It might look cutesy. And the dash fascia in its plasticky interior might resemble a ’90s portable stereo system.
Its ride is rigid and its mega-bolstered seats are a little tiresome for everyday use. But from the moment we chucked one into a corner at its Aussie launch last year, we knew the Ford’s Fiesta ST was something really special.
That wondrous chassis, and the harmony of steering, brakes and power deliver to extract its lofty dynamic talent, could give virtually any sports car at and price a hard shove.
And yet here was that goodness offered in German-engineered, -tuned and -built hatchback. For just $25,990. From that first punt we knew in the core of our bones that the Fiesta ST would be 2014 BFYB’s hottest contender for an outright win.
Why so confident? We’ll, with two consecutive (and undefeated) crowns, reigning champ Volkswagen Polo GTI clearly demonstrated where BFYB’s price-and-performance sweet spot lies.
And then the Feista ST fronted up, earned stripes as the sharper and more driver focused device in MOTOR testing, and undercuts the Polo’s sticker by a huge margin. Game most certainly on.
And then Renault lobbed its Clio 200 R.S. into the fray and the game changed. As you can see, the Fiesta RS failed to lift the winning sub-$50K garland. So, what happened?
For buck factor, only the Mazda was cheaper and by a mere tenner. It main on-paper protagonists – Clio R.S., Kia GT, Pug 208 GTI, Mini – were around four grand pricier or more. And four grand at the fiscally pointy end of the proceedings is, at a kick-off, a massive buffer with which to leverage solid on track and on drag strip performance.
Thing is, the Fiesta’s numbers were merely solid rather than scintillating. It clocked a fairly tardy 7.4sec 0-100m time when the French cars were in the sixes.
And its 15.4sec 0-400m effort was not only three-tenths down on the Clio but firmly in the bottom half of the 12-strong field aiming get close to the STI’s stunning (13.64sec) benchmark.
Even with overboost on tap lifting its official 134kW/240Nm ratings to 147kW/290Nm, its rolling 80-120km/h acceleration of 4.6sec was dead heat with the much heavier Kia and short of the French hatches, let alone the really powerful stuff such as the SS Ute and STI.
Braking? For a device weighing under 1200kg and certainly on BFYB’s lightest competitors, the Fiesta really should’ve done better than 40.1m, the second worst result of the Cheapie Dozen.
Fine. But the racetrack is the venue where the Fiesta should’ve shone its brightest and leverage its most stunning virtues.
Shine it did, but right here the Fiesta copped a rub that perhaps hampered its chance of a class victory, See, the ST stopped the clock at 1:46.6sec, but four other cars also pulled a ‘six’.
The Pug’s lap time was identical, the three others – SS Ute, Mini and Clio – fractionally quicker by a measure of tenths. Another half-second quicker and the Fiesta might’ve leapt up the results sheets…but then again the same could be said for any one of the competitors in any test.
Fact is, for the vast majority of the testing, the Ford kept trailing two other French compact hatchbacks that fight in the pint-sized rocketship segment for the buyer’s dollar.
Then the judges weighed in with their opinions on driver-focus, fun quotient and X factor. And when numbers are removed from the equation, the only other car they preferred for seat of the pants thrills was Subaru’s STI (and mainly down to its otherworldly potency and pace).
A bridesmaid effort then. But it’ll be interesting to see how it goes in the overall standings.
Results $0-50K placing – 2nd Overall placing – 1st Judges’ ranking – 3rd
0-100km/h – 7.40sec (16th) 0-400m – 15.40sec @ 154.30km/h (18th) Lap Time – 1:46.60sec (17th) Pricing – $25,990 (2nd)
Specs Engine: 1596cc inline-4, DOHC, 16v, turbo Power: 134kW @ 5700rpm (147kW overboost) Torque: 240Nm @ 1600-5000rpm (290Nm overboost) Weight: 1197kg Gearbox: 6-speed manual Suspension: struts, L-arms, anti-roll bar (f); torsion beam, coil springs, anti-roll bar (r) Brakes: 278mm ventilated discs, 2-piston calipers (f); 253mm solid discs, single-piston calipers (r) Wheels: 17 x 7.0-inch Tyres: 205/40R17 84W Bridgestone Adrenalin RE002 (f/r)
Get your free weekly report from the world of fast cars – subscribe to the MOTOR newsletter!
Subaru WRXs and their STi stablemates have always done well at Bang For Your Bucks.
Which figures given that since the 1990s, they’ve been offering up turbocharged grunt, all-paw grip and a fair degree of purpose, all for – when you think about it – chump change.
But this year had the potential to be different: The basic WRX has, arguably, lost some of its razor-sharp focus just for starters.
I mean, the two-pedal version (itself a conundrum) is now a CVT for crying out loud. Then there’s the fact that the STi was redeveloped on pretty much no budget.
So, no extra horsepower or torque over the old car, then, and certainly no new tech to speak of. Dunno about you, but I could see a black eye coming.
Wasn’t the case, though, and, provided you have the brains to select your WRX with a manual transmission, even the entry-level WRX is a good ‘un.
And we’re not even at the STi yet. See, the thing is, even the STi will still give you change from 50-grand (okay, only a ten-spot, but change is change) and I can remember when a Rex with a STi badge would rush you $60,000 and then some.
So, even if it’s not any better than previous STis, it should still make a fist of this given the new-age price-tag, right?
Ultimately, of course, Subaru really pulled something out of the hat with the new STi, because even with no extra bang from the engine, some clever changes to the active centre diff, a bit of a diet and some clever Nth-degreeing of existing bits has actually made a huge difference to how the car works. In fact, it’s a bleeding revelation, once you’ve toggled the centre-diff switch to maximum-attack.
And you know as much form the moment you tip it into the first fast corner. The big surprise was that though the Winton sweeper, the STi wasn’t anywhere near the top of the pops, but it sure felt fast everywhere else.
Part of the secret is the steering which seems to be super accurate and allows the front end to feel for grip, but it’s also about that centre diff moving the torque around to the tyres that can make best use of it. Which, in turn, means you can get on the noise early and blast towards the next obstacle.
In fact, there’s so much going on and so quickly does it happen, that it’s difficult to quantify from the driver’s chair what’s really going on and how.
But learn to trust it and you can soon be making big statements when it comes to entry speed and how soon you get back on the decibels.
Yet for all that, it doesn’t seem to be a non-involving experience, and where other cars using the same type and level of technology can feel a bit clinical, the STi still wants to be your buddy.
The grunt is interesting, too. Like we said, there’s no net gain over the old STi, but this car still threw down a 0-100km/h time of 5.5 (quickest of the sub-50K bunch)and a 400m sprint of 13.64 at 164.6km/h (yep, fastest again). It also despatched the 80-120km/h blast in 3.7 seconds (second fastest) and the STi’s lap-time of 1.41:5 was another class-leading performance.
Like we said, it’s a revelation to drive and with the sub-50K sticker taking care of the bucks angle (up to a point anyway) it’s no wonder the STi finished third in this company.
Results $0-50K placing – 3rd Overall placing – 6th Judges’ ranking – 1st
0-100km/h – 5.47sec (6th) 0-400m – 13.64sec @164.62km/h (6th) Lap Time – 1:41.50sec ( 1st) Pricing – $49,990 (13th)
Specs Engine: 2457cc, flat-4, DOHC, 16v, turbo Power: 221kW @ 6000rpm Torque: 407Nm @ 4000rpm Weight: 1525kg Gearbox: 6-speed manual Suspension: A-arms, struts, coil springs, anti-roll bar (f); multi-link, coil springs, anti-roll bar (r) Brakes: 330mm ventilated discs, 4-piston calipers (f); 315mm ventilated discs, 2-piston calipers (r) Wheels: 18 x 8.5-inch Tyres: 245/40 R18 97W Dunlop Sport Maxx (f/r)
Get your free weekly report from the world of fast cars – subscribe to the MOTOR newsletter!
For largely an emotionless game of number-crunching game, BFYB can pull a bloke’s heartstrings.
For this here judge, it was the first hot lap of Holden’s SS Ute, a two-pronged reminder both of what a marvel of dynamic prowess the humble Australian ute has become and of how, in short course, that marvel will become extinct.
The brain tells you that it should be an overpowered, tail-happy excursion into the barriers in waiting, but the truth is that this V8-powered home-spun hay-hauler has more mid-corner poise and balance than the majority of the BFYB field.
It’s slightly loose in the tail and keener to tuck its nose than the SS-V Redline sedan, but no less capable – choosing one over the other as a track car is realistically down to a matter of personal taste.
Did power help its cause? Did it what. The SS’s scorching 170.75km/h V-max around the Winton circuit was the fastest in category.
But the ute’s corner speed was also quite handy – in our measured Turn Seven its 54.36km/h was quicker half the Cheapie Dozen, including both Subarus.
And its particularly seductive blend of power and poise netted a very respectable lap time of 1:06.10, pushing the SS into the top half of its category’s Winton circuit standings.
Problem is, the ute has all the Go and not a lot in the Stop department. Sure, it pulled a really good 36.70m 100-0km/h emergency stop with cold anchors, and scored accordingly well, but merely a handful of Winton blinders would overcook its modest brakes.
And right here is the SS Ute’s double-edged sword: its sharp $39,490 price plays an advantage in Price Indexing against the pricier SS-V Redline fitted with properly engineered-for-durability brakes.
And while we love its playful chassis, dodgy stoppers get a big markdown in the eyes of subjective judgement, where it scored just seventh in class.
But acceleration? Forget traction issues. Despite its slightly baulky manual, the SS Ute dispatched the 100m mark in 5.9sec and nailed the 400m in 14-flat, both numbers the second-quickest of their respective tests in the sub-$50K category.
As for rolling punch, well, none of its class rivals could sprint from 80-120km/h as swiftly as the Holden’s 3.5sec march. Oh, and it was the fastest though the 400m traps, too, at 167.2km/h.
Throw all of those numbers in the BFYB Calculator and the dinky-di icon on borrowed time lands in impressive fourth place in class.
Results $0-50K placing – 4th Overall placing – 5th Judges’ ranking – 15th
0-100km/h – 5.90sec (9th) 0-400m – 14.00 @ 167.20km/h (9th) Lap Time – 1:46.10sec (11th) Pricing – $39,490 (11th)
Specs Engine: 5967cc V8, OHV, 16v Power: 270kW @ 5600rpm Torque: 530Nm @ 4400rpm Weight: 1729kg Gearbox: 6-speed manual Suspension: strut, stabiliser bar, coil springs (f); multi-link, coil springs, stabiliser bar (r) Brakes: 321mm ventilated discs, 2-piston caliper (f); 324mm ventilated discs, single-piston caliper (r) Wheels: 18 x 8.0-inch Tyres: 245/45 R18 Bridgestone Potenza RE050A
Get your free weekly report from the world of fast cars – subscribe to the MOTOR newsletter!
Small it may be. Weird-burger its interior may be. But as a performance car, the Peugeot 205GTi punches well above its weight.
Okay, so any Peugeot with a GTi badge should be able to walk the walk, but that hasn’t always been the case and it’s arguable that the 205 GTi of the 1990s was the last of the proper Pug hot-hatches.
But even the fiercest critic has to admit that the 208 gets the job done, and a 0-100km/h time of sub-seven seconds and a 400m time of 15.1 at 154.4km/h is far from taking the piss.
The 147kW that issue forth form the Peugeot’s 1.6-litre turbo-mill also come with a decent dose of torque, which explains how the thing gets from 80 to 120km/h in 4.2 seconds when it was only really the more expensive cars in this category that could best that time. Then again, 275Nm available from as low as 1700rpm, pushing just 1160kg will do that.
Brakes? Not so hot with a 38.7m stop. But everything else made up for that with a lap-time of 1.06:6 matching exactly the hot lap from the Fiesta ST and backing that up with a top speed through the sweeper of 55.05km/h and maximum velocity on the Winton straight of just a bee’s whatsit shy of 100 miles-per-hour in the old coin.
The 208 feels good on the track, too, with faithful steering and it only really starts to lose the plot post-apex when the grip begins to drift away. As does the front end at that point.
Up until then, though, it impresses for being quite pointy and even though the steering wheel looks like it’s in an odd position, it seems to work okay on the fly.
Actually, those ergonomics are possibly the car’s biggest hurdle from a showroom perspective. The gauges way up high and the tiny wheel below them certainly looks weird.
The other killer, of course, is the price which, at $29,990 isn’t the dearest car here by any means, but it ain’t the cheapest either.
And that, when you consider that cars like the Renault Clio are a bit cheaper and the Fiesta ST is thousands cheaper, that sticker-shock aint gonna go away.
Not when it comes to a strict formula like the BFYB one, anyway, and that leaves the Peugeot 208 GTi in a solid fifth place outright.
Results $0-50K placing – 5th Overall placing – 4th Judges’ ranking – 10th
0-100km/h – 6.96sec (14th) 0-400m – 15.14sec @ 154.44km/h (15th) Lap Time – 1:46.60 (16th) Pricing – $29,990 (5th)
Specs Engine: 1598cc inline-4, DOHC, 16v, turbo Power: 147kW @ 5500rpm Torque: 275Nm @ 1700rpm Weight: 1160kg Gearbox: 6-speed manual Suspension: struts, helical springs, hydraulic dampers (f); torsion beam, helical springs, hydraulic valve dampers (r) Brakes: 302mm ventilated discs, single-piston calipers (f); 249mm discs, single-piston calipers (r) Wheels: 17 x 7.0-inch Tyres: 205/45 R17 99V Michelin Pilot Super Sport
Get your free weekly report from the world of fast cars – subscribe to the MOTOR newsletter!
Is it any surprise that the new Octavia RS knocked its twin-under-the-skin Golf GTI Performance Pack by two places in the group standings when the Skoda’s sharp $36,490 ask is a cool $12K more affordable? Not if you’d read the form guide closely.
The Czech assassin lacks the VW’s primo sheen, offers no adaptive dampers or front diff trickery, and concedes seven kilowatts (on paper at least) and 33 kilograms to the GTI.
As a larger, roomier car, too, its wheelbase is some six centimetres longer, which no doubt colours its agility. But little of this really hamstrung the Skoda once the bell rang and it came out swinging.
Down the dragstrip, the Skoda pulled a strong 6.30sec to 100km/h, half a second quicker than the GTI, and was 0.3sec up (with 14.6sec) at the 400m mark.
On the move, the Octavia’s 3.90sec was shy of the VW by just two-hundredths for the 80-120km/h dash. And their terminal 400m speeds – both 166s – were within one kilometre of an hour of each other.
Oh, and under emergency braking, both cars pulled identical 38.52m stopping distances.
And that’s the Octavia RS’s clever deception: GTI goodness and pace wrapped in the most unassuming package, partly in solid primer grey. It’s got massive Q-car appeal, impressively value-laden and offers little compromise in family-friendly utility.
Behind the wheel, the VAG DNA is as familiar as it is welcomed, though the Skoda does display shades of character all its own once you bring corners into play.
Around the Winton circuit, the RS isn’t quite as quick or as agile as the GTI. Its laptime of 1:05.50 is slower, but at 0.6sec its only marginally so.
Corner speeds, too, are a little off the VW’s pace, but not nearly as much as you might expect given the top-spec GTI’s performance enhancements.
In the context of the 13-strong category, though, the Skoda was off the pointy end pace. It was a second off the class-leading pace for the 0-400m sprint, a full four seconds slower around the circuit than the $50-$100K benchmark time. A strong result then, but one quite a bit short of a fight for the win.
The Octavia did, however, dispatch the well-regarded WRX, which surprised many on the BFYB crew.
The real surprise, though, is that the Octavia RS remains off many petrolheads’ radars. It’s comfortable, accomplished, unassuming, want-for-little motoring that quicker and more fun that you might expect.
If this was All Round Goodness For Your Modest Buck, this’d be a clear favourite.
Results $0-50K placing – 6th Overall placing – 8th Judges’ ranking – 12th
0-100km/h – 6.30sec (12th) 0-400m – 14.60sec @ 159.80km/h (12th) Lap Time – 1:45.50sec (10th) Pricing – $36,490 (8th)
Specs Engine: 1984cc inline-4, DOHC, 16v, turbo Power: 162kW @ 6200rpm Torque: 350Nm @ 1500-4400rpm Weight: 1417kg Gearbox: 6-speed manual Suspension: struts, A-arms, adaptive dampers, anti-roll bar (f); multi-links, coil springs, adaptive dampers, anti-roll bar (r) Brakes: 340mm ventilated discs, single-piston calipers (f); 270mm solid discs, single-piston calipers (r) Wheels: 18 x 7.5-inch (f/r) Tyres: 225/40R18 92Y Contisportcontact 2 (f/r)
Get your free weekly report from the world of fast cars – subscribe to the MOTOR newsletter!
As a three-time Bang winner, seventh place might seem like a damning indictment of Subaru’s latest WRX, so let me set the record straight right away: this is most enjoyable WRX to drive for many years.
Sure, introducing a $0-50K class did it no favours when it costs $38,990, but its lowly placing is far more to do with the plethora of very cheap, very fast and very entertaining metal that’s now available.
Successful Rexes of years past have too often relied on being able to produce a stunning set of numbers once, before melting into a steaming pile of horse manure when asked to repeat the trick.
While there is still room for improvement, this year’s model showed far more stamina when subjected to the racetrack torture test.
A hard couple of laps would cause the brakes to wilt, but given the old car’s stoppers went south after about three corners, progress has been made.
By far the biggest stride, though, has been made in the handling department. Whereas the dynamics of recent WRXs seemed to have been modelled on blancmange, Rex MY14 is sharper, fitter and much more focused.
It’s not interested in lairiness, it simply wants to get around the circuit as quickly as possible, and finally it’s now responsive enough for the driver to find pleasure in doing just that.
A lap time of 1:42.80 set the benchmark for most of the day, and for all its tricky diffs and extra power, the STI could only shave another 1.3sec off that.
Perhaps unsurprisingly given his rallying backround, Brendo was an instant fan, placing it second on his scorecard, but without fail every judge exited the Rex expressing surprise at just how much fun it was.
If you’re waiting for the inevitable ‘but’, here it is. For years the Rex has been an engine looking for a chassis to house it, but now it’s exactly the other way around.
The new FA20 2.0-litre turbocharged boxer four feels flat with a power curve as lumpy as week-old milk and the new six-speed gearbox is notchy and obstinate.
No doubt with development both will improve markedly, but the STI, which retains the old 2.5-litre/six-speed combo, is a stark reminder of what went missing.
Against the clock, the WRX is no faster than when it first won Bang back in 1998.
The launch technique remains wincingly brutal, and the best it could manage was 0-100km/h in 6.08sec and 0-400m in 14.15sec at 158.87km/h.
Not bad numbers by any means, but the competition is catching up while Subaru stands still.
It might not be the giant-killer it once was, but the WRX is a proper driver’s car once again, and given it costs even less than it did in 1994, in real terms it’s cheaper than ever.
Results $0-50K placing – 7th Overall placing – 7th Judges’ ranking – 8th
0-100km/h – 6.08sec (10th) 0-400m – 14.15sec @ 158.87km/h (11th) Lap Time – 1:42.80sec (4th) Pricing – $38,990 (10th)
Specs Engine: 1998cc flat-4, DOHC, 16v, turbo Power: 197kW @ 5600rpm Torque: 350Nm @ 2400-5200rpm Weight: 1424kg Gearbox: 6-speed manual Suspension: strut, coil springs, anti-roll bar (f); double-wishbone, coil springs, anti-roll bar (r) Brakes: 315mm ventilated discs, 2-piston calipers (f) 287mm solid discs, single-piston calipers (r) Wheels: 17 x 8.0-inch Tyres: 235/45 R17 Dunlop Sport Maxx RT
Get your free weekly report from the world of fast cars – subscribe to the MOTOR newsletter!
Put down your keyboards, angry VW fans, we know we’ve got the wrong car.
While there’s no doubting the Performance Pack is the sharpest tool in the GTI shed, the nature of the BFYB formula means the extra seven kilowatts, bigger brakes and tricky front diff were never going to overcome the extra $6500 the Performance Pack adds to a base manual GTI.
So why did we take it? Simple, it was the only one VW had.
The bad news for those ready to lambast us for handicapping the Golf’s chances of its first win since 2010 is that it wouldn’t have made much difference.
Even assuming that the base manual matched the PP’s numbers – no guarantee given how much sharper the upgraded car is – plugging its lower price into the formula leaves the GTI… eighth, exactly where the PP ended up.
And overall? Yes, the base car would’ve moved a couple of places further up, but it wouldn’t have given the pointy end any trouble.
Yesterday’s hero, then? Not quite. Check out the judges’ rankings for an accurate representation of its abilities.
That trick new front diff is truly a thing of wonder, more throttle dragging the nose further into the apex when traditional logic says it should be pushing wide.
Everywhere else it feels very similar to the regular Golf GTI, which is certainly no bad thing.
The 2.0-litre turbo four has plenty of punch and revs strongly, the brakes stand up well and the handling is entertaining and agile.
A lap time of 1:44.9sec put it well clear of the baby hatches, though still two seconds off the pace of the all-wheel drive WRX.
VW’s biggest mistake was letting its health and safety people meddle in the GTI PP’s final tune.
It really is a travesty that VW creates a chassis this good then smothers it with electronics; you can turn everything off in the R, so why not the GTI?
This ‘careful now!’ attitude also explains the GTI PP’s lacklustre straight-line numbers.
Since VAG products cut the throttle whenever there is brake applied, you can’t build any launch revs, which gives you two options: first, walk the car off the line as gently as possible, or two, use the launch control and try and manage the furious wheelspin and axle tramp that results.
Neither is the fastest method and 0-100km/h in 6.80sec and a 14.9 quarter was the best it could manage.
A grippier surface would have helped, but check out how much faster the (manual) Octavia RS was! It’s all in the launch.
None of this takes away from the fact that the GTI PP is a superb road car, and good fun on a track, too – it’s just frustratingly held back from being as good as it could be.
Results $0-50K placing – 8th Overall placing – 14th Judges’ ranking – 6th
0-100km/h – 6.80sec (13th) 0-400m – 14.90sec @ 159.5km/h (13th) Lap Time – 1:44.90sec (8th) Pricing – $48,490 (12th)
Specs Engine: 1984cc inline-4, DOHC, 16v, turbo Power: 169kW @ 4700-6200rpm Torque: 350Nm @ 1500-4600rpm Weight: 1364kg Gearbox: 6-speed DSG Suspension: A-arms, adaptive dampers, anti-roll bar (f); multi-links, coil springs, adaptive dampers, anti-roll bar (r) Brakes: 340mm ventilated discs, 4-piston calipers (f); 310mm ventilated discs, single-piston calipers (r) Wheels: 19 x 7.5-inch (f/r) Tyres: 225/35 19 Pirelli P-Zero (f/r)
Get your free weekly report from the world of fast cars – subscribe to the MOTOR newsletter!
Of the handful of cars fittingly equipped to demonstrate Korea’s world-class aspirations, Kia’s Pro Cee’d GT is right up there.
And upon our current long-termer hatchback’s shoulders sits the Asian nation’s strongest BFYB pitch to date.
That mantle used to be Hyundai’s, specifically the i30, currently the SR variant, which you’ll read about elsewhere down the rankings.
Relativity? Well, down the drag strip, the Kia’s 7.47sec 0-100m and 15.37sec 0-400m times were a full second quicker than the i30, and the GT’s 4.60 80-120km/h sprint a sizeable 0.9sec brisker than the SR’s.
Terminal speed? At the 400m mark the Kia was almost 10km/h faster than its arch national rival.
Our emergency braking test couldn’t shake the status quo either, the Kia’s 37.7m stop a full four metres shorter than the Hyundai.
And, unlike the i30, the GT’s stoppers held up respectably to torturous lapping at Winton. Between these domestic rivals, the particularly richly spec’d $29,990 Kia asks for just two grand extra over the i30, demonstrating impressive all-round value.
Thing is, there were three other sub-$30K front-drivers from Europe – the Fiesta ST, the Peugeot 208 GTI and the Clio R.S. – that were giving the BFYB stopwatch a harder shake.
All of them are smaller compact hatchbacks yet equally potent under their bonnets. Even at 150kW/265Nm, the Kia’s 1.6L turbo four is a little undercooked for its small hatch segment.
It could do with a proper 2.0L engine and, frankly, the Euros stole the march over the Kia pretty much everywhere.
In fact, only three competitors of the sub-$50K class were slower around Winton Kia’s lap time of 1:47.8sec: the Abarth, the i30 SR and the Mazda 3 SP25. Meanwhile, the quickest of the 12-strong group was a full 6.3sec faster to the chequered flag.
The same could be said about straight-line performance. While it certainly gave the Hyundai a pasting, its time were still dwelling down towards the bottom end of the results lists.
The Kia is certainly world class for all-round goodness, especially in areas such as refinement, equipment levels, design and more.
The GT is a surprisingly good and solid performer. But it offers go-fast greatness merely in shades, and the reality is that $30K can buy quicker devices that are patently more engaging to drive.
I suspect Korea will be giving the sharp end a big hustle sooner rather than later, though…
Results $0-50K placing – 9th Overall placing – 10th Judges’ ranking – 16th
0-100km/h – 7.47sec (18th) 0-400m – 15.37sec @ 149.36km/h (17th) Lap time – 1:47.80sec (18th) Pricing – $29,990 (6th)
Specs Engine: 1591cc inline-4, DOHC, 16v, turbo Power: 150kW @ 6000rpm Torque: 265Nm @ 1750-4500rpm Weight: 1373kg Gearbox: 6-speed manual Suspension: struts, anti-roll bar (f); multi-links, coil springs, anti-roll bar (r) Brakes: 300mm ventilated discs, single-piston calipers (f); 262mm solid discs, single-piston calipers (r) Wheels: 18 x 7.5-inch (f/r) Tyres: 225/40 ZR18 92Y Michelin Pilot Sport 3 (f/r)
Get your free weekly report from the world of fast cars – subscribe to the MOTOR newsletter!
I have a bit of history with the current Mazda 3 SP25 and race-tracks.
My biggest brush with fame yet saw me hang out with the celebs driving in this year’s AGP celebrity race and while I was disappointed not to be buried in a mountain of white powder or raced off by a pack of rampant groupies, I was surprised at how hard the celebs competed.
I was also a bit surprised at how well the Mazda 3 managed a job it was never designed for. However, that does not mean it was the perfect race-car, so I had my reservations going into BFYB.
Foremost of those was the brakes. Even with the upgraded stoppers on the celeb-race cars, the 3 was still running out of brakes at our Sandown training camp.
So, no surprises then, to learn that the stoppers are the limiting factor at Winton, too. Oh sure, it can stop hard…once, and our number of 37.7m is nothing to complain about. But when asked to do the same thing time and again, the SP25 starts dropping the ball.
As it was, our best lap-time was a 1.52:60 which was stone, motherless last. Ah well.
Of course, it’s not just a relative lack of brakes, it’s also a distinctly road-tuned engine that is aimed at litres per kilometre, not kilometres per hour necessarily.
As such, 0-100km/h took 8.25 seconds, 400m claimed 15.87sec with a terminal speed of 148.33 and 80-120km/h was covered off in 5.03. All those numbers are towards the blunt end of things.
You’re also dealing with a car that was towards the slow end of things for speed down the straight, but interestingly, the SP25 was among the quickest of its category when it came to outright speed through the wicked Winton sweeper. Says a bit about balance, we reckon.
And here’s something else to remember: the Mazda’s bacon was saved somewhat by it being the cheapest car here. Imagine that, a classy product like the Mazda 3, fresh from a global release just last year turning out to be the bargain buy!
On the other hand, you also had the Ford Fiesta ST at just a hundred bucks more ripping out 0-100s nearly a second quicker and turning in a lap that was a full six seconds quicker than the Mazda could manage. You can see the problem…
Results $0-50K ranking – 10th Outright result – 9th Judges’ ranking – 18th
0-100km/h – 8.20sec (18th) 0-400m – 15.87sec @ 148.33km/h (18th) Lap Time – 1:52.60sec (21st) Price – $25,890 (1st)
Specs Engine: 2488cc inline-4, DOHC, 16v Power: 138kW @ 5700rpm Torque: 250Nm @ 3250rpm Weight: 1302kg Gearbox: 6-speed manual Suspension: struts, anti-roll bar (f); multi-links, coil springs, anti-roll bar (r) Brakes: 295mm ventilated discs, single-piston calipers (f); 265mm solid discs, single-piston calipers (r) Wheels: 18x 7.0-inch Tyres: 215/45 R18 89W Dunlop Sport Maxx II
Get your free weekly report from the world of fast cars – subscribe to the MOTOR newsletter!
Mini claims its new Cooper S is “proper quick.”
“It only needs 6.8 seconds to hit 100km/h and for the enthusiast who uses the race track, it won’t stop until there’s a mind-bending 235km/h on the speedometer.”
Such spiel spawns high expectations. Particularly given how finger-licking good the Mini GP was – of course, last year’s Bang winner.
Let’s start with the engine, whose philosophy for going fast is now all torque rather than revs.
Boot it in first and you’ll notice a long ratio, but through which the engine swiftly hauls. Max torque of 280Nm at 1250rpm will do that.
But you fall off a cliff past 6000rpm and quickly discover the last 1000rpm before redline is a dead zone not worth visiting, particularly given there’s no blood-chilling exhaust note living there.
Unfortunately, while its numbers are midfield – 0-100km/h in 7.43sec (9th in class), 0-400m in 15.3sec (8th in class) and 80-120km/h in 4.22sec (6th in class) – the Bang formula is unkind to the Mini’s $36,950 price, spitting it out a pretty average 11th in class, or 16th outright. But surely the Mini is a hoot to drive on track, right? Well, sort of.
On a recent road blast, the Cooper S impressed MOTOR with a light rear end, sturdy steering and a sweet manual gearbox. But on track, and with high expectations, we were disappointed to learn the Cooper S struggles to emerge from the Mini GP’s very long shadow.
The suspension, so capable at smoothing mid-corner bumps on the road, felt too soft on track. It’s like driving a lowered Countryman.
The feeling of mass is made worse by a standard tyre that just can’t handle the cornering load. Of all the 22 cars tested at Bang 2014, the new Cooper S recorded an apex speed of 50.11km/h – stone cold slowest.
The lower grip, too, means the Cooper S is understeer prone. Once upon a time, you’d get a trophy for understeering a Mini.
Meanwhile the rear-end lightness apparent on the road doesn’t directly translate into wickedly hilarious on-track playfulness. Flick the Cooper S and it will rotate into oversteer, but in an inelegant, mildly frightening way.
Fortunately, a lack of mid-corner grip didn’t impact the Mini’s laptime, with a 1:46.3 landing it a solid sixth in class. Thank the torquey turbo donk that’s able to hurl the Mini through its long gears, reflected by a seventh-best Winton v-max of 161.37km/h.
Upon serious reflection, BMW has built a Mini that is a much, much better car than the last. It’s beautifully polished – it rides well, it’s quiet, comfortable, with a nice interior. BMW has built a superb road car but it left us lukewarm on the track.
With stiffer suspension and stickier rubber, we’re pinning our hopes of salvation on the JCW. Bring it on.
Results $0-50K placing – 11th Overall placing – 16th Judges’ ranking – 13th
0-100km/h – 7.43sec (17th) 0-400m – 15.30sec @ 154.71km/h (16th) Lap Time – 1:46.30sec (12th) Price – $36,950 (9th)
Specs Engine: 1998cc inline-4, DOHC, 16v, turbo Power: 141kW @ 4700-6000rpm Torque: 280Nm @ 1250-4750rpm Weight: 1160kg Gearbox: 6-speed manual Suspension: struts, anti-roll bar (f); multi-links, anti-roll bar (r) Brakes: 295mm ventilated discs, single-piston calipers (f); 260mm solid discs, single-piston calipers (r) Wheels: 17 x 7.0-inch (f/r) Tyres: 205/45 R17 Hankook Ventus S1 evo2 (f/r)
Get your free weekly report from the world of fast cars – subscribe to the MOTOR newsletter!
