WhichCar By Wheels

Interesting car, this one. We’ve so far mainly commuted in Australia’s cheapest diesel passenger car and accomplished a dozen or so outer-urban sorties. A more challenging, and revealing, long-haul trip is imminent. That’s when I fully expect to experience the i30 CRDi to the max. And to shake off an urban quirk that’s meant I’ve had to adapt my driving style to suit the car.

I’m talking about the way the i30’s tall, tall fifth is perhaps too lofty on some occasions to work well with the grunty 1.6-litre turbo-diesel when the turbo’s off the boil. As a dyed-in-the-wool short-shifter in traffic, I’ve found that the i30’s diesel donk simply doesn’t like low revs and high gears.The CRDi’s 1.6-litre/variable geometry turbo combination is impressive. Its 85kW and 255Nm peaks are seriously good numbers for an engine of its size. By comparison, the recently departed long-term Skoda Roomster pumped a meagre 77kW and 240Nm from 1.9 litres.Yet the Skoda/VW engine and the Roomster’s gearing made it a better drive than the i30. In traffic, anyway. Where the Roomster could lug from minimal revs — I even went on record as saying it would still pull in fifth from 1000rpm — the i30 won’t. Drop below about 1300rpm in fifth in moderately flowing traffic, and the driveline shudders alarmingly.I’m also reserving my judgement on the i30’s ride quality. It’s not bad but definitely not one of the car’s strong points; although I wonder how much of that is attributable to the Kumhos. Again, a long haul should provide a more definitive assessment.Otherwise, no complaints. The car’s decidedly roomy, the boot’s useful and the flat-folding rear seat arrangement is a bonus. Those thickset C-pillars haven’t yet caused any visibility issues, either. Nice touches include a likeable driving position (with lumbar adjustment on the driver’s seat) and easy-to-use controls and switchgear. Don’t laugh; sometimes an awkward driving position and finicky controls can make a car seem less appealing than the prospect of Christmas dinner at your mother-in-law’s.Date acquired: Nov 2008 Kilometres this month: 1376 Total kilometres: 1441 Av. fuel consumption: 7.1L/100km Maintenance: 100km free inspection serviceIt’s still early days, but we haven’t got within a bull’s roar of Hyundai’s claimed, hybrid-like 4.7L/100km combined fuel consumption. Mind you, we haven’t yet pointed the i30 down a decent highway. That’s next … and should reveal a lot.

The doom-doctors say that car costs and petrol prices are climbing, sales are down, taxes up, ‘safety’ cameras mete out rough justice, speed limits are whittled beyond sensibility and rules and regulations multiply faster than rabbits with a Viagra stash. Whatever happened to the joy of driving?

Well, take heart. Thankfully, some stellar bright spots are beacons for enthusiasm. And here are four of them – the Audi TTS, BMW 135i Sport, Mazda RX-8 GT and Nissan 350Z Track. The blues simply can’t persist within the glow that these four deliver.You’ll notice this quartet doesn’t add up to a typical four-car comparison. Yes, they’re exclusively coupes, but of very different kinds. And very different prices. However, we’re at pains not to try comparing apples with oranges. Hell no, we’ve raided the peach and pear bins as well.For an inkling of the variety on offer, check the engines. Two are naturally aspirated; one a zing-along rotary, the other a hard-hitting V6. Elsewhere there’s a sophisticated turbocharged four, and a brilliant twin-turbo straight-six. Each of ’em has what it takes to keep pushing your starter buttons.These cars’ cabins also display the gamut of coupe possibilities. Of the two-door liftbacks, the 350Z is an undiluted two-seater, while the TTS adds a plus-two jump seat for (small) kids. Of the two conventionally booted ‘coupes’ the 135i Sport will accept four average-sized adults, while the RX-8 is an even more dinkum four-seater, but differs fundamentally with superior rear seating accessed via clever rear doors.Drivetrains? BMW, Mazda and Nissan agree on the longitudinal layout and rear drive, whereas the TTS favours a transverse powertrain and all-wheel drive.While each model tested has a slick six-speed manual gearbox as standard, the 135i Sport and TTS list optional six-speed autos. The RX-8 GT and 350Z Track do not. Mazda’s six-speed auto is optional only for the RX-8 Luxury model, and then with noticeably less power than the manual, while Nissan’s alternate five-speed auto is specific to the 350Z Touring.The disparities are no less marked between the respective price points. The RX-8 GT sets the ball rolling from $57,265. The standard RX-8 asks just $49,720 with the Luxury version from $55,520. As the sportiest rotary, the GT is distinguished by 19-inch wheels, upgraded suspension, bodykit and race-style Recaro front seats.Find another 10 grand or so and you’re on target for the $68,990 350Z Track. The manual Touring version is $5000 cheaper, but lacks the Track’s switchable ESP system (making do just with traction control) and larger Brembo super stoppers.The admission ticket jumps to $72,230 for the stock BMW 135i Sport, which the test example levered to $79,698 via an electric glass sunroof, metallic paint and navigation system. Although not in the 135i Sport’s performance class, the smaller-engined 125i Coupe holds plenty of appeal at $54,401.Finally, the manual TTS Coupe clearly tops the bill with a $92,900 list price. From there, the test TTS drove the ante beyond $100K by dint of metallic paint, 19-inch wheels, navigation/TV system, two-tone full leather interior, premium sound system, adaptive headlights and more.As a footnote, very rarely in our long experience has any car turned as many heads, dropped as many jaws and drawn such high wow-factor scoring as the ocularly riveting Solar Orange TTS. Anyone would rate this a colour/car combo for those keen to be seen.There’s a noticeable spread in these models’ performance potentials. Unavoidably, an abbreviated test session allowed each car only two or three standing start runs, preventing enough practice to guarantee maximum lunge from the all-important launch. Even so, the BMW 135i Sport shoots to 100 clicks in just 5.6 seconds and needs merely 12.7sec to spear 160km/h. It celebrates by nailing the 400m mark in 13.8 seconds, at very near 170km/h.The way the 135i Sport reels off such sprints with consummate authority is hugely impressive. So, too, the sheer exhilaration of the twin-turbo 3.0-litre’s spine-tingling wail as it continues welling way beyond the revs where you might expect its intensity to soften. Every irrepressibly pulse-racing dollop of the 135i Sport’s performance is dispensed with impeccable sophistication and refinement.There’s a hint of perspiration, too, knowing the TTS is wedged up close and personal. Game on!Hurled from a standing start, the TTS uses the combination of lighter weight, shorter gearing and four-paw traction to storm ahead through the early increments. The exquisite thrill of the Audi’s mighty thrust is equalled by the infectious enthusiasm of the revvy TFSI engine and its deliciously raspy exhaust.However, the Audi’s headlong impetus hiccups when the upshift to third gear comes right at the cusp of 100km/h, letting the 135i Sport drive home the advantage of its taller gearing and power-rich top-end. Although the TTS reduces the gap as the two charge ever faster, its next gear-change (into fourth, at just over 140) affects the 0-160km/h result, which the long-legged Beemer achieves in third gear.The closeness of the duelling turbos shows in their identical 0-400m times, with the TTS clocking a slightly slower terminal speed. However, the Audi shades the BMW for rolling response in third, fourth and fifth gears, only to be eclipsed in sixth.In terms of speedy performance, though, there’s daylight between the turbos and the macho 350Z, with a further gap back to the RX-8.By naturally aspirated 3.5-litre standards, the Nissan is well and truly on the pace. In spite of being very nearly as heavy as the big-boned 135i Sport, the 350Z has enough grunt to score the group’s lustiest power-to-weight ratio, the dividends of which include 0-100km/h in just over six seconds, and the standing 400m in low- to mid-14s. Good stuff.Rather less intoxicating is the Nissan’s aural accompaniment. Even when exploiting the engine’s very elastic rev range, the V6’s gravelly snarl isn’t at all tuneful and certainly brings no reminder of its smooth, sweet cousin Maxima.The RX-8 is a total contrast. Unlike any other engine here, or in production anywhere, the Mazda’s rotary spins like a turbine and sounds like a bumble bee that’s high on fermented nectar.Although you’ll notice the dearth of mid-range torque, the Renesis engine is exceptionally smooth and tractable from middling speeds (albeit not very quick). You’ll find its sweet spot on the high side of five grand, above which it gets pumping all the way to 9600rpm. When you’re hurrying, the revs come so quickly, you ignore the tachometer and upshift by ear as the redline buzzer beeps like a microwave cooker signalling that dinner’s ready.Because the latest RX-8 makes seven kW less than its predecessor and weighs about 25kg more, it loses a little outright acceleration and rolling response. Before, it would do 400m in high 14s, for example, where low 15s now rule.One thing unchanged is that for making short work of winding roads and overtaking, the action’s dominated by incessant to-and-froing between third and fourth slots. You might reach gearshift stroke rates that qualify for the Olympic rowing squad, but that’s part of what RX-8ing is about.So is thirstier-than-average fuel consumption, as affirmed by our test results and the ADR81 drive-cycle numbers. The only (slight) offset stems from the rotary’s acceptance of 95RON juice, where 98RON is the others’ first preference.Still, if you’re the kind of person who craves the style and ability of a sports coupe, relative/comparitive fuel economy probably won’t be a deal breaker.What matters most are the high-calibre performance and driving dynamics, together with the feel-good sensory infusion that comes from piloting cars as exciting as these four.For example, you’re assured of a unique buzz whenever stropping the Mazda through the gears, regardless of its being slower than the other cars here. Overriding that, the GT lives up to its label because it takes a back seat to none of its nominally faster peers when winding roads shift the emphasis from simply speeding to proper driving.Pardon stray superlatives, but even in the company of three outstandingly good sports chassis, the RX-8 GT’s handling is unreservedly brilliant. In their own ways, the others are similarly accomplished corner carvers, of course. Yet, when fully engaged, the Mazda feels and acts just that tad lighter and more poised on its feet, just a shade better balanced and more responsive, just a heartbeat more alive in its handling’s feel and co-operation.Heaven knows, when our enthusiasm occasionally over-revs and we’re inadvertently clumsy in corners that unexpectedly tighten or markedly roughen, or both, the chassis has every reason to get a bit narked.But to its great credit, the GT is a car not easily unsettled by nerve-wracking situations. Even when you’re hard on the picks and turning in later than is ideal, while dithering over downshifts, with the suspension dancing to absorb vindictive bumps, the GT remains superbly stable, unflappably balanced and finely directional.The more you demand of the GT’s handling, the more you appreciate how utterly predictable, controllable and exploitable it is.Much the same is true of the others, the BMW 135i Sport especially. Extra weight ultimately means the Beemer hasn’t quite the RX-8 GT’s sheer agility. But, oh lordy, how it handles. Because its chassis/driving dynamics are just bloody terrific, and that’s putting it mildly, the 135i Sport treats bends of all sorts as one swash-buckling adventure after another.Although the 135i Sport leans more noticeably than the others when being directionally forceful, it keeps its composure and carries as much cornering speed as any of ’em. Its handling is just as predictable and forgiving as the Mazda’s, but the 135i Sport’s boundless squirt promotes exit velocities that the RX-8 can only dream of.The 350Z is right on the case, too, as it consumes winding roads with immense zeal. Like the BMW, the Nissan feels a bit heavier on its feet than the Mazda, and hasn’t quite the deftness of steering and turn-in. Still, it stays fairly flat, grips strongly at both ends, points obediently and is incisively responsive to the wheel and throttle.While the Zedster tends to be a touch less communicative and involving for the driver in some respects, well-sorted handling keeps it well and truly in the hunt. And if the Z’s more-machete-than-carving-knife cornering talents perhaps aren’t always quite as fluid or tidy as the others, it’s just as effective when and where it counts.Then there’s the TTS. To see the Audi rush into sight from a fast corner, or to follow it along the road, or sense its intimidation via a rear-view mirror, there’s no mistaking its air of authority. Whether cruising the straights or bringing challenging corners into line, the TTS appears crouched to pounce, focused as acutely as a targeting carnivore.That effect isn’t illusionary. Featuring exceptionally broad track widths for a car of its comparatively compact envelope, the visually squat TTS always looks, and feels, particularly well hooked up to the road; regardless of whether the bitumen you find yourself on is dry, wet, slushy or whatever.Although the Audi’s quattro all-wheel-drive system hasn’t the multi-skilling bells and whistles of Japan’s latest, hottest road rockets, such as the Mitsubishi Evo, the TTS continually serves dynamic reminders that Audi has been at the forefront of sophisticated high-performance AWD chassis since 1980 and the all-conquering rally-championship-winning Quattro coupe.If the Audi’s steering isn’t quite as tactile as some, it certainly is well weighted, well connected and not as pushy in corners as other, characteristically more understeery AWD models.Like the rear-drive models assembled here, the TTS is distinguished not only by great handling, but also mighty brakes, slick-as gearshift and remarkably bump-blotting ride qualities, especially considering the disciplined body control and low profile tyres. Mind you, for comfort’s sake, the TTS’s ride quality depends on it being in the normal mode, rather than the push-button alternate Sport setting which is a teeth-rattler on anything but smooth surfaces.So, now, after experiencing these four in their elements, which way goes the verdict? Four ways, actually.There are no losers here, and it would be wrong to assume otherwise. The wide differences in prices are very influential of course, but so, too, the respective performance potentials, the accommodation/function aspects and also, far from least, the cars’ discernibly different characters. After all, individuality is their most common thread; that and their irrefutable evidence that fulfilling driving enjoyment is alive and well and available for under $100K.One solution lies with the Audi TTS. It’s the most expensive car here and has a rear seat suitable only for kids or real shorties, however, it’s also stunningly well designed, offers truly blistering performance and the surety of AWD.If you have a mid-range budget, a preference for an uncompromised two-seat cabin, want the immediate strong response of a husky, naturally aspirated engine and the manly handling of a proven sports chassis, the nod could just as deservedly go to the honest Nissan 350Z.Then again, besides its significant edge in price, the RX-8 GT comes up trumps for the uniqueness of the rotary engine, the unrivalled practicality of its accessible, accommodating four-door cabin with four adult-size seats, and the superb chassis dynamics.If pressed, though, and while taking nothing from the TTS, the RX-8 GT and the 350Z, each of which has quantifiable attractions, the 135i Sport commands the widest appeal.Combining keen pricing, thrilling performance, polished refinement and inspiringly accomplished handling with snug yet realistically adult rear digs, the 135i Sport answers the question about which coupe is hardest to go past as a born-to-drive all-rounder.

The 1.4-litre, seven-speed DSG Audi A3 boasts a 5.8L/100km ADR81 combined cycle result (the best in the field) but it consumed 98RON at a rate nearly three times that (15.6L/100km). Turbocharged cars can suck fuel at a frightening rate when the throttle is always pinned, as is the case on a race track, but this result surprised even us. While the little Audi was obviously trying hard, it just wasn’t fast or fun. Slowest in acceleration (9.8sec against a 9.5 claim) and slowest around the track (a full eight seconds a lap slower than the 911), the Audi felt and sounded flat. The $2K cheaper Golf GT (admittedly with turbo and supercharging), simply ran rings around the Audi.

Steering wheel-mounted shifters would have improved the operation of the DSG, and a fully-switchable ESP would allow the chassis to shine brighter. But as it stands, the Audi had a lock on last place; six percent behind 8th place and 15 percent adrift of the winner. JT

A diesel C-Class is not something you’d expect to encounter at a track day, but the 2007 Wheels Car of the Year boasts a finely balanced chassis and, with 510Nm from its 3.0-litre V6, it’s hardly slow. Mercedes claims a 7.7sec 0-100km/h time but the C320 punched out repeatable 7.0sec runs with no more effort than slipping the auto into drive and standing on the throttle. Around the circuit, John Boston recorded an effortless 54.12-second lap, placing the Merc fifth, a fraction ahead of the overtly sporty Civic Type R. “So easy, you could drive one-handed,” grinned Boston. “You can’t turn ESP off so you need to drive smoothly. It doesn’t feel as fast as it is. You wouldn’t take it to a track day, but if you did, you wouldn’t be embarrassed.”

No surprise that the comfy luxury sedan was the best at eating up the highway kays and urban crawl, and it recorded the best actual consumption (12.1L/100km), even if it was 60 percent more than its 7.4L/100km ADR number. But wearing the third highest price tag and scoring second last on the subjective fun factor, the C-Class was unable to add more silverware to the cabinet. JT

Japanese car makers are certainly behind the eight ball when it comes to diesel passenger cars, at least here in Australia. Take a look at the small- and mid-sized hatch and sedan catalogues of Toyota, Honda, Mitsubishi, Nissan and Subaru, and compare that with the likes of Volkswagen, Peugeot, Renault, BMW and Mercedes-Benz. Even the Koreans are better represented over here.

Toyota has a Corolla oiler abroad, as does Mitsubishi with its Lancer, yet both are denied an Australian passport. The new-gen Mazda 3 diesel is also now delayed until some time next year. This makes the mid-sized 6 oiler, at $37,190 for the Diesel Classic wagon or $43,890 for the Diesel Sports hatch, the second-cheapest Japanese diesel passenger vehicle in Oz. Or the cheapest, if you discount the $36,990 Nissan X-Trail SUV.With 136kW and 400Nm from Mazda’s 2.2-litre turbo-diesel four, the 6 closely rivals the Merc C-Class’ 125kW/400Nm 2.1-litre turbo-diesel four. Unfortunate, then, that it’s only available as a six-speed manual and, at 1637kg, our Diesel Sports hatch test car also weighs 124kg more than the Luxury Sports hatch on which it’s based (the Diesel Sports is essentially a Luxo Sports without the sunroof).So with all the data downloaded, how does it all translate in the real world? Well, get past the slightly clattery idle and dulled throttle response, and the 6 diesel really starts to kick, revving to beyond 5000rpm without much stress or strain. Typical of a turbo-diesel, it’s swimming in a pool of mid-range torque, so in-gear punch is excellent. Yet you’re rarely frustrated by that typical diesel trait, the dreaded narrow power band, because the engine doesn’t fall into a gutter with churned guts if you run the revs too low or high. Only driveability from take off is an issue – don’t dial up enough revs and there’s a bit too much lag; dial too many, and you’ll anger the ESP gods as the front wheels try to dig a whole in the tarmac.Pleasingly, the heavier diesel donk doesn’t seem to affect the petrol 6’s finely balanced – actually, make that brilliantly balanced – chassis. There’s innate communication between steering and front wheels, minimal body roll, nicely intuitive ESP and good responses to throttle and brake. A harmonious blend of controls still defines the Mazda 6 as a driver’s car nestled within a conservative family-car genre. Like the accountant who plays first-grade footy.However the 6 does put a foot wrong when it comes to ride quality. On 18-inch alloys, it’s constantly restless and jiggly even on smooth bitumen. Interestingly, we drove to Mazda HQ in an MX-5 and drove home in the 6, and it was the little Mixxer that I thought had a superior ride. But it’s road noise that replaces ride quality as the issue on rough roads, because the 6 deals better with larger pot holes than small stuff, and shows good levels of discipline and body control. It just roars at you while it’s doing it.As it stands, though, the few blotches on the Mazda’s copy book can’t blemish a diesel that’s well worth having in the range, a gutsy move when most of the Japanese don’t bother.

If test-driving the real Golf MkVI GTI would be a taster, then this virtual Scalextric intro is barely a whiff.

On the plus side, the simulator eats away minutes at the office, and omits annoying side-effects of the real Scalextric – I distinctly remember family arguments and carpet fluff on the track inhibiting use of our Bathurst 1000 Brocky special AFX slot-car set.

This mess-free, mouse-operated online model is a plug for the upcoming UK release of the GTI, which we tested in the May issue of Wheels.

A team of 60 modellers created a real life 9 x 7.6 metre reproduction, in which a 1:43 scale GTI navigates precariously along a track through 200 similarly scaled buildings.

True to real life slot cars, the virtual Golf will crash if you get over-zealous with the left-click. And the simulation happily includes a static-y montage of your ‘GTI engineer’ replacing the unit back in its track groove for the remainder of your race.

To satisfy the competitive streak, achieving what the website deems an acceptable lap time will enter you in the draw to win a GTI. That’s right, your very own GTI … on loan, of course … um, for three months only.

Oh, and it’s only open to UK residents.

Still, the game’s highly recommended for nostalgic value, safe in the knowledge that no family pets will paw at the track and interrupt your slot car’s cornering.

This is a new-millennium custom car that was begun in the last century, yet its innovative use of cutting edge technologies and materials could change the way cars are manufactured in the not-too-distant future. It’s also one of the most ambitious hot rod projects ever undertaken, yet it was built in Melbourne, not Los Angeles.

While it may look like the work of renowned US custom-car designer Chip Foose, the exotic mid-engined FR-1 was originally conceived in the garage of Fox Classic Car Collection curator and master coachbuilder, Brian Tanti.Tanti envisaged classic hot rod lines over a high-tech, lightweight chassis powered by a large-capacity (yet fuel-efficient) engine to give it supercar performance. But he had loftier goals than just winning a gong at a hot rod show. He’s involved with a number of children’s charities, and wanted to build a unique car that could be auctioned to raise funds – hence the name Fund Raiser-1 – while also wanting to inspire school kids to consider a career within the automotive sector.“I felt we could harness the resources and skill sets of the automotive industry and do something for the community,” says Tanti, who is “unashamedly influenced” by Foose. The fact that the FR-1 bears a resemblance to the ’90s Plymouth Prowler (itself inspired by an early Foose design) is, according to Tanti, purely coincidental. While Tanti doesn’t describe himself as a hot rodder, he says he “gets the culture”.“It reminds me of the whole bespoke craftsmanship thing, what coachbuilders like Scaglietti did in the ’50s for Ferrari,” he explains.Tanti’s ability to galvanise support, both material and moral, reached all the way to the design studios of Holden, and two years ago design chief Tony Stolfo, and designers Richard Ferlazzo (of Effigy fame), Rob Walker, and former Wheels Young Designer of the Year, Harsha Ravi, enthusiastically signed on, joining long-term team members like coachbuilder Jeff Edwards, one of the backbones of the project.“Tony became very interested, initially just to help us with the interior and the beltline down, then it mutated into helping us with the exterior as well,” Tanti smiles.Working after hours, Holden’s design gurus took Tanti’s early concepts and original interior styling work done by automotive design students at Monash University (FR-1 became part of the 2003 third-year curriculum) to car-company standards using computer-aided design. Walker was responsible for the majority of the final styling.“The Holden guys were used to high-end surface development, not low-volume bespoke work … they had never worked with wooden bucks and aluminium skins,” Tanti explains.Tanti estimates Stolfo’s team has put in “the best part of $800,000 worth of R&D”. Holden also contributed the 6.0-litre V8, which features Active Fuel Management. It’s mounted behind the cockpit and mates to a Ferrari F355 transaxle.Inspired by supercars at the Fox museum like the Ferrari F40, Tanti originally planned a chromoly spaceframe chassis but interest from former HSV engineering manager Brad Dunstan, now CEO of VCAMM (the Victorian Centre for Advanced Materials Manufacturing), pushed FR-1 towards more high-tech underpinnings.That had an unexpected bonus for chief engineer, Russell Gallagher. The former FPV chassis man had been a volunteer on FR-1 and ended up working for VCAMM. It took Gallagher two years, part-time, to design the chassis using CAD. Along the way, he learned how to use MCS Finite Element Analysis software to simulate loads on suspension components.The chassis comprises four sections of carbon-composite, the smaller sections made using a new faster, cheaper, non-autoclave method of curing carbonfibre by Perth-based company, Quickstep. Another VCAMM technology, Direct Metal Deposition, or DMD, is used to create titanium mounts on the chassis for the race-inspired suspension and other components. DMD is the process of creating components by using a laser to fuse together powered metal.The biggest challenge Gallagher faced was a lack of space. “Even though the car is very long, the seating position makes the engine bay really tight,” he says. But there are clever cooling solutions such as having a radiator mounted in each air duct set into the alloy sail panel. Fans direct cool air from the ducts over the exhaust manifold and hot air is expelled via the vents in the engine cover. “The nose section is also very cramped because it tapers and we have to fit suspension arms, two monotube dampers, coil springs, an anti-roll bar, a steering column and the battery in; it’s very tight,” Gallagher adds.Looking like an insect’s endoskeleton, the chassis is a work of art in itself, which is where final designer, Jesse Diephuis, from Holden comes in. Diephuis, who had been an intern at the iconic Hot Wheels toy company after graduating in the US, calls FR-1 an “industrial custom”.“We wanted to make the car look as good without the skin on it,” Diephuis says proudly. “Because a lot of the parts will be visible, like the suspension, we really wanted to convey a cohesive design story right down to the core of the vehicle. It’s a hot rod at heart but it has the industrial technology built in to take it to the next level.” That “skin”, as Diephuis calls it, is, of course, handmade in aluminium.Eight years after Tanti built a one-third scale polystyrene model, the Tanti Coupe, as it became known, was unveiled at the Melbourne International Motor Show. Tanti hopes the finished car will be shown at the Frankfurt motor show in September, as part of a state-funded trade mission to promote innovation. After that the FR-1 will be auctioned with hopes it will raise $5m for children’s cancer charities.As for government backing, there has been limited financial input via VCAMM but Tanti says he’s keen to lobby governments for more support now that he has something tangible for them to see.“It’s been a hard sell but I don’t think it’s over,” he says, ever optimistic. “Most of the people we’ve spoken to (in government) don’t get it but when they see the car they do understand.” Prior to FR-1’s debut at the MIMS, no government minister had walked through Tanti’s door, which remains open.Body aluminium, 2 seats Drivetrain mid engine (north-south), rear drive Engine 5967cc V8, ohv, 16v Power 260kW @ 5700rpm Torque 517Nm @ 4400rpm Transmission 6-speed manual , Ferrari transaxle Size l/w/h 4100/1900/1100mm Wheelbase 3100mm Weight 1000kg Price $5,000,000 (estimated) On sale by auction, late ’09’

The original Lexus RX (the RX300, sold only in Japan and the US) was a luxury SUV trailblazer, and since Aussies got their first taste of Lexus medium-SUV luxury with the second-generation model in 2003, the segment has continued to boom from 12 vehicles to 18. But the RX remains at the pointy end of the market, outsold in Oz only by BMW’s X5. It’s the Japanese car maker’s most popular model here.

This goes a long way to explaining the evolutionary approach taken by Lexus in developing its third-generation medium-sized soft-roader. Despite the new RX350’s all-new body and chassis, nothing about its styling or drive experience will alienate owners of the previous model. Peer beneath that familiar-looking exterior, however, and there lurks a thoroughly refined and re-engineered new luxury wagon.

The best news for enthusiastic luxo-soft-roader drivers (if such creatures exist), in addition to the improvements to safety, efficiency and comfort, is the RX350’s new-found handling poise. To a new, more rigid body structure attach an improved strut front suspension with a larger anti-roll bar and an all-new trailing arm double-wishbone rear suspension.

A lower centre of gravity, revised spring rates, a larger footprint (wheelbase is up 25mm; front/rear tracks are up 55/65mm), and bigger wheels and tyres contribute to genuine dynamic improvement over the outgoing RX without trading the Lexus-signature ride comfort and refinement levels. Bodyroll is well contained, and an appropriate bump absorption/body control compromise has been struck.

The Lexus RX steers with accuracy through a new speed-sensitive electric steering system. A new 3.5-litre V6 lifts outputs just 1kW and 5Nm, but Lexus claims the real gains are in the midrange. It’s backed by a six-speed transmission in place of the previous five-speed, and grunt is apportioned to all fours via an on-demand AWD system, with front-drive the default. Zero to 100km/h is in a swift-for-an-SUV 8.0sec (claimed).

There has been effort to reduce cabin noise levels, with acoustic glass up front, new door and glass sealing, and by increasing the distance between the side mirrors and the windows to reduce wind rustle. Progress is hushed on smooth roads, though by reducing other noise sources, some wind rustle remains evident.

Externally, RX gen-three marks the first ‘L-Finesse’ (design philosophy — as seen on GS, LS and IS) Lexus SUV. A concerted effort to the way the RX cuts through the air has resulted in a CD of 0.33, thanks to aero tricks like tucking the rear wiper under the rear spoiler and a neat fairing on the leading edge of each rear lower suspension arm.

Prices are up, but so is equipment. The new entry-level Prestige variant is $81,900, compared with $77,631 for the outgoing entry Sports. However, the Prestige has many of the features of the outgoing top-of-the-line $87,588 Sports Luxury.

All variants feature active all-wheel drive, VDIM (retuned to be less intrusive), rear-view camera and 10 airbags (including rear-seat side ‘bags), as well as Bluetooth and iPod capabilities, sat-nav and a five-star Euro/Japan NCAP rating (the result of 233 crash tests at a cost of $30m).

A space-saver is standard, though a full-size wheel and tyre can be optioned. The $88,900 Sports adds a moonroof, 19-inch alloys, a new pre-collision system and radar adaptive cruise control to the Prestige.

In addition, the flagship Sports Luxury gets bright chrome 19-inch alloys, intelligent adaptive headlamps, ‘wide-view’ side camera, reversing sonar and rear guide assist for the reversing screen, a head-up display and is loaded with creature comforts.

Lexus is predicting sales of 130 a month in the current financial crisis market (excluding the forthcoming RX450h, due in July). A conservative estimate for a conservative yet thoroughly re-engineered evolution of a class-creating family car.

RX350 Prestige Specifications

Hats off to Ferrari. Few if any other brands in the world could convince assorted and presumably sane millionaires to effectively drop hundreds of thousands of dollars on a car that they never take delivery of, and then put said owners to work as test drivers of development mules. As the Guinness ad says, it’s “sheer genius”.

We’re talking about the Ferrari 599XX, the extreme track car that is helping the supercar manufacturer develop new technology for future roadgoing supercars.Ferrari says a limited number of 599XXs will be available for sale to the Prancing Horse’s most valued customers, but here’s the rub…Ferrari will prepare and run the cars on behalf of their owners, who will be able to occasionally drive them at special events at Ferrari’s own Fiorano test track and at leading race circuits in Europe and the USA.Data gathered from these track days will be used to further enhance and develop technology for future frontline Ferrari models.So these punters are unpaid test drivers contributing to the development of coming models for which these same customers will pay a poultice.First shown at this year’s Geneva Auto Salon, the 599XX is certainly a bastion of stunning engineering.The technology includes reducing internal friction in the engine, faster gearbox operation, aerodynamics that automatically adjust depending on whether the car is cornering or going in a straight line, as well being speed dependent, and a new high speed adjustable chassis.Based on the front-engined 599 GTB Fiorano with the same transaxle layout and engine type, the 599XX prototype is an extreme track car.Ferrari’s engineers have carried out extensive work on the engine’s combustion chambers and inlet and exhaust tracts. These modifications, combined with the fact that internal friction has been reduced and the maximum revs have been boosted to 9,000rpm, helped achieve the target power output of 515kW – or 700 horsepower in the old language. Engine weight saving was achieved by adopting exclusive materials, as in the carbon-fibre used for the intake plenums. A new gearbox shift strategy cuts overall gearchange times to 60ms.The chassis of the 599XX gets a flash electronic model called the “High Performance Dynamic Concept” optimising the car’s mechanical limits with electronic controls. Handling has been improved thanks to the adoption of second generation SCM suspension system. Track usage is also made easier thanks to the new “virtual car engineer”, a screen in the car that provides a real-time indication of the vehicle’s track performance.The 599XX’s aerodynamics have been honed over the regular 599 by numerous wind tunnel test sessions. The front underside of the body is completely faired-in and the vents that channel hot air from the engine bay have been moved to the bonnet.There is also tricky stuff like the “ActiflowT” system which increases downforce and/or cuts drag depending on the car’s trim cornering conditions, via the use of a porous material in the diffuser and two fans in the boot which channel the air flow from under the car out through two grilles next to the tail-lights. Winglets have been added to the rear buttresses to increase downforce. Synthetic jets have also been incorporated into the rear of the car to control and smooth the air flow and to reduce drag.Ferrari’s engineers have also used F1-derived metal “doughnuts” which partly cover the brake discs and wheel rim. These have the dual function of improving both aerodynamics and brake cooling.Composites and carbon-fibre have been widely used in the bodywork and the engineers drew on their experience in working with aluminium to reach the weight target. The brake pads are now made from carbon-fibre which means that the calipers (also carbon fibre) are smaller whilst guaranteeing the same efficiency. The new racing carbon ceramic braking system also delivers shorter braking distances and is generally more efficient due to the weight saving.The 599XX comes with slick tyres (29/67 R19 up front and 31/71 R19 at the rear) specifically developed to maximize stability in cornering and increase lateral acceleration. They are fitted to 19 x 11J wheel rims at the front and 19 x 12J at the rear.

Drive the Insight, Honda’s new hybrid, and you’re constantly reminded how little power it takes to keep a car rolling, once it’s been accelerated up to speed.

If less than 5kW is required to keep the aero-slick five-seat hatch moving, its 1.3-litre petrol-burner shuts down. On the energy-flow display in the centre of the Honda’s big tachometer, you’ll see the filler nozzle icon, which indicates engine running, disappear. What’s left is a moving arrow from the battery icon to the car’s electric motor. When more than 5kW is needed, say for acceleration or climbing a hill, Insight’s four cylinders spark back to life. And the nozzle reappears.Driving the streets of central Valencia, the Insight regularly goes electric. In the zone between 30 and 60km/h, just so long as the road is flat or a little downhill, 5kW is often all that’s needed to keep moving with the bustling morning traffic in this pretty city on Spain’s Mediterranean coast.Electric mode isn’t Insight’s sole fuel-saving strategy. Stopped at red lights and pedestrian crossings the engine mostly remains silent. It shuts down long before the Honda actually comes to a halt, of course. Like any other hybrid, Insight uses regenerative braking to slow itself. With its motor switched to generator mode, the Honda loses speed but gains a surge of battery charge.To maximise the amount of energy available for recycling through regenerative braking, the engine’s variable cylinder management (VCM) system shuts all of its eight valves. The system is also activated when the Insight is running in electric mode.If this all sounds super complex, well, it is. And it’s not. Honda’s IMA – for Integrated Motor Assist – hybrid tech is quite simple – if you just look at the hardware. It’s mind-warpingly complicated, however, if you examine the software that runs the system.While the 1.3-litre engine is related to the same-size four in the base-model Jazz, its head is quite different. There’s the VCM hardware, obviously. But it also has half the number of valves (two per cylinder, not four) and double the number of spark plugs (two per cylinder instead of one) compared with a Jazz 1.3-litre engine, changes designed to boost fuel efficiency.Insight’s electric motor, like its engine, is Honda designed and made. Maximum power is 10kW, in short bursts. The reason the Insight uses only half the motor’s rated output in electric-only mode is that full power quickly drains the relatively small battery. While the motor’s power isn’t massive, the way it’s delivered is a sweet mesh with the petrol engine.The motor’s 10kW maximum arrives at only 1500rpm. There’s no torque curve; it’s 78Nm from 0-1000rpm, beyond which a steeply angled decline explains the modest power maximum. In contrast, the petrol engine’s 65kW max arrives at 5800rpm, not far beyond its 121Nm torque peak at 4500rpm. Where the engine is weak the motor is strong, and vice versa. To make the most of the electric motor’s torque, Insight’s CVT runs a lower final-drive ratio than the similar transmission in the current Civic Hybrid.The unseen hand in command of IMA, its software, has lots to do. Hiroshi Yoneguchi, Insight’s chief drivetrain engineer, reveals it took three years to develop.Despite the efforts of Yoneguchi’s team, Insight isn’t as refined as the current Prius in city driving. Engine start-up, whether stationary or moving, can sometimes cause a soft thump, felt as much as heard. Clutch engagement and disengagement could also be smoother.It could be more polished, but in city driving Insight’s performance is fine. From rest, where the electric motor does its best work, the car feels quicker than its claimed 0-100km/h time of 12.6 seconds indicates.There’s more than this to like about Insight in town. Visibility is good, even to the rear through that high tail, and the interior environment is pleasing. High-quality plastics and fabrics, flawless assembly; typical Honda. Behind the wheel there’s ample room and an adequate seat. The bi-level instrument layout, similar to Civic, works well, and the minor displays and controls are intuitively simple to use. Rear seat headroom is a little tight for anyone over 185cm, and kneeroom can be in short supply for those stuck behind a tall driver, but the cargo compartment (more than 400 litres), will easily accommodate a horde of shopping bags. Thanks to the underfloor location of Insight’s battery, the rear seat backrest can be flipped forward. Just like in a normal hatchback. The Honda’s low-speed ride can be a little lumpy on rough surfaces, but it generally avoids harshness.On the highway, it’s a different story. Cruising on a flat Spanish autovia in the 100-120km/h zone Insight’s low-drag shape cleaves easily and quietly through the air, its engine (which is always working at these speeds) typically spinning at a relatively lazy 2000rpm or so. But ask the Honda to accelerate hard or climb a steep grade and revs quickly head for the 6000rpm redline as the CVT slides to the low end of its ratio range. North of 100km/h there’s not a lot of action to accompany the soaring sound levels. There’s no way around the problem here. At high revs Insight’s electric motor can do nothing to help. It’s a 1200kg car, but has only 65kW to work with.Insight’s handling won’t surprise (or delight) anyone. Benignly stable (with a standard electronic chassis stability system providing a safety net) and averagely agile, it’s safe and sound. The electrically assisted steering is glutinously dead around straight ahead, and only shows signs of life once some lock is wound on.So the Honda isn’t quick, or sharp, or sensual. Those seeking conventional thrills aren’t going to be attracted, but this doesn’t mean the Insight is without appeal. For the growing proportion of buyers prepared to consider hybrid, the Honda is downright seductive.It’s a matter of numbers.Insight’s official European combined cycle test fuel consumption (4.4 or 4.6L/100km, depending on whether it wears a 15in or 16in wheel and tyre package) is only a little higher than the world’s best known (and most bought) hybrid, the second-generation Toyota Prius. Yet the Honda will be significantly more affordable.Honda Australia is striving for a price tag of around $30,000 for Insight’s launch early in 2010, while Toyota knows it will be tough battle to keep the new third-generation Prius (due to launch in July) beneath $40,000.Honda believes the world wants an affordable hybrid, and on this promise the Insight certainly delivers. While the low cost involves compromises in the areas of performance and drivetrain refinement, there is something addictive about rolling along, propelled by nothing more than a handful of recycled kilowatts.