The prospect of another car that’s had its fixed roof scrapped and replaced with a folding item is hardly big news. Hey, you can even get a Mitsubishi Colt or Ford Focus with a doffable tin-lid.

Then you look at Lexus’ claims about its new IS 250C and perversely, it becomes an extremely interesting car. It’s an almost entirely different car to the four-door donor vehicle, given the exterior’s only carry-over items are the bonnet, headlights and wing mirrors.The back end is where most of the action has happened, that is, providing a big enough boot to stow the three-piece roof. Yes, the 250C has a big bustle, but one that just about works stylistically, apart from some unresolved lines from the C-pillar to the rear wheelarch. Roof up, there’s a massive amount of luggage space; stowed, there’s not much at all, but at least what’s available is behind the folded roof, not underneath and virtually inaccessible as with some other convertible hardtops.Chief engineer Keiichi Yoneda said it was a major job to design the roof and still retain Lexus’ NVH parameters. To that end, he utilised 13 electric (rather than noisier hydraulic) motors for the folding process, and no less than 33 sensors to verify its operation, including one that recognises low garage roofs. Good thinking.There’s also a good 60kg of additional body strengthening components, including seven under-floor cross braces. Together with another 60kg of new roof mechanism and 30kg or so of related paraphernalia (such as folding rear headrests for a sleeker look) and extra spec in higher-end models, it all equates to a convertible up to 150kg heavier than the 1625kg IS 250 sedan.There are three spec levels, all sharing identical 2.5-litre V6, six-speed auto drivetrains. All get touch-screen sat-nav, heated seats and rear parking sensors, with prices starting at $79,900 for the Prestige, $84,900 for the Sport (with its 18-inch rims and radar cruise control) while the Sports Prestige tops the range at $99,900. In comparison, BMW’s 325i Convertible auto starts at $100,088.The best news is that the IS 250C is nice to drive. The ride is velvety smooth without being wallowy, the steering has plenty of feel and road and wind noise levels are low. And yet there are decent levels of grip and handling precision, at least on the 18-inch tyre package.The drivetrain is just as refined and there are paddleshifts (even in full-auto mode) to help you fully exploit the rev range. As it happens, they’re essential: with only 153kW and 252Nm to propel a fair mass, the folding hardtop IS 250 lacks mid-range grunt on uphill country roads. We’re told a 3.5-litre V6 version available in the US won’t come here in the foreseeable future.Roof off, cruising through a sunny urban environment, this is an automotive analgesic to the outside world. Red hot performance it might not have, but the IS 250C’s refinement, interior comfort and build integrity make it an alluring proposition for summer.

Lexus IS 250C Sports Prestige

2500cc V6, dohc, 24v 153kW @ 6400rpm 252Nm @ 4800rpm 6-speed automatic 9.0sec (claimed) $99,900 Now

Remember cornering an Audi executive at dinner a few years ago and grilling him about the disappointing dynamics of the (now previous-generation) S4.

Surprisingly, rather than stoutly defending Ingolstadt’s honour, he freely (although off the record) admitted it was dynamically hamstrung and that a BMW 3 Series was a much sharper drive. Primed with a little liquid courage, I pushed a bit further.

The flared wheelarches and tough-guy swagger, I argued, promised a proper sports sedan experience, but fell frustratingly flat in delivery. That bellowing 4.2-litre V8 and rear-biased all-wheel-drive system gelled on smooth roads, but a punishing ride, wooden steering, and a total inability to deal with bumps and corners simultaneously killed the love.The sharp-suited exec sighed and nodded, but even back in 2006, he clearly knew something was brewing back in Ingolstadt. He leaned over and whispered that BMW was going to face some much stiffer competition from Audi in the years to come. Draining the last of his shiraz, a wicked little smile played across his lips and he told me the next S4 would flip the status quo. Not that this kind of car-company spin was surprising, and I’ve heard plenty of bare-arsed lies at industry dinners, but even back then I got the impression there was some substance behind his bravado.Fast-forward three years and it takes just one strafe down a twirling ribbon of mountain pass behind the wheel of the new S4 to prove his words prophetic.But clearly Audi’s tilt at sports-sedan supremacy hinges on defeating another German giant, and the S4’s sparring partner is sucking up 98 RON as I pull into the servo in the early hours of a crisp July morning. Sexy, gunmetal grey paint glinting in the sun and aggressive bodykit hunkered over the tarmac, it’s all tautly drawn surfaces and sporting intent. Man, this thing looks good. The badge on its rump reads 335i.BMW has been the undisputed heavyweight champion of sports sedans for close to 50 years. Since the first four-door 1500 in 1962, through to the legendary 2002 turbo of ’73 and across successive generations of M3s and M5s, BMW has spiked pulses and stirred trousers the world over. But even the lesser models have always been cast from the same mould, woven from the same strand of tightly-focused DNA. Any enthusiast will tell you fun lives largest in rear-drivers and BMW has a blue-ribbon pedigree in delivering finely honed rear-drive sedans.Audi has stuck with its traditional rear-biased all-wheel-drive performance mantra, but has given the S4 a ground-up rebuild. Based on the company’s new mid-sized platform (also underpinning the A4 and A5 ranges), the naturally-aspirated V8 has been turfed in favour of a supercharged, direct-injection 3.0-litre V6 (which, confusingly, is badged as a ‘V6T’). Power drops slightly from 253kW to 245, but torque ramps up 30Nm to 440. More telling, however, is where that blown grunt is produced. Max torque is on tap from 2900-5300rpm, then at 5500rpm peak power steps in and stays on hot and strong until redline at 7000rpm.Now, swapping from a V8 to a blown V6 isn’t going to refreeze one single square centimetre of polar icecap, but it does make for a more wallet-friendly 9.4L/100km ADR sticker (down 24 percent). But keep the new V6 spinning in the meat of its power zone and that figure will skyrocket. The Audi recorded 14.1L/100km over our test loop, while 335i’s twin-turbo six slurped 11.3L/100km. Chalk one up for BMW.Why did Audi choose the less sophisticated supercharging route when almost every other manufacturer is playing with turbo tech, and Audi itself fits plenty of its other models with hairdryers? Packaging and weight are two key reasons; with the Roots-type blower nestling neatly between the banks of the 90-degree V6 and the entire engine weighing in at just 189kg. Throttle response also benefits – the V6 whip-cracks like it’s wired to your right ankle with a crispness the BMW’s turbo six simply can’t match.The 3 Series range was revised and reloaded late last year with a host of subtle cosmetic changes that crank up the dial on the sedan’s kerbside swagger. I’d love to list for you exactly what BMW has changed, but the press kit was written in some bastardised, incomprehensible form of English that probably got someone in marketing a promotion, but left me scratching my head. I’m still not sure what ‘new width orientation’ means, but I did decipher that a wider rear track, new side sills, new headlamps and tail-lights are among the more significant changes.What hasn’t changed is the 335i’s superb drivetrain. The 225kW/400Nm twin-turbo 3.0-litre straight six is left untouched and still hooks up to the slick-shifting six-speed ZF auto (the 335i coupe and convertible are available with Bee Em’s seven-speed dual-clutch ‘box), making this one of the sweetest drivetrain combinations available. The two equi-sized, low-inertia turbos – each force feeding three cylinders – spool up from 1300rpm, meaning turbo lag is virtually nonexistent and that creamy 400Nm wallop of torque stays under your right foot until 5000rpm. This engine is more flexible than a Chinese gymnast, and while it may cede 20kW and 40Nm to the S4, the BMW is 135kg lighter than the bigger-bodied S4. As a consequence, it feels beefier in the mid-range, chewing tarmac as the turbos whistle distantly, then giving way to a metallic snarl as the tacho charges to redline and the engine wails like a BMW should.But as sweet as the 335i’s engine is, it can’t touch the S4’s ballistic top-end pace. Below 3000rpm, the Audi’s 3.0 TFSI doesn’t feel any more special than the 3.2-litre V6 fitted to top-end A4s, but as the crank spins into the upper reaches, speed seems to multiply exponentially and the final charge from 5000-7000rpm is like being strapped to a Tomahawk missile. The Vbox-verified figures are 0-100km/h in 5.05sec, with the 400m marker gobbled up in 13.19sec. The BMW doesn’t exactly hang around at 5.52 and 13.68 seconds, but the list of cars left sucking fumes by the S4 stretches from any HSV on sale to the Maserati Gran Turismo. And it’s breathing hot on the neck of any Porsche 911 not spinning turbos…Some of the credit for this scorching straight-line speed must go to the new seven-speed dual-clutch ‘box. Despite being a little recalcitrant and clunky around town (particularly moving away from standstill), in max-attack mode shifts are eye-blink quick and virtually imperceptible; only the rise and fall of the V6’s buzz-saw snarl and the relentless sweep of the speedo needle indicates cogs being swapped. The Bee Em’s torque-converter auto creams the Audi’s for smoothness around town, sliding seamlessly between ratios, but is outgunned by the S4’s rifle-bolt changes, and the twin-snail straight six can’t match the blown V6’s high-rpm heroics.But the Audi’s real party trick, the reason BMW should be worried, is the way it now goes around corners. The S4’s transformation is nothing short of a revelation, and the key to its dynamic revolution lies in the revised all-wheel-drive system (which can send up to 85 percent of torque to the rear wheels, or 65 percent to the front axle) and the optional new active rear ‘sport differential’ which juggles torque between the rear wheels. The propeller heads among you will want to know that this trick diff uses a variety of sensors monitoring steering angle, lateral acceleration, yaw angle and road speed to calculate which wheel needs a torque injection, and is capable of sending nearly 100 percent of drive to either wheel. But all you really need to know is that it works. And then some.Pinned hard in a corner, you can feel the diff shuffling drive to the outside wheel as the tyres squirm into the tarmac, allowing the S4 to fire out of bends with an almost Evo-like ferocity. There’s a fluency and agility to this German that marks it as a true driver’s car, and the added steering effect of sending drive to the outside rear wheel means the S4 carves corners like Dad attacking the Christmas turkey, just minus all the sweating and swearing.Long sweepers tackled close to the limit will initiate the push into understeer, but tighter bends are a playground and the playful, adjustable chassis is a peach. Lift off the throttle and the nose tightens its line as the bum smudges wide, then nail the throttle to execute delicate apex-clipping drifts. Or, choose to drive straight and the power-down exits are electric and overall grip levels huge.Tearing back up the pass, criss-crossing tight 30km/h hairpins and stretching out onto fast, white-knuckle sweepers, the BMW’s twin-turbo six is sucking hard on the cool winter air and offering a very different experience to the S4. The first thing you notice is the contrast in steering between the two. The BMW’s steering is heavy and meaty around town, but lightens too much at speed and under load, which strikes me as the opposite of how it should be. There’s always a fine grain of feel through the thick-rimmed wheel, and turn-in is sharper than that of the S4, but the hair-trigger steering tugs and tramlines and you feel like you’re chasing the nose through corners, sometimes making it difficult to find a smooth, steady line.The rear-drive chassis is sweetly balanced, though, and throttle control is linear and consistent, despite the twin huffers forcing 400Nm through rear rubber only. There’s a certain delicacy to the 335i’s dynamic behaviour that the S4 lacks, but in terms of outright grip and pace, the Audi is simply on another level. The BMW is still a fine sports sedan, but on the optional M Sport suspension and 18in wheels, the ride is borderline harsh over scarred urban arterials and feels nervous charging over back roads. The rear rebound is too fast, bobbing sharply over dips and humps and feeling disconnected from the sniffer-dog front end.The S4 was fitted with Audi’s optional ($6700) ‘Drive Select’ system, which bundles adaptive three-mode dampers and active steering with the brilliant rear differential. This system allows comfort, auto and dynamic modes for the steering, gearbox, diff and dampers. The Audi offers a noticeably superior ride (now there’s a sentence you don’t see very often). The springs and adaptive dampers round off larger impacts with a deft touch – even on the stiffest setting – and keep body movements firmly in check without punishing kidneys. Around town, the ride is stiff-legged even in comfort mode, but it’s an acceptable trade-off for the apex-clipping dynamics.The S4’s active steering isn’t as successful. It’s pleasingly light in comfort mode for tooling around town and parking, then firms up nicely in dynamic mode when the red mist clouds the eyes, but there’s virtually no connection and the weighting is artificial, lacking the BMW tiller’s trace of feel.The Audi’s dynamic superiority, however, does come at a price. Fitted with $12,578 worth of options (Drive Select, upgraded audio system, sports seats, carbon-look interior trim and metallic paint) the final figure jumps to $131,478.Our 335i kicked off from a lower base ($107,300) and added the $4800 M Sport package (including sport suspension, 18in alloys, M steering wheel, and sports seats), along with metallic paint ($1840) and sunroof ($2920) for a $116,860 tag.But as accomplished and undeniably bloody quick as the S4 is, there’s still a certain Audi-ness which left me slightly cold. It’s difficult to pinpoint, although the numb steering and excessively assisted brakes certainly contribute, but it’s the over-arching sense of clinical efficiency that makes it difficult to truly bond with the Audi. It lacks a kind of mechanicity if you will; its true character buried under a layer of refinement and Germanic efficiency. The chassis may be a peach, but that ultimate, eye-popping tactility is missing. For some, this may be a positive attribute, but I craved the extra touch of involvement.Nevertheless, Audi’s victory here is emphatic; the S4 is a stunningly rapid and cohesive sports sedan. The 335i still deserves praise, but the game has moved on and Ingolstadt has rocked the status quo.

By finding yet another application for its latest-generation 2.0-litre TFSI four, Audi has created a cracker of an A5 coupe that makes the pricier 3.2 V6 version seem almost redundant.

The 1984cc direct-injection turbo comes straight out of the Q5 (as well as VW’s Tiguan and forthcoming Golf GTI) and produces identical numbers iV 155kW from 4300-6000rpm and 350Nm from a lowly 1500rpm. The engine’s A5 introduction also coincides with a new double-clutch transmission and the availability of a manual in the regular A5 for the first time.With a starting price of $79,900, the 2.0T A5 quattro wears 17-inch alloys and Pirelli rubber but, despite the lower ask, retains the higher-spec A5’s design cues and equipment levels, including LED running lights, leather trim, electric seats and Bluetooth.The 2.0TFSI is full of character as you’d expect from a Golf GTI engine. Pre-drive apprehensions that the newest A5 V that weighs 1490kg V may be too much for the engine to haul are very quickly dismissed. Despite no changes from its Q5 spec, the 2.0-litre pulls hard once the momentary lag has passed.Above 2000rpm it really starts to shine and loves having revs piled on, while emitting a subtle induction note to let you know its working. It’s an immensely flexible engine that responds quickly to throttle inputs, but while acceleration is willing, the A5 is no giant-killing performance coupe. It’s more a talented tourer. Steering that lacks feel, but is at least accurate, puts paid to any aspirations the A5 may have to being a proper sports coupe.The other key advantage the 2.0 TFSI offers is Audi’s new double-clutch seven-speed S-tronic box, also from the Q5, that adds $3600 to the A5’s ask. Also now offered in the A4 sedan and Avant, it shifts in 0.2sec and doesn’t suffer the same indecision we’ve found in other DSG/S-tronics, or the tiptronic found in the 3.2 V6 A5 and A4 (which keep the torque-converter auto). The seven-speeder has three modes V Drive, Sport and Manual V with the latter the best on a winding road. Left in Drive, it changes smoothly and precisely without incessantly hunting for gears.So the 2.0-litre has a more-responsive transmission than the V6, which makes the S-tronic A5 a quicker point-to-point car than the manual version, despite both sharing the same 6.5-to-100 claim.For a coupe that quick, the 2.0-TFSI combined fuel economy of 7.5L/100km is really impressive. In comparison, the higher-spec $98,500 3.2 V6 quattro offers less torque (330Nm) at higher revs (3000rpm), sprints to 100km/h in a slightly faster 6.4sec, yet drinks much more fuel (9.3L/100km).The A5 coupe range now spans three engines (2.0TFSI, 3.0TDI, 3.2FSI), three transmissions and $80K to $98K, with a sexy convertible set to join the range later in the year. Audi expects the 2.0TFSI to account for 30 percent of the A5’s volume, which means about 130 should find upscale Aussie homes by year’s end.And we don’t doubt that as it introduces a more economical, but still highly entertaining and capable package that represents perhaps the A5 iteration yet.

I bet I know what you want from the Alfa Mito. I’ll bet that, like me, you want this little Hello Kitty-faced pocket hottie to be fast, noisy, alive in your hands and root-your-poodle obnoxious.

Sorry to disappoint, but it’s not the least bit noisy. Nor is it fully those other things, to the extent of bygone, budget-boned GTIs. But the Mito, at $31,490 base and $37,490 Sport, isn’t chasing cheap, raw hatchbacks.The Mito (it means both ‘myth’, and a blend of Milano and Torino) is underpinned by the Fiat Punto’s strut front/torsion-beam rear platform. Nothing wrong with that. Developing Mito exclusively as a three-door gave designers greater freedom to coupe-fy it, inside and out.Both the Mito and Mito Sport are powered by 1.4-litre turbo engines (see breakout). The five-speed manual Mito’s no slouch, with 0-100km/h in 8.8 seconds; one-tenth quicker than the similarly powered Punto T-Jet.Mito Sport’s bigger-boost engine, six manual slots and claimed identical 1145kg kerb weight help trim the 0-100 to eight seconds neat. (There’s no self-shifting tranny until mid-next year.)Mito isn’t shy on equipment, with stability control, hill-holder, auto windows, a six-speaker sound system, voice-command phone link, 16-inch alloys, cruise control and trip computer.Sport steps up to 17s, Brembo brakes, rear parking sensors, sportier cloth trim (with leather a $2500 option), dual-zone climate control, brushed metal bits and faux-carbon dash (see breakout).Steering adjusts for height and reach, and both left and right seats get lumbar and height adjust. But nobody gets grab handles or much storage.A class first in both cars is DNA, a three-mode (Dynamic, Normal and All-Weather) control for steering, throttle and ESP response. The latter governs behaviour of the trick Q2 diff.Something sure works, because the Mito’s turn-in response is as quick, sharp and grippy as anything out there, although the steering feels wooden, even when firmed up in Dynamic mode.The base car is nicely quick, albeit lacking the urgency and edginess of the Sport. But the same is also true of the ride, which is nicer, if still a little busy, on the base car’s 16s. The Sport makes more obvious an imbalance of finesse between the front and rear ends; while the nose flows and sticks, the too-stiff tail tries to bully mid-corner bumps and will skitter out of line before regaining itself.Mito’s price puts it right alongside Mini (less performance, more prestige) and RenaultSport Clio (vice-versa) and with practicality bang in between. Overall, the Mito’s neither better nor worse; just different. Which is still the best reason for having an Alfa.

Alfa Romeo Mito Sport

1368cc 4cyl, dohc, 16v turbo 114kW @ 5500rpm 230Nm @ 3000rpm 6-speed manual 8.0sec (claimed) $37,490

Strange but true: some people are driven into a tizzy by the idea of a diesel sports car. Never the twain shall meet, they rant. Sorry guys, but the sports-diesel union is a done deal.

Any question of the new Audi TT 2.0 TDI quattro’s virility is fully answered by its looking like, sounding like and driving like the sports car it most certainly is. The simple truth is that the TT 2.0 TDI easily outruns any lingering diesel doubts, and puts your sports-driver oil on the boil.Audi credits the TT 2.0 TDI with a 226km/h top speed and a 0-100km/h sprint of 7.5 seconds. Can’t yet vouch for the Vmax, but bum’s-rush judgement of the TDI’s thrust through the gears suggests mid-sevens to 100 kays is entirely plausible.At the quoted accelerative level, the TDI is only 0.3sec slower to the tonne than its also-new petrol sibling, the front-drive manual 1.8-litre TFSI. This entry-point TT makes less power and torque (118kW and 250Nm), but also weighs 130kg less than the 1370kg TDI.While the diesel engine weighs a bit more than the petrol donk, the overall difference is due mainly to the torque-rich TDI’s inclusion of quattro AWD.Not surprisingly, the TDI scores decisively for fuel use and CO2 emissions, officially rating 5.3L/100km and 139g/km to the 1.8-litre TFSI’s 6.7L/100km and 158g/km. Thus the TT TDI is Audi’s second most fuel efficient model, bettered by only the A3 TDI e.Given a foot-full, the engine sounds authoritatively meaty. Performance comes on strong from just over 1500rpm, swells forcefully until the tacho needle blurs by the 4500rpm redline and continues boldly until play ends at five grand.However, the TT diesel’s talents aren’t limited to short, sharp, revvy exhortation through the gears. Its overall muscularity brings better than average flexibility and noticeably athletic rolling response.Ambling at the open-road speed limit, the diesel TT answers your call with enthusiasm even in sixth gear, despite that ratio having longer legs than Tyra Banks.But wait, there’s more. The package’s attractions include very grippy, flat cornering, well-balanced handling, disciplined ride quality, arresting brakes, slick gearshift, well-weighted and accurate (if numb) steering, the welcoming 2+2 cabin and ever-present great build quality.Ah yes, whether doubters are ready or not, in the Audi TT the sports diesel has emphatically arrived, and the sports car world is the better for it.

Audi TT 2.0 TDI Quattro

1968cc in-line 4, dohc, 16v, t/d 125kW @ 4200rpm 350Nm @ 1750-2500rpm 6-speed manual 7.5sec (claimed) $70,900

Not long before the end of the 20th century, a remote automotive outpost took a bare-arsed bet on a concept for its first full-sized coupe in 20 years.

Far from being an unnoticed blip on a distant star, the Commodore Coupe concept would re-align the orbit of General Motors itself and make Holden the magnetic centre of its muscle-car galaxy.

Eleven years on, more cataclysmic forces are pulling GM in a new direction. But Holden’s 10-year trajectory produced Monaro, the all-Australian pony-car that went on to earn one of America’s most iconic badges: Pontiac GTO. It put Australia in the box seat to develop GM’s new generation of rear-drive architecture, the Zeta, which in turn put another all-Australian model, the VE Commodore, on the boat to the US wearing Pontiac badges.It culminated, perhaps inevitably, in Australia designing and engineering an all-American icon, the new Camaro. It was a surrogate project, never destined to be built or sold here. Unlike the third, and perhaps most dazzling star that might have embodied the best of everything.We know it as Holden Coupe 60. By the time it was unveiled at the 2008 Melbourne motor show, ostensibly in celebration of Holden’s 60th anniversary, the car that had been developed as the VE-generation Monaro had been dead in the water for three years. “Eventually it was shelved as not the thing to do; for the show car we resurrected it and put carbon all over it,” shrugs Holden’s exterior design manager, Peter Hughes, for whom Coupe 60 was very much his baby.Back in 1998, Hughes was on the team of the now near-legendary Holden design revolutionary, Mike Simcoe. He confirms the furtive Friday nights and surreptitious Sundays that the team spent on the largely unauthorised Commodore Coupe clay. “I recall coming in one Sunday and doing a full-size tape that we were going to show [engineering boss] Tony Hyde. We just let a few important people know that we were going to make a full-sized clay.“These days, [Holden is] far more global, so you have to let people know before you can get things done,” he smiles. “But back in those days, we had a bit more flexibility to hide the costs [involved].Yeah, it was very sneaky…“We were all pretty young when we did it, then it was a big success when it came out. It put Holden – and more specifically, Design – on the map as a stand-alone department that could do things for GM globally.”Of course, it was GM’s product prophet Bob Lutz who saw the inner beauty of the Commodore Coupe. His nod gave the green light for the first new Monaro coupe since the HX LE of 1976, and also put it in the frame for the US market from 2003.Monaro famously took just 22 months from show to go. It was hard work, but Hughes knows only too well that a lot of it had been done already. That’s the culture of design within Holden: any concept they do is already very close to a production reality (excepting Richard Ferlazzo’s wild Efijy hotrod from 2005).“There’s no point doing something wacky,” Hughes says. “We can’t spend millions and millions of dollars on show cars without the intention of going forward into production. It’s pretty well known in the GM world that when Holden does a show car it’s usually quite buildable and quite realistic.“The Coupe 60 was done as a coupe study on VE architecture, similar to Monaro, similar architectural changes. That’s not unknown. It’s the same when we do any new architecture. We do all the variants that could possibly go ahead.”Lutz’s sudden fondness for his antipodean outpost would also, of course, create a global foundation for Holden’s next generation of Commodore. In Zeta, Lutz would have a world-class platform capable of underpinning a variety of enthusiast US models.Matter-of-factly, the design boys set about doing studies of that family. Sedan. Ute. A new twist on wagon. And a coupe.I hear it before I see it. The sharp, Ferrari-like bark seems an octave too high for a 6.0-litre, Gen IV V8. Put that down to a straight-through exhaust system that exits, race car-style, via side pipes. The sound, and the admitted absence of a cat converter, contrasts with the Coupe 60’s green credentials, namely AFM cylinder shutdown and E85 ethanol-blend capability.Still photography can’t do it justice because Coupe 60 is live-action. Light plays and pours over it like mercury as this one-off, hand-built creation motors across the Lang Lang skidpan, rumbles to a halt in front of me and, signing off, cracks a lop-sided grin of right lock.Two weeks of revolving on a motor show stand doesn’t touch 10 seconds of this.I’m later told that the eye-riveting, titanium effect of the paint (which Hughes named Diamond Silver) is achieved by an undercoat of black, followed by four coats of chrome silver. The same process is used on a couple of the Camaro’s wheel options, the number of chrome coats determining the darkness of the final finish.The body shape is a completely logical, yet understandably emotional step from the VE sedan. There’s the zip front overhang, trademark solid surfaces hitting crisp lines, and obvious cues like the hockey stick at the base of the C-pillar. But with its more raked windscreen, 60mm lower roofline, 150mm longer doors (with a properly fast cut-line, unlike the poor old Monaro’s) and 123mm chopped from its upturned tail, Coupe 60 is a more exaggerated and unrestrained expression of VE’s proportions.Even alongside Camaro, this four-seater coupe, on the same wheelbase as its large sedan sister, has all the tension of a sports car.But as I clamber into the carbonfibre-sided channel of the passenger’s seat – a barrier less immovable than the design department minder in the driver’s seat – there seems to be even better accommodation than in a VE sedan. The instrument panel is familiar, but different, with the driver’s side graced with a floating instrument pod atop the steering column.Despite the recognisably thick A-pillars and the prevalence of black interior colour – which, here, brings more focus onto the variety of textures used – there’s space and light everywhere.It’s the pillarless design that absolutely opens the cockpit. The black, high-waisted interior of the VE Commodore (and the Camaro even more so) feel almost dungeon-like by comparison. Remember, underneath Coupe 60’s hand-made fibreglass and carbonfibre panels, is literally a pretty standard, donor Commodore SSV, gas-axed above the sills.Hughes confesses the pillarless solution is a bit fanciful in these times of cost and side-crash constraints. Coupe 60 hangs together with the help of a boot-consuming X-brace. “It’s still possible to have pillarless, but you throw in extra tin and weight and it’s ridiculously expensive.”How does it drive? Firmly. I’d peg the Coupe 60 experience right in the middle of HSV’s sedans and a V8 Supercar, with a plank-stiff ride, neggy-cambered front wheels, side-exit pipes and the whiff of petrol bringing some racetrack realism. The interior is a more pure expression of sports-luxury than HSV’s chintzy efforts – but riding in the Coupe 60’s re-trimmed RaceTech carbonfibre seats is like a spanking session with a dominatrix.It also drives slowly. Coupe 60 itself may not be far from reality, but that can’t be said of the bespoke 21-inch tyres (245/35 front, 285/30 rear) which were hand-cut with a Holden-designed tread pattern. Anything above 40km/h could throw the rubber; stopping on the outer banking of Lang Lang’s speedbowl could roll the soft sidewalls off the rims.Then again, it might not. But neither Holden’s design department nor the suit who inked the Coupe 60’s $1.5m insurance policy wants to find out.Almost certainly, we’ll never get to drive a production VE Monaro. Holden’s design efforts are now necessarily split between its large, rear-drive models and a new emphasis on advance design of smaller, front-drive cars, of which Cruze is an early example.Hughes sees Coupe 60 as a glorious celebration of rear-wheel-drive proportions – “every designer in the world would like to work with the proportions that we’re handed out here” – but he stresses that Coupe 60, with its blend of overt sex and enviro-tech sensibility, is very much alive in its message.“Do we really want to give up rear-drive cars if we can make them more efficient?” he asks. “There’s the challenge: for a car company to keep the dynamics of a rear-wheel-drive car while keeping it efficient and economical. If you can buy a rear-drive car that’s as efficient as a smaller front-drive one, would you?”If it’s a Chevy Camaro, even a V6, we answer hell-yeah!Camaro came from a US show car, but the finished product is as much a tribute to Holden design as it is to Holden’s engineers. Production viability wasn’t included in the fibreglass shell that arrived from the States.“The show car was what we call ‘cheated’,” explains Hughes. “It can’t be produced. It was pushed to the very limits in terms of pressings, slammed roof, overhangs, those sorts of things. The challenge was to move [key aspects of the structure], by 30mm in some areas, to make it so you can’t pick it.”Hughes describes the result as “a dramatic American statement”, which he clarifies as being more extrovert than the drama of Coupe 60. “It has to be,” Hughes says. “When you drive on their roads over there, BMWs just disappear. You don’t notice them.”A close cousin of the Coupe 60, Camaro is very much the squat, haunchy two-plus-two. It’s longer in the dash-to-axle (by 75mm), shorter in the wheelbase, much shorter in the tail, wider in the track. I realised that the black Camaro SS Rallye-Sport that was staring me down, crow-like, was pure Batmobile.The interior is certainly dramatic, from the deeply-dished, Buck Rogers steering wheel to the sweeping, amphitheatre-like instrument panel. Everything’s focused on the front two occupants, though the rear is quite habitable for kids. Interior visibility beyond the B-pillar is severely restricted, but the consolation comes in the exterior-mirror view back to those hard-edged haunches.The dynamics live up to the promise. The manual-trans SS (V8) drivetrain feels instantly familiar to anyone who’s driven a recent V8 Holden/HSV product. There’s a smidge of understeer and perhaps a tad more give in the overall chassis feel, but the chassis’ grip and responsiveness are spectacular. I’m deeply impressed by the SS’s ride, which is pock-marked only by the rumble through the 20-inch tyres … until I step into the V6 base LS version.It’s a sweetheart by any measure. The 3.6-litre, direct-injected engine is both adequately strong in the mid-range and absolutely up for a thrashing. The six-speed Aisin manual ‘box is unsurprisingly lighter and faster than the V8’s six-slot Tremec, and the steering’s quickness, plus the incredibly refined ride on the 18-inch 55-series tyres, make this an easy car to get in and drive fast, every day. It made me think of a Commodore SS crossed with a Nissan 370Z.Andrew Holmes, Camaro’s program engineering manager, says the philosophical shift from four-door Commodore to pony-car icon was dead easy. “Among Australian engineers who do that sort of stuff anyway, it was an opportunity for us to build a genuine sports car … Monaro was something that came off an existing platform, there were certain constraints in place.”In today’s GM, there isn’t the same sort of freedom to do covert, Sunday-afternoon skunkworks projects like the one that started this whole thing 11 years ago. But Holmes points out there’s a definite upside. “Back then we had a little bit more autonomy – but by the same token, there’s stuff you miss out on.“You know, it’s nice to be able to go to the guy who did Corvette and the Cadillac XLR and say: ‘I’ve got a little problem, how did you solve it on your car?’ And at the same time, it’s nice to have those guys all asking us stuff we know about.”

Mitsubishi’s rugged Triton utility range has been further boosted by a raft of changes – topped by a new high-powered 2.5-litre common rail turbo diesel – to take the four-wheel-drive variants hauling into next year.

Muscle is a key to success in this work horse segment. Buyers respond to ‘tough’. In looks, character and performance.The 2.5, used previously in two-wheel-drive Tritons, has been upgraded. The numbers are not to be sneezed at – in manual form it knocks up a very driveable 131kW of power at 4000rpm and 400Nm of torque at a handy 2000rpm. This is up 11 percent and 17 percent respectively over the superseded 4M41 3.2-litre turbo diesel. The figures for the auto are 131 kW and slightly less torque – 350Nm.Fuel efficiency is part of the story too, with the manual managing 8.3litres/100km combined, and the auto 9.3.Scoring well in terms of output and efficiency was achieved by changes to the combustion chamber shape, improving the injectors, adding a variable geometry turbo charger and increasing boost pressure.On the road, and on a tough off road course which included many steep climbs, the new package felt responsive and capable.As for the rest of the 2010 line-up, the 2DW Tritons retain the 94kW/194Nm 2.4-litre petrol engine and 100kW/314Nm 2.5-litre diesel from the recent past. The petrol manual (10.4L/100km) can’t get close to either diesel engine variant. The 2.5 litre diesel in the 2WD Triton (admittedly pulling a lighter vehicle) manages 8.2 (manual) and 8.6 (auto).Two automatic trannies are available on the HP (for high performance) diesel variants – a four-speed carried over from the outgoing model is an option on all but the range-topping GLX Triton. The well-equipped GLX is fitted with an electronically-controlled five speed auto with sports mode.We should mention too that standard with the GLX is Mitsubishi’s All Terrain Technology (MATT) featuring the Super Select four-wheel-drive system which includes stability and traction control, multi-mode ABS and optional factory diff lock.Owners will also welcome Mitsubishi’s response to feedback which reflected consumer clamour for improved load carrying and towing abilities with the work-and-play vehicles. The new long-bed tray available on dual cab Tritons have been improved by 14 percent to a tray length of 1505mm and tray height of 460mm. Towing capacity has been boosted too.These days of course, vehicle makers can’t get away with going soft on safety. The new Triton shares a good four-star crash rating with one other competitor – the Toyota Hi Lux. All 2010 Tritons get standard front airbags, anti-skid brakes with electronic brakeforce distribution, and front belt pretensioners.The new range also gets some subtle styling improvements inside (seat fabric and seat pads, instrument panel, audio upgrade) and out (bumpers, grille and side turning lamps).With the launch of the 2010 range, Mitsubishi has simplified the variants to make consumer choice simpler.Eight 2WD variants are petrol manual GL cab chassis and GLX dual cab, and auto or manual diesel GLX cab chassis and dual cab, and GL-R dual cab.The new HP 2.5 diesel is available to power 4WD models in either manual or auto in GLX single cabs and dual cabs, GL-R dual cabs or GLX dual cabs.Prices reflect Mitsubishi’s determination to remains popular in the archly competitive segment.The base GL 4 x2 stays at $20,990. The most expensive model in the catalogue is the 2.5 diesel GLX-R double cab pick-up 4 x 4 at $47,990 (or another $2500 for the auto).The $35,490 GL-R slots into a new price class for Mitsubishi.

ALFA ROMEO’S 8C Spider is one of those cars that invites the suspicion that it will be absolutely at its best when parked. There’s just so much beauty to enjoy without ever tugging the right-hand paddle and kicking the accelerator. Plus, it is an Alfa Romeo, so there’s always the risk that the drive will never live up to the looks.

But the moment your thumbprint on the starter button is answered by a burst of V8-flavoured decibels, it’s clear at least the business end of the 8C Spider is up for the challenge.But first let’s look beneath that achingly gorgeous sheetmetal. As much as possible of the donor coupe’s architecture has been retained for the soft-top version. The same steel platform underpins the car, placing the engine behind the front wheels and the gearbox ahead of the rears. Inevitably, some reinforcement has been added in strategic areas and in the engine bay, but the overall weight of the car has only increased by a modest 90kg.Where the Spider deliberately strays from the script is in its suspension. There are still double wishbones at each corner working with conventional dampers, but here you find stiffer springs and anti-roll bars to, perversely, help improve ride quality. The secret is in the careful selection of gentler damper settings to allow the suspension to breathe more.As for the engine, Alfa Romeo hasn’t fiddled with the 4.7-litre, Maserati-sourced V8. Apart from retuning the exhausts to make the most of its new open-air arena, it’s the same 336kW unit powering the coupe and thunders the Spider from 0-100km/h in a claimed 4.5 seconds and beyond 290km/h.And so the moment to drive arrives. Underway, wind management around the cockpit impresses but what strikes most is the compliancy of the ride. I don’t think anyone will complain that the Spider rides too stiffly.So the 8C Spider is gorgeous to look at and clearly well suited to a grand touring role. Is it too much to hope that it’s also receptive to being hammered around Fiat’s Balocco test track?Apparently not. In theory this heavier, less rigid Spider should struggle to match the standards of the already twitchy coupe, but that’s not how it transpires. Alfa’s engineers have produced a roadster that’s better to drive than its hard-top sister. And that’s something you won’t often read in a motoring magazine. Maybe never again.No-one’s going to criticise the tireless stopping power of the car’s ceramic brakes (but pedal feel is deader than disco) or the way this front-engined Italian angles into a corner, fully justifying Alfa’s keenness to centralise the car’s masses as much as possible. Its weight distribution is actually a perfectly balanced 50/50, while the coupe’s is 49/51 front-to-rear.Once settled and stable, the Spider’s natural desire is to understeer, and while the coupe would also allow this trait to be cancelled by the kick of foot on throttle, I don’t recall it doing so with this kind of grace.And however it behaves, you’ll always have that engine at your command. The whole road-testing vocabulary from thunder to shriek is in there, but it’s the crackle on the overrun at about 4000rpm in third gear that I’ll remember most. How Alfa manages to pass drive-by tests with those exhausts will always be a mystery to me.It’s not hard to find faults with the Spider, not only for the wooden feel of its brakes but also its heavy steering and the fact that its gearbox swaps cogs neither as swiftly nor as smoothly as its rivals’ dual-clutch alternatives.But the truth is that when taken as an entire experience, the Spider is one of the most special roadsters you can buy — or would be able to buy if those damn Italians made the thing in right-hand drive…But credit where credit is due: it doesn’t matter if you’re looking at it, listening to it, cruising in it or thrashing the pants off it; the Spider captures all you could ever hope for from a 21st-century drop-top Alfa sports car.Alfa Romeo 8C Spider 4691cc V8, dohc, 32v 336kW @ 7000rpm 479Nm @ 4750rpm 6-speed automated manual 4.5sec (claimed) A$345,000 (in UK) Not for Australia

It’s the last variant to emerge, but the new Sportback is destined to occupy first place on the A5 sales chart, say Audi execs. Designed chiefly for younger and more sporty European customers than currently buy the A4 sedan or wagon, the hatchback should score a couple of points more root-worthy on anyone’s ‘Would You?’ scale.

While the front third of the Sportback is familiar A5 inside and out, the hatch is built on a longer (by 59mm) wheelbase than the two-door models. This takes the hatch’s axle-to-axle distance 2mm beyond that of the A4. But the Sportback has the A5’s broader-than-A4 front and rear tracks, and is a little lower, so its fundamental proportions are inherently sexier. Audi’s designers, to give them their well-earned due, did pretty good work on the Sportback, making the most of the raw material.The Sportback’s interior provides rear leg and shoulder room similar to that of the A4, and headroom is only slightly less. Anyone up to around 185cm tall won’t feel too cramped for space. The A5’s cargo compartment has the same 480-litre capacity as the A4 sedan, but is easier to access.Perhaps because someone at Audi felt the Sportback was in danger of being perceived as a hatch version of the A4 rather than a practical version of the A5, it has only four seats. From the rear of the Sportback, it seems like the decision was made late. There’s a vast amount of space between the two seats, making it seem like the original idea was to seat three. It also means the view forward from the rear is mostly front seat head restraint and that taller passengers will find the roof rails uncomfortably close to their heads. Both problems would disappear if the rear seats were moved 50mm or so closer to the car’s centreline. While those in the front of the Sportback will find nothing to complain about, this isn’t a very clever four-seat package.‘Not very clever’ also applies to the chassis set-up of most Sportback variants. While Audi’s drivetrain expertise is considerable, the fine engines and excellent transmissions seldom seem to go to worthy homes.While Audi is yet to confirm the exact line-up for Australia, in Europe (where sales began in September) there’s a choice of six engines: three petrol (132kW and 155kW versions of the 2.0-litre four-cylinder turbo TFSI, plus 195kW 3.2-litre V6 FSI) and three TDI turbocharged diesels (125kW 2.0-litre four-cylinder, 140kW 2.7-litre V6 and 176kW 3.0-litre V6). Those with more than 140kW are quattro all-wheel drive.The 3.2-litre V6 quattro, for example, is a pretty awful thing to drive. The suspension manages a combination of both harshness and a lack of control that ruins ride and handling, and inexplicable variations in weighting make the steering pretty unpleasant.But there are two A5 Sportback models that show Audi can, if it tries, deliver dynamics. The basic, front-drive TDI rides and handles quite nicely, but the Sportback TFSI quattro with 155kW engine and seven-speed S-tronic DSG, when equipped with optional Drive Select dynamic control system, is a very accomplished car. If you believe that Audis always understeer (because, well, they do … or at least they used to) this is a car that will change your mind.Possessing trustworthy front-end bite, good natural balance, strong brakes and a driveline that’s a privilege to thrash, this is one of those rare Audis for those who appreciate driving as much as impeccable interior finish. It’s the one to look forward to when the A5 Sportback launches here sometime in the first quarter of 2010.

There’s something odd going on at Ingolstadt. As Audi’s barrage of new model variants continues, a definite trend is emerging that the cheaper, smaller-engined models of the range are much sweeter to drive than their faster, more expensive relatives. The A5 rag-top is a case in point.

All the A5 Cab variants coming to Australian showrooms run quattro all-wheel drive and shift gears via a seven-speed DSG ‘box, but there are three engine options. We drove the 155kW/350Nm turbo four-cylinder petrol version ($94,900) and the 176kW/500Nm 3.0-litre V6 diesel ($112,500). The fastest and most expensive ($116,500) model is powered by a 195kW/330Nm 3.2-litre petrol V6, but wasn’t made available for us to drive. Hmm, I can hear the conspiracy theorists now…The big oiler is smooth and swift, and that slug of turbo torque makes short work of overtaking, plus it’s frugal, wearing a 6.8L/100km sticker. What it isn’t, however, is all that pleasant to hustle along. The suspension is overly stiff, yet body control is a little loose, and the heavy V6 suspended between the front wheels means turn-in is reluctant.Swapping over to the 2.0 TFSI was something of a revelation. The lighter four-cylinder engine takes understeer off the menu and sharpens turn-in. And despite the body being more tightly screwed down, ride quality is markedly more absorbent. Plus the rorty turbo-petrol donk is a honey to hammer, making the cheaper, slower 2.0 TFSI simply a more pleasant car to drive, either cruising or bruising.Elsewhere, the A5 Cab performs exactly as you’d expect: it’s extremely refined top up or down, suffers only minor scuttle shake, the interior is impeccable (although space in the rear two seats is tight) and the tautly-shaped sheetmetal is elegant from every angle. Even on the cheap model.