of a gem, delivering a breadth of performance that questions the need for complex and expensive turbo installations. The same applies to the

sweet six-speed manual and quick-witted six-speed torque-converter auto.

Furthermore, big-car directional stability and grip that is in stark contrast to the flimsy feeling Jazz around the proving ground, backed up on the ride and handling course by exceptional body control, reveal a chassis that could easily cope with more power. With dynamics this cultivated, the MPS version should be quite special.

The good news continues even with the 2 standing still, thanks to standard idle-stop technology across the range and Autonomous Electronic Braking below 30km/h available for a modest $400. And the aforementioned Genki gives you proper little luxury-car trimmings such as sat-nav, an iDrive-style screen controller and the class’s only head-up display unit for a tenner under $20K.

Indeed, as the walkarounds quickly revealed, the littlest Mazda’s funky interior presentation ranks as one of its biggest drawcards, with pleasing aesthetics and an attention to detail you don’t expect from a supermini. With better vision, more storage and seemingly greater refinement, Mazda’s little 2 shamed the 3.

Blitzing along at pace, it outperforms expectations in more ways than one.

BYRON MATHIOUDAKIS

“ Doesn’t feel like a Lexus should”

BRUCE NEW TON

“ Hideous to behold and almost as bad to drive”

JOHN CAR EY

“ A chunk of unadulterated goodness”

JOHN CAR EY

“ I love what they’ve done with the interior”

SA LLY DOMINGUEZ

IN THE roughly 30-year history of the modern SUV in Australia, only one – the Ford Territory in 2004 – has won our award. It’s a depressing fact that, despite their popularity, they are often heavier, thirstier, less involving to drive and less well packaged than the passenger cars that spawned them.

Coming into this COTY, we hoped that electrification might give the 300h (the sole NX version available in 2014) a critical technology leg-up. And in some ways it does, with fuel efficiency figures some 20 percent better than petrol-powered Audi Q5 and BMW X3 equivalents, according to Lexus. Crucially, though, rival diesels are even more economical.

If we were judging Interior of the Year, the ambience-abundant Lexus might have been a shoe-in with its evocative dashboard presentation, sumptuous seats, high quality and generous standard spec. With leather, sat-nav, smartphone touchpad interface and powered tailgate, even the $55K opener seems like a $75K luxury SUV.

However, the NX (for “Nimble X-over”) doesn’t feel like that to drive, a reality obvious from the outset. Based on the Toyota RAV4’s transverse architecture that dates back to the middle of last decade, the NX employs a 147kW 2.5-litre

Atkinson-cycle four-cylinder petrol engine and an electric motor, driving the front wheels via a CVT transmission. We’re talking current Camry tech here, derived from three generations of Priuses.

While seamless and smooth ambling about, the first lively throttle prod results in a charmless CVT drone as the NX picks up speed quickly but with little sensation of power or finesse.

With inconsistent ESC and numb steering that made the Lexus a handful through our swerve test, there’s nothing remotely nimble to report, yet the firm ride suggests it should be. And the wooden brake-pedal action takes us back to the early Bush error, er, era. At least the NX stops well in the wet.

AWD versions add a 50kW electric motor driving the rear wheels when extra traction is required, as in the five-year-old RX. In fact, the NX drives much like a (slightly) smaller version of that roly-poly bus.

Throw in an old-school nickel metal hydride battery pack, when even the 2012 Prius V switched to lithium-ion, and the latest Lexus SUV looks a lot like a GFC victim.

Impressive pricing, fuel economy and interior design aside, the NX300h is off the luxury SUV pace for tech and refinement, feeling like the jumped-up RAV4 that it is.

BYRON MATHIOUDAKIS

LEXUS NX300hBODY

Type 5-door wagon, 5 seatsBoot capacity 475 litres

Weight 1740-1895kg

DRIVETRAINLayout

front engine (east-west), FWD/AWDEngine

2494cc 4cyl + electric (147kW/210Nm)TransmissionCVT automatic




Collision mitigation n/aCrash rating n/a

Prices $55,000 – $75,000

MAZDA 2BODY


Weight 1027-1058kg

DRIVETRAINLayout

front engine (east-west), FWDEngines

1496cc 4cyl (79kW/139Nm);1496cc 4cyl (81kW/141Nm)

Transmissions6-speed manual;

6-speed automatic




Collision mitigation OPTCrash rating N/A

Prices $14,990 – $21,990

Lexus NX THE SHARPLY ATTIRED NX IS

NOT AS NEW AS IT LOOKS

bmw the future of dynamic boost with us makes …it shares with the c4 hatch is a disappointment....

Documents