Renault five-seater makes its Aussie debut.

WHAT IS IT? The second generation of Renault’s Koleos mid-size SUV – a hugely-important model for the French brand in this country, considering the ever-swelling popularity of SUVs in Australia.

Offered in three grades (Life, Zen and top-shelf Intens), the 2016 Koleos range occupies a price bracket spanning from $29,990 to $43,490 and is offered in front-wheel drive and all-wheel drive configurations.

A single engine is offered for the time being – a naturally-aspirated 2.5-litre petrol four-pot with a modest 126kW and 226Nm – and all models are equipped with a CVT automatic as standard.

Renault globally recognises this: which is why they’ve fast-tracked the all-new Koleos to Australia ahead of every other market.

MAIN RIVALS Mazda CX-5, Honda HR-V, Hyundai Tucson, Nissan X-Trail, Toyota RAV4, Kia Sportage, Subaru Forester, Ford Kuga, Holden Captiva, Mitsubishi Outlander

THE WHEELS VERDICT The Koleos has morphed from ho-hum to hum-dinger, now boasting plenty of space in a more attractive and well-equipped package. It’s at its best in its highest specification, where it offers loads of mod-cons for an attractive price, but its powertrain lacks pep when the speed limit rises.

PLUS: Spacious cabin, generous equipment list, value for money, composed handling MINUS: Weak engine/gearbox combo, no smartphone mirroring, squeaky boot plastics,

The old car was a backmarker in the ever-competitive and increasingly-important medium SUV segment, with frumpy styling, antiquated infotainment and sub-par quality. The last time we put a Koleos through the Wheels wringer we complimented its ride and off-road nous, but lamented virtually everything else. The new Koleos addresses the overwhelming bulk of our criticisms.

Sharing its platform, powertrain and drivetrain with its corporate cousin the Nissan X-Trail, the new Koleos is longer, has more cabin between the axles and is substantially bigger on the inside than the superseded model.

There’s no seven seat configuration offered – nor will there ever be, according to Renault Australia – but as a five-seat rival to the likes of the Hyundai Tucson, Honda CR-V and Mazda CX-5, the Koleos can finally boast competitive dimensions, both inside and out.

All models get a customisable TFT screen in place of traditional analogue instruments, mid-grade and high-grade variants score leather (though it’s synthetic on the mid-spec Zen) and the top-shelf Koleos Intens ships with a choice of leather upholstery colours, a 8.7-inch portrait touchscreen display, heated and cooled front seats, power tailgate and LED headlamps.

The front seats are spacious and offer up a great view of the road ahead, while the back seat has enough leg, knee and headroom for even six-footers to be comfortable. A pair of USB charging ports for backseat passengers are provided on the Intens grade, but fans of smartphone mirroring may be disappointed that no Koleos model offers Apple CarPlay or Android Auto integration. At least sat-nav is standard.

The Koleos offers plenty of room for cargo, whether it’s a brace of boogie boards or a pram (or two) for your brood. Luggage capacity measures in at 458 litres with the seats up and 1690 litres with the 60/40 split second row dropped.

Renault also doggedly refuses to put the cruise control/speed limiter toggle switch in an area of the cabin that’s easily visible, instead hiding it low on the centre console behind the shift lever – forcing drivers to take their eyes off the road as they search for it.

The Koleos’ 2.5-litre petrol powertrain lacks oomph. Considering rival Mazda manages to squeeze 138kW and 250Nm out of a similar displacement for its CX-5(compared to 126kW and 226Nm for the Koleos), that puts Renault behind the eight-ball when it comes to driveability.

It feels less hamstrung in front-drive form, but if you’re opting for the full-fruit Koleos Intens then all-wheel drive is the only drivetrain configuration available. It brings a traction advantage on slippery surfaces thanks to its ability to send up to 50 percent of torque to the rear wheels, but the rest of the time its extra weight simply slows down proceedings.

A CVT is the only gearbox on offer, and that puts another crack in the Koleos’ façade. On the hilly and twisty launch route the combo of engine and drivetrain wasn’t happy, with the latter forever hunting for the right ratio and the former droning away as it struggled to deliver the pace required. Need to overtake? Allow plenty of space for a run-up.

If that puts you off, consider that a diesel auto will be added to the family around mid-2017.

The Koleos irons out truly lumpy surfaces with ease, but minor, low-amplitude bumps and corrugations reveal a slightly fussy and fidgety suspension. There’s plenty of body roll in corners (as you’d expect for an SUV), but the Koleos keeps its body movements in check on all but the most diabolical of surfaces.

The steering, however, is dull and overly-assisted. But few will care when they scope the Koleos’ pricetag.

The $29,990 price of entry is slightly higher than the average midsize SUV, but in higher grades (where the bulk of buyers tend to shop) the Koleos convincingly undercuts its chief rivals with a $43,490 pricetag for the range-topping Intens.

That’s cheaper than its underwhelming predecessor – and cheaper even than the X-Trail Ti petrol upon which the Koleos Intens is based, and a hell of a sharp deal considering the equipment on offer.

SPECS Model: Renault Koleos Intens Engine: 2488cc in-line 4-cyl, dohc, 16v, naturally aspirated petrol Max power: 126kW at 6000rpm Max torque: 226Nm at 4400rpm Transmission: CVT Kerb weight: 1608kg 0-100km/h: 9.8sec (claimed) Fuel economy: 8.3 l/100km Price: $43,990 On sale: Now

TELL ME ABOUT THIS CAR

After eight years on the market, Renault has finally retired its first-generation Renault Koleos and replaced it with an all-new model. Based on the Nissan X-Trail’s underpinnings (Nissan and Renault share much of their technology through their corporate alliance), the new Koleos is bigger both inside and out, not to mention specced higher than its predecessor.

Prices start at $29,990 for the base model front-drive-only Koleos Life, rising to $33,990 for the mid-spec Koleos Zen FWD and $36,490 for the Koleos Zen AWD, then topping out at $43,490 for the top-grade Koleos Intens AWD.

1

A naturally-aspirated 2.5-litre petrol inline four powers the full range with a CVT automatic being the only transmission option. With 126kW and 226Nm it makes the same amount of power and torque as the outgoing Koleos petrol, but if that’s not enough for you then wait until mid-2017, when a turbo diesel engine will be added to the range.

STRENGTHS

• French flair: While its Nissan X-Trail cousin is saddled with drab styling, the Koleos possesses significantly more visual panache thanks to distinctive headlamp and tail lamp treatments and an interior design that boasts a pronounced European flavour. Features like a roller shutter to hide the cupholders and a high-resolution colour TFT instrument panel are nice touches.
• Surefooted handling, both on and off paved roads: the Koleos shrugs off potholes and big lumps with ease, and handles its weight well in corners. Its Nexen tyres aren’t the grippiest around, but they work well in regular driving conditions. The ride can feel a touch fidgety on smaller bumps and corrugations, but otherwise the Koleos has a comfortable and capable suspension tune.

1

• Roomy interior: Even six-footer adults will find enough space in the second row, with plenty of leg, head and knee room available.
• Sizable luggage area: Boot space has grown slightly with the new-generation Koleos, with 458 litres of seats-up luggage capacity (an increase of eight litres) and a total of 1690 litres with the 60/40 split rear seats folded down and cargo stacked to the roofliner (310 litres more than before).
• Sharp pricing: Even when lined up against the Nissan X-Trail that it’s based upon, the new Koleos is a cracking deal. Ignore the $27,990 X-Trail ST base model – the true rival for the most affordable Koleos variant (the $29,990 Koleos Life) is the $30,490 X-Trail ST 2.5 litre automatic, and the Koleos has more standard equipment. At the top end, the $43,490 Koleos Intens costs thousands less than similarly-specced rivals like the Mazda CX-5 Akera, Honda CR-V VTi-L ADAS and Hyundai Tucson Highlander.
• Top-end features: The flagship Koleos Intens packs plenty of gear for the money, with a panoramic glass sunroof, 8.7-inch tablet-style touchscreen infotainment display, heated and cooled seats, a Bose premium audio system, AEB, park assist and a power tailgate all standard equipment.

1

WEAKNESSES

• Quality is improved, but still could be better. There are plenty of hard, scratchy plastics even on the range-topping Intens grade (most of them on the lower dash and centre console). Our test drive also revealed some rattly plastics in the boot area that spoiled the ambience.
• No smartphone mirroring: this won’t be a deal-breaker for most people given satellite navigation is standard on all models, but tech-heads who like to integrate their smartphone’s interface and features with their car may wish the Koleos had that capability – especially as it’s fast becoming standard equipment in many mainstream cars.
• Weak powertrain/drivetrain combination: The Koleos’ 2.5-litre engine isn’t the most muscular engine in its segment, and it’s weakened further by the CVT automatic that’s the sole transmission available. On steep and winding roads it tends to hunt around a lot as it searches for the right ratio, with the engine making plenty of noise in the process.
• Unsupportive front seats: the front seat bases may be adjustable, but there’s not enough variability in tilt angle to give decent under-thigh support.

Plenty. The medium SUV segment is hugely competitive and heavily populated, with current segment leaders including the Mazda CX-5, Hyundai Tucson and Toyota RAV4. There’s also the Honda CR-V, Kia Sportage, Ford Kuga and Nissan X-Trail to consider as well, and all are worthy of consideration.

THE Kia Rio is ditching its budget-car past with an all-new model that looks more premium inside and out.

Kia has released the first official images and details of its fourth-generation Rio, which will be shown publicly later in September at the 2016 Paris motor show before reaching Australia sometime in 2017.

There’s a Germanic influence to the straighter-lined, smoother-surfaced Rio that could see it easily confused for a Volkswagen Polo on first glance.

The new styling brings the Rio into line with other newer Kias, including a narrower but wider interpretation of the company’s signature ‘Tiger nose’ grille – now also integrated with new headlights.

1

The rear of the car is more upright than before and features a shorter overhang. Length grows by 15mm to 4065mm, width increases by 5mm, the roofline drops by 5mm, and the distance between the front and rear wheels widens by 10mm.

There’s a five-door version only this time with the previous three-door dropped.

Kia has also taken the Rio’s interior upmarket, at least visually judging by its images.

The slightly random layout of the outgoing model is replaced with a more harmonious-looking cabin. Highlights include a chunky-rimmed steering wheel that just looks inviting to hold, stylishly designed controls, and a high-resolution colour infotainment display that protrudes from the centre of the dash.

Gloss black and metallic trim that’s standard on every model contributes to the more premium interior experience.

1

Black or grey cloth seats are standard, with the option to pay extra for artificial-leather seats in black, grey or red.

Kia is holding back further details such as mechanical specifications for now, though the Rio’s engine line-up is expected to be joined by a new 1.0-litre three-cylinder turbo.

A sportier GT model is also anticipated for the range.

The Kia Rio is the Korean brand’s best-selling model globally, reaching nearly half a million sales in 2015.

Local sales of the Rio have increased 17 per cent year to date, for a market share of 8 per cent in a segment that includes popular rivals such as the Mazda 2, Toyota Yaris and Ford Fiesta.

Ready your cheque books, collectors, Ferrari’s building one more LaFerrari.

While LaFerrari production finished last year, Sergio Marchionne, Ferrari Chairman and CEO, confirmed it’ll build and auction a 500th example to help victims of the recent earthquake in Italy.

More than 290 people were killed when a 6.2-magnitude earthquake struck Italy’s Amatrice last Wednesday, which also displaced thousands more.

At release the LaFerrari wore a pricetag of 1.2-million Euros (AU$2.5m). However, as one of Ferrari’s fastest, and with only 499 being built, money alone was not enough to bag Maranello’s flagship.

Of course, whatever price it summons, it’ll be appreciated. Italy’s summer has ended and it’s reported the Amatrice’s displaced are expecting wooden chalet-style huts be built before winter arrives.

Ferrari hasn’t said when its one-off LaFerrari will go to auction, nor what specification it’ll bear, but it won’t be long. The incoming LaFerrari Aperta should’ve kept factory lights on.

Both V12 flagships before it, the Enzo and F50, avoided round totals. Produced to runs of 349 and 399 respectively.

This is not the first time Ferrari’s built a special ‘extra’ for charity, either. In 2004 Ferrari donated an Enzo to the Pope, which was then auctioned off for Tsunami victims.

The R35 Nissan GT-R (aka ‘Godzilla’) gets its most extensive makeover yet, attempting to be more things to more people.

WHAT IS IT? The MY17 facelift of Nissan’s halo car, complete with a three-model line-up that includes a sharply focused, Nismo-engineered Track Edition, a much-improved interior, a more modern nose and a greater breadth of talent.

WHY WE’RE TESTING IT? Because the Phillip Island Circuit and the Nissan GT-R are like a red rag to a bull, except the MY17 – well, the non-track versions anyway – has discovered some semblance of comfort away from the circuit.

MAIN RIVALS On price, it’s the BMW M4 Competition and Mercedes-AMG C63 S Coupe, both of which are slightly cheaper than the entry-level $189,000 GT-R Premium. But if we’re talking ability, Nissan believes its supercar can mix it with upper-end Porsches and the AMG GT.

PLUS: Brilliant dynamic focus of track-savvy Track Edition; loveable boosted-six grunt and grumble; vastly improved interior; now-liveable ride quality of regular GT-R MINUS: Still the odd driveline clunk; turbo lag in lower drive modes on the road; cramped rear seat; higher prices

THE WHEELS REVIEW IT MAY no longer be called Skyline – that iconic name was sent to heaven (for global consumption) when the R35-generation GT-R launched in 2007 – but the spirit of its forebears definitely lives on in this extensive MY17 upgrade. And that DNA link most closely aligns with the 2001 R34 Skyline GT-R.

The most comprehensive makeover in the R35’s near-decade existence falls at exactly the right time. Surrounded by fresh German high-performance armoury, the GT-R needed to reassert what its badge stands for, and what this all-wheel-drive, twin-turbo V6 is capable of, while aiming to appeal to broader cross-section of sports-car buyers.

While the MY17 looks fresher, it’s styling driven by functional development rather than fancy embellishment. It has a 20 percent-bigger front air intake, yet due to many aero detail refinements, its drag coefficient improves by one percent. The MY17 also has a stronger body, with more uniform stiffness between front and rear to improve chassis balance, while its suspension, steering and driveline are all refined to smooth over the GT-R’s brutal edges. And it works.

All of this broadens the GT-R’s appeal in an increasingly luxe-focused society, and so does its newfound driveline refinement (though you’ll still get the odd clunk from its rear transaxle). But when you ask for it, the GT-R is still a gloriously brutal beast.

But then there’s the ‘Track Edition engineered by Nismo’. With a heap of stuff borrowed from the proper GT-R Nismo (rumoured to be joining the Aussie GT-R line-up in 2017), the Track Edition is a seriously focused supercar around Phillip Island. Like the Nismo, it has adhesive bonding on its spot welds for greater body rigidity, completely retuned suspension (springs, dampers, anti-roll bars and upper links), slightly wider front guards to accommodate the Nismo’s broader track, and even fatter 10-inch-wide rear alloys (black forged-aluminium Rays 20s). In an extreme environment such as this, it’s the true embodiment of Hiroshi Tamura’s “car as body” philosophy.

But it’s the improvement in the GT-R’s everyday personality that also deserves praise here. Even in MY17 guise, the R35 GT-R will never be a shopping supremo (especially the very firm Track Edition), but this time — without the grumpiness of the past — you could. And with extra polish to ensure its future.

SPECS Model: Nissan GT-R Track Edition Engine: 3799cc V6 (60°), dohc, 24v, twin-turbo Max power: 419kW @ 6800rpm Max torque: 632Nm @ 3300-5800rpm Transmission: 6-speed dual-clutch Weight: 1760kg 0-100km/h: 3.1sec (estimated) Fuel economy: 11.7L/100km Price : $227,000 On sale: Now

First published in the November 1980 issue of Wheels magazine, Australia’s best car mag since 1953.

An outsider passes judgement on Australia’s Own – the Ford Falcon and the Chrysler Valiant.

A Pom’s eye view of Australia’s Own, Bob Murray takes a Ford Falcon and a Chrysler Valiant out driving – and comes back without seeing the joke …

I KNOW a girl, a slight girl not much more than 1.5 m tall, who loves her Ford Falcon. “Especially since it has manual steering,” she says. “It does wonders for building up the boobs.” Now this lady is hooked on big cars. She had a Sigma once but couldn’t stomach it because “it felt so tiny…” I guess she’s typical. Big cars for a big country.

This friend of mine drove a Chrysler Valiant I had briefly. It surrounded her with the necessary acreage of steel panels but she hated it. True, the steering is so light it wouldn’t do a thing for the pectorals of a fly. She would still prefer a Valiant – the “Marrickville Mercedes” – to any small car.

I have driven a few big cars and almost without exception they were either good or bad. And all the bad ones of my acquaintance have passed on. They had to die: when a car half the size and half the weight does everything as well – plus a lot more besides – there is little reason to carry on. Unless it has a name or a following or an image.

The Falcon and the Valiant have the name, the following and the image. It may not be the image they would like, but it is nonetheless an effective one. The title Australia’s Own, having been relinquished by originators General Motors-Holden’s which is now set firmly on the world-car path, is no mean label to be able to apply.

Nevertheless the Falcon and Valiant are, along with their derivatives and the Holden Statesman, the only cars you can truly call Australian. That’s a staggering fact: out of 24 5 cars listed in the Price Guide at the back of this book just three models, split between 18 variants, are actually Australian to their bootstraps.

It’s a sad thing to have to say, but having driven the Valiant and Ford Falcon – yes, the smart-looking Falcon with all its modern suit of clothes — it’s neither surprising nor much of a shame Australian car manufacturers had as much chance, if rather less finance, as their American counterparts to change course from the wildly wrong path that took them careering into the ’70s without a thought for what the mass of people really wanted.

If you disagree just look at the sales figures for Japanese cars, both here, in America and Europe. But they muffed it and the people who are in genuine need of an affordable big car are stuck with the Falcon and Valiant, and that’s terrible for both are old cars.

I don’t know why, but it is the minor controls in the Falcon that I remember most. Huge, clumsy items whose only possible justification could be that they were designed for huge, clumsy hands.

This impression, which can be fairly accurately applied to the rest of the car with the exception of the styling, has stayed with me despite some seemingly far stronger images. Like that of the strangled six whose asthmatic gasping is something to behold. Or a picture in the mind’s eye of the rear axle trying to cope with a bumpy road. The steering – I drove a “luxury” Fairmont which still had manual steering — made a lasting impression, not because of its ability to turn a 32A into a 36D with the requisite number of U-turns, but because it felt as if you are heaving away on a piece of dead wood. The gear selector, mounted on an exaggerated steering column, has all the precision of a wooden spoon in porridge.

I remember the dashboard and how it offers less information, less easily read, than the display in a Daihatsu Charade. I have nightmares about the size of the Falcon – its width, especially, is formidable – not because it is so big but because it feels every bit as big as it is. Good big cars feel small in the driving.

Yes, there’s room inside though I’m not convinced the best use has been made of it, or that there is sufficient comfort for it to be taken seriously. The cabin feels like a compromise between the need to cram in as many people as possible and the realisation that the best modern cabins are cosy, comfy, sporty affairs. There are, therefore, two front bucket seats as standard when the width of the car, and the location of the gearchange, makes it plain that here is a car designed to seat three abreast. There is a front bench seat available, which is the obvious way of making the Falcon a six-seater, but I don’t know if it’s any good. If it is not there is little excuse: bench seats can be all right.

As it stands I’m not sure the Falcon offers anything more, other than the ability to make insecure drivers feel safe behind all that bodywork and to provide floor space for rubbish/samples/bags/kids/ animals, than a car a class smaller, even a car two classes smaller. After all, if you’re serious about driving your family, or your colleagues or friends, long distances, you don’t actually need a big car. What you need is a car that can seat four or five adults comfortably and transport them efficiently, quietly and safely- as far as I know five is the normal number of seat belts ever fitted- and which remains that way all day. For my money the diminutive Ford Laser, which has a Jaguar ride, Ferrari traction and Lotus handling in comparison with its big brother, meets the criteria a whole lot better. Yes, the Laser is a better “big car” than the Falc. Of course, the Mitsubishi Colt, like the Laser, can never hope to match bigger cars if a true five-seater cabin and luggage space are the priorities. But in other ways the parallels are the same. The Colt, like the Laser, has the ability to do pirouettes around its own big brother, the Valiant. Not only on the road – though on the right road both the tiny tots could drive rings round the big guns – but in all the important areas.

The Valiant’s biggest disadvantage – and surely part of the reason it dies any day now – is its bodywork, which is as old to look at as the Falcon is to drive. The Falcon and the Valiant, for both are as old and tedious as each other. At least Mitsubishi/Chrysler is honest about the packaging …

To drive a Valiant is to experience the ’60s in all its vinyl-seated, bump-thumped, finger light-steered glory. The car is old everywhere – including the places where the Falcon is not: in its hideous seats, its disastrous visibility and ergonomics, its cabin room relative to exterior size. . . just about verything, right down to the design of the smallest detail. Old, but not all bad: the foot level ventilation is the best of any car I’ve ever driven.

There are other compensations, too. The big six actually has some semblance of engine response and eagerness. lt’s fairly quiet, too, though it doesn’t have to be revved very far to break down into the most awful cacophony of sound. On a bumpy road the body stops its nasty floating motion and starts to jerk, causing the car to wander and leading to worrying directional stability, not helped by steering which is every bit as directionless and detached as the Falc’s only it’s about 50 times lighter. This does nothing for the boobs but must revitalise the grey cells something rotten, since the concentration needed to keep course is mighty.

If pushed I’d say the wheels of the Valiant are more in touch than those of the Falcon, at least at the rear where the much harder-riding Ford hops, skips and jumps like a boxer the night before the Big Fight. The Valiant just scrubs its tyres into the bitumen – at the front, mostly, and at ludicrously low speeds. The road noise and harshness transmitted into the cabin would discredit a car of the ’50s.

Dynamics apart, the Valiant is a very difficult car to drive well. Somehow everything works against the driver, as if there were some giant conspiracy. It is, not surprisingly, an easy car to drive badly: to potter along at the speed limit, braking for every 200 km/h corner, weaving and floating along with two wheels in the dirt and two fingers on the steering wheel. For all its bulk it is minimum transport for minimum people.

So, it’s huge and clumsy versus mindless and minimum and if I were Australian I’d be insulted. The end of Australia’s Own? Maybe it’s just as well.

Check out Wheels Archive online now for other great Ford Falcon features and more from decades past!

Simply log in here using your existing MagShop account or create a FREE account and select this article from the homepage.

Don’t have a MagShop account?

Have a MagShop account?

Despite plenty of enthusiasm from Renault’s local office, the Navara-based Renault Alaskan dual-cab utility won’t be arriving in Australia before 2018.

Strong demand from markets in South America has seen the local launch timing for Australia pushed into 2018, frustrating Renault Australia’s efforts to cash in on booming demand for body-on-frame utilities.

“I don’t think we’ll see it inside of 2017, not for Australia,” Renault’s local boss Justin Hocevar told Wheels.

“We just don’t sit as one of the early launch markets. There are a number of other markets that are well and truly ahead of us.”

But what will set it apart from the Nissan Navara? The Alaskan shares its engine range, transmissions and almost all of its interior furniture with its Nissan-badged cousin, however Hocevar believes there will be enough points of difference to separate the two in the market.

In a segment where even less popular players like the Volkswagen Amarok reliably sell in excess of 400 to 500 units per month, the Alaskan could quickly become Renault Australia’s highest-selling product.

“Alaskan has the potential to be one of our most popular models,” Hocevar said.

“If you think of the size of the pickup market in Australia, its growth and where our network will be by the time we launch – yeah, we’ve got a very good opportunity from a market coverage point of view.”

There comes a time in everyone’s life when the wild excesses have to be reined in and a more restrained, mature approach is required.

For Nissan’s R35 GT-R, it appears that age nine is the tipping point, which must mean that one car year equals about three human years.

Having fiddled around the edges for years, adding a few extra kilowatts here and a stiffer suspension bush there, Nissan has unveiled a much more substantial update for the 2017 model year GT-R, primarily aimed at making it a more liveable day-to-day proposition.

The last time I spent significant time in an R35 was in 2011, covering over 700km in the space of a week. Its performance on a twisty road was absolutely jaw-dropping, but the ride varied between harsh and spine-crushingly brutal and the diffs and gearbox felt and sounded like someone had forgotten to put any oil in them.

A more rigid body structure has allowed Nissan to soften the dampers slightly; it’s still not exactly plush on rough surfaces, but locked in Comfort mode the ride feels roughly comparable to the likes of AMG’s C63 S Coupe or BMW’s M4 Competition and tolerable for the urban grind. The biggest bugbear on most roads is a strong tendency to tramline, a consequence of aggressive wheel alignment and 255/40 ZR20 run-flat front tyres.

The biggest changes, however, concern the interior. It’s a leather fetishist’s wet dream, with ex-cow covering almost every visible surface. The design looks much more premium, the new steering wheel is a delight to hold and the new 8.0-inch touchscreen has reduced the button count from 27 to 11. The graphics are more Playstation 1 than Playstation 4, but it’s intuitive to use, whether by pressing the screen or via the iDrive-like controller in the centre console.

In a world of 12-second hot hatches, turbocharged 911 Carreras and Ludicrous Teslas, perhaps the R35’s punch doesn’t quite have the same shock value it once did, but it still takes real effort to reach full throttle on the public road.

A slight lift in boost pressure and new ignition timing system has extracted a further 15kW/4Nm from the 3.8-litre twin-turbo V6 for a total of 419kW/632Nm, which is more than enough to motivate 1765kg of R35.

At this speed the revised styling is having an effect, shaping the airflow over the reinforced bonnet, across the new side skirts and past the redesigned C-pillar, all in the name of reducing turbulence and drag associated with the 20 per cent larger front air intake, required to meet the increased cooling demands of the more powerful engine.

It still shifts extremely quickly and Nissan has paid particular attention to its low-speed behaviour with reasonable success; even better, the paddles are now mounted on the back of the steering wheel rather than fixed to the column.

Accessing the GT-R’s ultimate limits on the public road is nigh-on impossible and certainly inadvisable. It’s difficult to imagine a scenario in which you’d need to take the dampers out of Comfort; GT-R boss Hiroshi Tamura admits it’s the best setup for road use due to the extra compliance keeping the wheels in greater contact with the tarmac over bumps.

With the track still damp in places, a certain level of caution is required but, even so, you can feel the torque being shuffled around beneath you as the ATESSA all-wheel drive system works its magic.

If there’s a chink in the GT-R’s armour, it is its behaviour in wet conditions. Far from being the ultimate all-weather machine, the lack of front-end purchase on a wet road or track can be disconcerting and the GT-R has the power to spin up all four wheels on a slippery surface. It can still cover ground at a phenomenal rate, but care is needed.

The 2017 GT-R starts at $189,000, $17,000 more than the previous model, with the luxury pack an extra $6000 and the NISMO-engineered Track Edition a hefty $227,000. Even so, no other car at this price point can offer anything like its performance.

The 2017 GT-R might be more mature than ever before, but sky diving is safer than it used to be, too. It’s all relative.

4/5

Specs

Engine: 3799cc V6, DOHC, 24v, twin-turbo Power: 419kW @ 6800rpm Torque: 632Nm @ 3300-5800rpm Weight: 1765kg 0-100km/h: 2.7sec (claimed) Price: $189,000

Nissan’s most comprehensive update yet of the R35 GT-R is now on-sale in Australia, which has resulted in a price increase and the addition of a new model.

The GT-R Premium Edition lists at $189,000, a $17,000 increase over the previous model, with Luxury Trim another $6000 and the NISMO-engineered Track Edition $227,000.

New side sills and redesigned C-pillars also help smooth the new GT-R’s path through the air, Nissan claiming significantly improved high-speed stability.

While it’s still one of the fastest things on four wheels, the majority of the MY17 changes have been focused on improving its day-to-day useability. Ride comfort is improved and the addition of Active Noise Cancellation aims to reduce some of the more agricultural noises emitted by previous GT-Rs.

The hefty price premium for the Track Edition buys a number of performance upgrades from the hardcore NISMO GT-R. There’s a more rigid bodyshell, a 5kg weight loss, revised suspension and new front guards, which provide room for forged RAYS wheels that measure 20 x 10 inches, a half-inch wider than standard.

You can read our first drive review of the 2017 Nissan GT-R here.

What to expect from Holden with a new import-only future.

“It’s time to change.” That was the crux of a frank and open internal assessment of Holden as it embarks on a massive marketing campaign designed to reposition the brand that currently has its lowest market share in 68 years of building cars in Australia.

The quintessentially Australian brand is set to go through the biggest change in its history as it transitions from Australia’s first and most influential car maker to one that from 2018 simply falls into line with the 60-odd import-only brands fighting for a slice of 1.2 million sales.

In its quest to become the “most caring and trusted car company in Australia” and one that attracts “new customers for life” Holden chairman and managing director Mark Bernhard acknowledged some of the failures and immense challenges of a brand fighting for survival; quality hasn’t always been where it needed to be; Holden hasn’t always offered the right cars for Australia; and Holden has sometimes focused on enthusiasts and loyalists at the expense of others.

Despite having the biggest dealer network in the country – totalling 230 – Holden sales account for just 8.0 percent of the market in 2016, less than half that of the top seller, Toyota.

“For 70 years Holden has been defined by local manufacturing and locally built vehicles. That has to change. Our challenge is to redefine what Holden means in Australia and recapture our relevance.”

At the same time Bernhard acknowledged the long and diverse history of Holden, which started in 1856 with a saddlery company and in 1948 evolved into a manufacturer of Australia’s original own car, the Holden 48-215.

“We also have a 160-year history in this country [first as a saddlery and eventually a car maker], which we’re very proud of, but we need to evolve if we’re to flourish,” said Bernhard.

Key to the fresh sales pitch is an influx of new models, which has already kicked off with the heavily revised Colorado ute as well as the Spark city car, the first of 24 new models promised by 2020.

Holden also committed to five new or updated models by January 2017; an updated Barina, updated Trax, updated Trailblazer (formerly Colorado 7), new Astra and a replacement for the Captiva, expected to be called Equinox.

Bernhard said by 2020 Holden will have its most diverse product portfolio, replacing the ageing models that have lingered as a result the new model trickle that slowed when its parent company, General Motors, applied for bankruptcy in 2009 as a result of the global financial crisis.

“We’re going to have more vehicles in more segments than we’ve ever had before,” he said. “Our opportunity with product is huge.

“We are in a unique position to pick and choose the best vehicles from General Motors; the best cars from Europe, the best cars from the US and the best cars from Asia.”

Bernhard said part of the challenge would be reconnecting with the Australians that have turned away from the brand over more than a decade.

“Holden has deep connections into Australian communities. We’re a big part of the history of this country, but we need to show today’s Australia who we are, what we stand for and why they should buy Holden products and services.”

It starts next month with the October 7 wind down of Cruze manufacturing. Phase two is in December, with confirmation the Port Melbourne engine plant will close, while the final phase is the closure of the Elizabeth production line – and local Holden Commodore production – late in 2017.

Beyond that the Holden brand will continue, but for the first time there won’t be an Australian Holden in the lineup.

As for topping the sales charts – something Holden has done for most of its life and something that was a stated goal two years ago – Bernhard says the brand will not play the “discount game” to atrract big volumes.

“Holden’s success is not purely about market share; yes, it’s still a big factor … but we’re not blindly chasing market share.

“Number one in market share or sales is not the measure of success.”