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.

First Falcon motor to be produced by Ford Australia April 29, 1960

On this day in 1960 at its Geelong plant, Ford Australia began production of its in-line six-cylinder engine. The same engine (with shared bore-centre spacings and basic architecture) continues today in the current FG Falcon range. Displacing 2.4-litres, the original over head valve engine produced just 60kW.

A straight six cylinder block in the 1960 machine shop

Fast forward to today’s six-cylinder range-topping FPV F6, and the now twin overhead cam, turbocharged six pumps out 310kW (that’s over 500% more power). The Falcon XK that the in-line six powered, struggled it’s way to 60mph (97km/h) in about 13.5seconds, the same amount of time required for the F6 to cover the standing 400metres (at 180km/h).

The first Falcon to receive the Australian engine

Ford had originally planned to kill off the iconic straight six next year in favour of an imported V6, but its now been granted a stay of execution beyond 2010, and likely until 2013. In line with international emissions standard, Ford’s in-line will become Euro IV compliant from July 1 next year, meaning the old girl still has a few more birthdays to celebrate.

ROAD vs RACE

In face value it seems a lopsided contest – take an example each of Holden and Ford V8 Supercars and compare them with their distantly related donor vehicles, in this case two cars apiece from Aussie performance maestros, FPV and HSV.Not only are we talking purpose-built racing cars versus road cars – the latter designed with the inherent compromises required to ensure reliability while operating in a wide range of driving conditions – we’ve taken them to a race track for the exercise. In terms of home-ground advantage, it’s like pitting a hamster against a racehorse at Flemington.Of course, if all this test came down to was lap times and V8 thunder, then we could put down the glasses now, as the V8 Supercars have their road-based relatives well and truly covered on both fronts. But, being a tad pointy headed, we wanted to dice the data more finely than a mere lap time. Which is how we found ourselves standing in the pit lane of Calder Park one fine morning, flanked by a half-dozen cars, two transporters and a bunch of helpers.Among the scrum were two familiar faces in HRT’s Garth Tander and FPR’s Steve Richards, invited along to hammer out the hot laps in their respective race cars. Somewhere in a flight case nearby lay a data recorder that would soon earn its stripes logging lap times, corner speed, braking markers, braking forces and top speeds. There, too, was Wheels’ trusty Vbox, destined to measure acceleration of 0-100km/h, standing 400 metres, and 80-120km/h, and, this time, 120-160km/h.We also asked the pro drivers to provide their subjective appraisal on the relative merits of all cars driven. So, would it be the expected walkover by the purpose-built V8 Supercars, or would our data fest burp up some surprises?

On face value it seems a lopsided contest – take an example each of Holden and Ford V8 Supercars and compare them with their distantly related donor vehicles, in this case two cars apiece from Aussie performance maestros, FPV and HSV.

Not only are we talking purpose-built racing cars versus road cars – the latter designed with the inherent compromises required to ensure reliability while operating in a wide range of driving conditions – we’ve taken them to a race track for the exercise. In terms of home-ground advantage, it’s like pitting a hamster against a racehorse at Flemington.Of course, if all this test came down to was lap times and V8 thunder, then we could put down the glasses now, as the V8 Supercars have their road-based relatives well and truly covered on both fronts. But, being a tad pointy headed, we wanted to dice the data more finely than a mere lap time. Which is how we found ourselves standing in the pit lane of Calder Park one fine morning, flanked by a half-dozen cars, two transporters and a bunch of helpers.Among the scrum were two familiar faces in HRT’s Garth Tander and FPR’s Steve Richards, invited along to hammer out the hot laps in their respective race cars. Somewhere in a flight case nearby lay a data recorder that would soon earn its stripes logging lap times, corner speed, braking markers, braking forces and top speeds. There, too, was Wheels’ trusty Vbox, destined to measure acceleration of 0-100km/h, standing 400 metres, and 80-120km/h, and, this time, 120-160km/h.We also asked the pro drivers to provide their subjective appraisal on the relative merits of all cars driven.So, would it be the expected walkover by the purpose-built V8 Supercars, or would our data fest burp up some surprises? Read on…THE TESTS Twenty-two hundred kilowatts (that’s 3000bhp), split six ways, and one empty Calder Park circuit is a ‘pinch yourself’ day’s work — eight hours of fun with things that are fast and loud.Acceleration The Wheels Vbox, powered by GPS and piloted by Hawley, recorded the straight-line speed tests. The road cars were also driven by Hawley for the sprint tests. The race cars were steered by their respective pilots. It should be noted that a recent drag-racing event had made Calder’s front straight extremely slippery. As a result, all standing start acceleration data is 0.2-0.5-seconds slower than we’ve either previously recorded or were expecting from the race cars. The data, however, remains relative.Braking The peak G-force generated was simultaneously documented as was the average deceleration in the braking zone (again displayed as a G-force reading).Lap Based The pros cut two laps in each car (ESP off in the road cars except for one set in the F6 for comparison). The laps were logged by an AX-22 data logger, which uses GPS and a two-axis accelerometer to map the unit’s position 100 times a second. The data was downloaded and processed by Race Technology’s software, which then displays an accurate map of the track. We cut the track into ten sectors (main straight, turn one, etc), and subsequently assemble a best theoretical lap time for comparison with the best actual lap time.

It would have been excellent to have a Commodore Omega on test here, purely as an anti-benchmark, to demonstrate how far above it the bar is lifted by cars like the GTS. As things stand, in the present company, the GTS’s performance is … mundane. Like not being a medal-winner in an Olympic final.

The W427, which weighs 45kg (two percent) more than the GTS, understandably romps away on the straights. You’d expect that of a vehicle with an extra 58kW and 90Nm. But the GTS’s wheel/tyre package is identical to W427’s (245/35ZR20 front and 275/30ZR20 rear), so why the big in-corner difference?The GTS is significantly slower than the W427 in four of the five cornering manoeuvres around Calder, across a wide range of speeds, and almost line-ball on the fifth (turn one, 64.0km/h versus 64.1). The 427’s cornering edge is probably due to its suspension tweaks – lower ride height, unique MRC calibration, different spring rates.The GTS is six percent slower through the first dogleg, four percent slower through both the kink and the second dogleg, and three percent slower through turn two. This relativity in the cornering stakes is reflected in the peak lateral G numbers recorded around the track – the GTS generates five percent less lateral G in left handers and eight percent less to the right.It’s worth noting here that speed and cornering load aren’t directly related – cornering load varies with the square of speed, so the differences in generated cornering load between the GTS and the W427 in turn one, dogleg one, the kink, dogleg two and turn two are: negligible, 12 percent, eight percent, eight percent, and six percent, respectively. Small changes in speed make big differences to cornering.Interestingly, there’s less of a gap between the pair in steady-state corners – the two sweeping right-handers at either end of the main straight – and a more profound difference in the transient cornering (both doglegs and the kink). This is probably due to the ability of the W427’s unique MRC settings and how it adapts to keep the chassis under control. (1800kg is a lot of mass to nudge one way and then the other through the kink at 150-odd km/h, even with such big tyres gripping the track.)And don’t be fooled by the lacklustre peak brake application number (0.9G versus about 1.0 for both Ford road cars). The GTS (and W427) didn’t brake as hard or as late as either Ford. So the stops took fractionally longer (about 0.7 seconds) – which reduced the peak brake load. The average deceleration under brakes on the main straight was 0.58G for the GTS (versus 0.53G for the GT and 0.65G for the F6). On the back straight the numbers were 0.63G peak/0.91G average (GTS) versus 0.60/1.05G (F6) and 0.67/1.08 (GT). The different braking characteristic could be either a Holden/Ford thing or a Tander/Richards thing.Price $78,170 Engine V8 (900), ohv, 16v Capacity 6.162 litres Bore/stroke 103.25/92.0mm Compression 10.9:1 Power 317kW@6000rpm Torque 550Nm@4600rpm Transmission 6-speed manual Kerb weight 1829kg Power-to-weight 173kW/tonne Tyres Bridgestone Potenza RE050, 245/35R20 (f); 275/30R20 (r)

General Motors has confirmed the persistent rumours that Pontiac is a goner, to be phased out by next year after 90 years as a flag bearer for American muscle car models.

And this doesn’t bode well for Holden, which began exporting its rebadged Commodore model to North America last year, where it has been selling as a Pontiac G8.Though initial projections of 30,000 annual sales were dented by the global downturn, the G8 has been well received by the US motoring media and is selling reasonably well.Shipping the G8 to the US will cease by the year’s end, impacting on Holden export earnings to the tune of nearly a billion dollars.Sadly for Holden and for Pontiac, the mood in the US seems to be that if it had offered products as impressive as the G8 even as recently as a decade ago, the brand may have survived.Writing in the New York Times, James G Cobb observed: “Of course, if GM had made a serious effort to build over-engineered cars like the G8 20 years ago, there would be no talk of bankruptcy or slicing the company’s “good” assets from its mistakes.”Cobb went on: “But the G8 damns GM’s management on another level, for this excellent yet very American-feeling sedan actually started out half a world away. It is heavily based on the Holden Commodore, a product of GM’s Australian subsidiary, and thus joins a long list of well-designed, carefully engineered, highly competitive automobiles created by G.M. subsidiaries around the world. Until recently such products were largely denied to the American consumers who have been telling the company for decades – with their closed checkbooks and their mass defections to foreign brands – that they wanted Detroit to give them world-class cars.“Now a few of those cars are here. They are Pontiacs with Australian accents. And they are about to become orphans.”

For ages we’ve been occupied by an endless series of rumours suggesting Porsche was going to build a Cayenne diesel. You’ve been able to buy oiler versions of the VW Touareg and Audi Q7 for, well, ages. And after all, the Audi and VW share underpinnings with the Porsche and are assembled on the same production line in Bratislava, Slovakia (though final assembly of the Cayenne takes place in Leipzig, Germany).

Predictably, Porsche’s outspoken chairman Wendelin Wiedeking backed away from the idea when we first popped the question to him, suggesting that even the most modern of common-rail diesels didn’t fit with Porsche’s petrol philosophy. But that was when sales were booming.Now, facing a stalled economy and diving demand, Porsche is suddenly singing a different tune. So, right or wrong, the Cayenne diesel has arrived.The upmarket oiler slots into the line-up between the V6 Cayenne and V8 Cayenne S. Not that you’re likely to notice. In a move that suggests Porsche remains uncomfortable about introducing an oiler to its range, the Cayenne diesel doesn’t feature any external badging to indicate its oil-burning properties.It’s not until you climb behind the Cayenne’s three-spoke steering wheel that you’re confronted with the first clues to the 3.0-litre V6 turbo-diesel that resides up front. First up, the rev counter is redlined at 4600rpm. Turn the key and there’s also the characteristic diesel clatter.Produced in Audi’s factory in Gyor, Hungary, the engine features piezo injectors and a variable geometry turbocharger, and kicks out 176kW at 4000rpm and 550Nm at 2000rpm.The six-speed auto is decisive and fast. Thanks to a sensible spread of ratios, it provides both strong acceleration and excellent cruising qualities to make the Cayenne a very rounded proposition.At 2240kg though, it’s a porker in more ways than one. Still, Porsche is proud that it’s been able to keep the weight increase over the base Cayenne to just 70kg.For such a big car the handling is nicely composed; the added weight of the engine barely noticeable. With all that torque and four-wheel drive to exploit it, you can confidently stomp out of bends, finding ample grip from the standard 17-inch Michelin Latitude Tour tyres.At $101,900, the Cayenne Diesel is just $1400 more than the base Cayenne — money you’d recuperate in around three years (at current fuel prices) thanks to 9.4L/100km versus 12.9 in the petrol V6.Still, the Touareg V6 TDI, with which the Cayenne shares its engine and mechanicals, costs a whopping $26,910 less. But few potential owners will care. For them, the only thing of real consequence will be that black, red and gold crest affixed to the nose. It might be a diesel, but the pull of the Porsche badge remains as strong as ever. Porsche Cayenne Diesel Engine 2967cc V6, dohc, 24v t/d Max Power 176kW @ 4000rpm Max Torque 550Nm @ 2000rpm Transmission 6-speed automatic 1-100km/h 8.3sec (claimed) Price $101,900 On sale April

Australia’s Marcos Ambrose has finished fourth in the Aaron’s 499 in one of the most spectacular finishes in NASCAR history, a result that will do wonders for his growing reputation as well as catapulting him to 19th in the overall Sprint Cup standings.

On the wide open spaces of the Talladega superspeedway, Ambrose, who qualified only 34th, ran well all day in his JTG Daugherty Racing Toyota Camry.

In his most competitive oval outing yet, the Tasmanian was comfortable among the lead pack, running much of the race in the top 10.A multiple-car crash on the back straight in the closing stages set up a four-lap sprint to the finish for the field, with Ambrose facing the restart in seventh position.On the last lap came the spectacular and frightening shunt on the mad, jostling run to the chequer, when Brad Keselowski made contact with Carl Edwards, who had moved down on his rival’s car in a defensive blocking tactic. Edwards’ car became airborne, was hit by third place driver Ryan Newman and then catapulted violently into the catch fencing.Eight spectators received various minor injuries from the debris.The popular Edwards climbed injury-free from his wrecked, burning car, and jogged across the finishing line to the cheers of the fans.Ambrose, lucky to miss the wreck, crossed the line in fourth place to record his best Sprint Cup finish on an oval in what was his first Sprint Cup race at the 2.66-mile Talladega tri-oval.“That was a wild finish,” said Ambrose.“I just hope everyone is all right. It was the most spectacular thing I’ve ever seen in my life coming across the finish line looking at a car upside down like that.“This is crazy racing, it really is. We can try and legitimise as much as we’d like but it’s insanity on four wheels.”Keselowski took his first Sprint Cup victory ahead of Dale Earnhardt Jr, Newman in a wrecked car, Ambrose, former Formula One driver Scott Speed, and series leader Kurt Busch.Ambrose is back in action next weekend in at Richmond International Raceway.

RESULTS: Aaron’s 499 at Talladega Superspeedway Race 9 in the 2009 NASCAR Sprint Cup Series 1. #09 Brad Keselowski 188 laps 2. #88 Dale Earnhardt Jr 3. #39 Ryan Newman 4. #47 Marcos Ambrose 5. #82 Scott Speed 6. #2 Kurt Busch 7. #16 Greg Biffle 8. #83 Brian Vickers 9. #20 Joey Logano 10. #31 Jeff Burton2009 NASCAR Sprint Cup Driver’s Standings – After Race 9 of 36 1. Kurt Busch 1299 2. Jeff Gordon 1294 3. Jimmie Johnson 1235 4. Tony Stewart 1232 5. Denny Hamlin 1193 6. Kyle Busch 1124 7. Carl Edwards 1119 8. Clint Bowyer 1098 9. Jeff Burton 1092 10. Greg Biffle 1081 19. Marcos Ambrose 937

Given the current global credit crunch this is hardly the best time for Jaguar to be launching its new $250K XKR, the marque’s fastest accelerating current production car: 4.8sec to 100km/h. That’s 0.3sec quicker than the old XKR and into 911 territory. Besides, given the hype over the new XFR, it’s easy to forget the XK range has been significantly enhanced, though the new GTs won’t reach Oz until November. Obviously the XKR gets the same mechanical upgrades as the sedan, together with new headlights, LED tail-lights and a front bumper that all conspire to make it even more handsome. Inside, Jaguar has cleverly incorporated the XF’s cylindrical gear selector and made a number of design and material upgrades.

The aluminium-bodied XK – it weighs 138kg less than the equivalent steel XF sedan – also integrates the same chassis mods as the XFR: the new continuously variable damping system and electronic diff. We loved the old XKR and the new one is much improved, with far more accessible performance. It’s tractable – running down to 1200rpm in sixth and then pulling away fluently. There is so much torque that between 80-113km/h, the new car is 24 percent faster.In terms of character the XKR always sat cleverly between the hard-edged Porsche 911 and the softer Mercedes SL500. However, the new car moves closer to the 911 in terms of agility and sharpness, while remaining far more relaxed and comfortable. It encourages the driver to go quickly from the moment you twist the tranny selector. The linear power delivery starts at 2500rpm and goes on and on, all the way to the cut-out at 6700rpm. The exhaust sounds epic, too.Drive the new XKR and it’s difficult to make any case, beyond exclusivity, for the $360K Aston DB9 or $400K Bentley Conti coupe. In these tough times that makes Jaguar’s new GT great value for money.

Jaguar XKR

Body aluminium, 2 doors, 2+2 seats Drivetrain front engine (north-south), rear drive Engine 5000cc V8, dohc, 32v, s/c Power 375kW @ 6000-6500rpm Torque 625Nm @ 2500-5500rpm Transmission 6-speed auto Size l/w/h 4791/1892/1322mm Wheelbase 2846mm Weight 1753kg 0-100km/h 4.8sec (claimed) Price $250,000 (est) On sale November