The FPR V8 Supercar totally out-classes the HRT ride car on a hot lap of Calder Park. Before either V8 Supercar had turned a wheel in anger, I asked Garth Tander and the boys from HRT what the performance difference between the ride car and the FPR racer was likely to be. The consensus view was: “about a second per lap” – a frank and on-the-money appraisal as things turned out.

So, what aspect of ‘real’ V8 Supercar performance do you miss out on, from the passenger’s seat of the HRT ride car? The answer is, essentially, that the FPR car is a braking virtuoso, while the HRT ride car is merely impressive.Off the end of the main straight, the FPR car starts its braking 20 metres closer to turn one. And, during those 20 metres, you have to ask yourself what it spends its time doing. The answer is, of course, accelerating – increasing speed. When Richards hits the anchors in the FPR racer, he’s doing 255km/h. At this exact same point on the track, the HRT ride car has already wiped 5km/h from its maximum speed of 246km/h. If you stare at the overlaid straight-line acceleration graphs long enough, you actually see the FPR Supercar carve up the HRT ride car under brakes.Then, still on the straight, the FPR racer goes on to brake a lot harder. It gets to its peak brake application (1.3G) early, and at this point the HRT car is managing ‘only’ 0.85G. Around 120 metres later, the FPR car is still pulling 1.2Gs under brakes at 147km/h – at which point Richards starts easing off the brakes in the set-up for turn one; the HRT is managing 0.7G at 139km/h, and Tander won’t start easing off for another 30 metres.The braking duel into turn one repeats itself – albeit not on such a grand scale – off the end of the back straight into dogleg two, highlighting the two places on the track where the FPR car has a real edge.Elsewhere, its gains are incremental. The two cars are very close on corner entry and exit speeds around the entire circuit. At one point on the way into turn one, for example, the FPR racer is carrying 116.5km/h while the HRT carries 117.3km/h. On the way out, the FPR car is doing 88.2km/h at the point where the HRT car is level-pegging at 88.3km/h. However, at the apexes, the FPR racer carries slightly more speed (and therefore more lateral G) in each of the turns.For 600 metres of the main straight, the two Supercars really are nose-to-nose. At the second-third gearchange on the way out of turn two, the FPR car pulls 122.0km/h while the HRT car, hypothetically beside it, manages 121.1km/h. Then, 350 metres before the entry to turn one, the FPR car starts to inch ahead. One hundred metres after that, Tander in the HRT car hits the anchors; Richards won’t for another 20 metres, and the FPR car gallops away.This braking performance adds up to a 1.2-second per lap difference in the favour of the FPR. That’s a two percent advantage to the Blue Oval racer, a gap that the HRT car lacks the ability to close. Price $500,000 (est) Engine V8 (900), ohv, 16v Capacity less than 5000cc Bore/stroke team specific Compression 10.0:1 Power 470kW@7250rpm Torque 630Nm@5750rpm Transmission 6-speed manual Kerb weight 1355kg Power-to-weight 347kW/tonne Tyres 17-inch Dunlop racing slick on 11-inch wide magnesium alloy

To fully appreciate just how well these cars perform, we really need something mundane for reference, to demonstrate just how far above the pedestrian the bar is set with high-performance Aussie road cars, and then how much higher again it’s lifted by the two race cars.

Fortuitously, the G-force figures for a current Falcon XT and a Commodore Omega were available. These were set on a different track (Oran Park’s skidpan), which is concrete (Calder’s bitumen is likely to offer more grip), using a different driver and a lot slower. But the data is enough for ballpark comparisons.Both poverty-pack road cars delivered around 0.4G of straight-line acceleration, about 0.9G of braking, and about 1.0G in the corners.The F6, GT and GTS raise the bar significantly, each offering about 50 percent more straight-line acceleration, and about 10 percent more outright cornering capability. The F6 and GT both offer about 20 percent more braking. On paper, the GTS doesn’t appear to up the ante much at all under brakes. What the performance cars here do is generate their peak brake force at higher speeds, with more weight to haul up. Their brakes are, literally, more powerful.It’s also worth remembering that the performance-car experience isn’t just about the numbers – these cars are set up so they’re happier approaching (and at) the limit.And the W427? It’s just that much better again – at everything.The next step up is even bigger. A V8 Supercar slashes 11 seconds a lap from the F6 and GT, 10 seconds from the GTS and even steals 7.6 seconds from the W427 – all massive margins. The gains are carved out by being better at, basically, everything.Is there a ‘comparable’ road car to compare the V8 Supercars against? Nearest thing to hand was the data for a Porsche 911 GT2 on Oran Park’s North Circuit (archived from the recent Wheels Handling Olympics). The GT2 makes 390kW and weighs 1440kg, so it’s about 80kW down on power and about 100kg heavier than a V8 Supercar. Still, it delivered 0.7G of straight-line acceleration – equivalent to the FPR race car at Calder, but not quite up there with the HRT ride car.It also managed a Herculean 1.3G under peak braking, equalling the FPR racer’s effort, albeit at considerably lower speed (therefore less outright braking power). In cornering the GT2 delivered 1.2G at Oran Park, about 0.2G behind the FPR car at Calder, and slightly closer to the HRT ride car’s peak cornering ability – the slicks on the racers are probably 90 percent of the difference here.

Pontiac, the GM brand that gave the world the iconic GTO and Firebird muscle cars, is to join Oldsmobile, Studebaker, and other once-great badges in the expanding car-makers burial plot.

The official announcement indicating the end of Pontiac is expected early this week as part of GM’s widespread plan for survival. Once great Pontiac – always positioned upmarket of Chevrolet with the emphasis on performance – has overall market shares of a mere 1.9 per cent so far this year. Sales last month (March) accounted for a little over 11 per cent of GM’s total.The demise of Pontiac severs an export pipeline for Holden, although if the Australian brand continues as part of the GM family, its products could potentially be sold in the US as Chevs.

Reports out of the United States suggest that the US Treasury Department is instructing Chrysler to prepare a Chapter 11 bankruptcy filing for as soon as next week.

The Treasury can make demands due to the massive injection of Federal funds into the struggling Chrysler. A bankruptcy filing by Chrysler would be the first from Detroit’s ailing vehicle makers, all of which have been sinking in a morass of debt flowing from increasingly irrelevant and unwanted products tied to a different world of way lower fuel prices and a healthier economy.The powerful United Automobile Workers has been given assurances that its members’ pensions and retiree health care benefits will be protected as a condition of the bankruptcy filing, according to the New York Times.Italy’s Fiat, also struggling with poor sales and debt, seems prepared to complete its planned alliance with Chrysler while the company is under bankruptcy protection.Unresolved though is what happens to Chrysler’s lenders. A New York Times story says the lenders hold US$6.9 billion in company debt but the US government’s most recent offer, gives them about 22 cents on the dollar, or US$1.5 billion, plus a 5 per cent equity in a revamped Chrysler. The lenders have been seeking 65 cents in the dollar, or US $4.5 billion, and a 40 per cent stake.Failure to reach agreement between Washington and Chrysler’s uncomfortable lenders could mean the outbreak of an unseemly legal battle in bankruptcy. The New York Times report suggests creditors are adamant their claims are backed by most of the company’s collateral, including plants, brands and equipment. But the major senior lenders are expected to argue that they have first claim on those assets, even ahead of the government’s debt. We wish them luck on that push.Last month, the Obama administration said it would provide up to US$6 billion in financing provided Chrysler and Fiat could complete a proposed alliance by the end of April. Fiat was keen as it wants to use the deal as a springboard to get a strong foothold in the US market. Initial negotiations centred on Fiat taking 35 per cent of Chrysler, but the slice was subsequently reduced to 20 per cent.A bankruptcy case would make it easier for Fiat to select the assets of Chrysler that it wants to hang on to, specifically dealerships, factories and the company’s product development operations.After Fiat’s cherry picking is done, Chrysler could flog off any assets it does not want to keep, and cancel existing franchise agreements with superfluous and under performing car dealers.

If predictions hold true, China’s light vehicle sales for 2009 will top 10 million.

If those same projections hold true, U.S. sales of similar vehicles will come in under 10 million. So you can understand while the 13th Shanghai Auto Show had more life to it than Detroit’s annual car display this past January.

In fact, as you wander through the chain of halls that house the Chinese show, you begin to wonder if there’s any end to it. If you ever attend, take sensible shoes.

There were familiar faces, the newest and biggest star being Porsche’s four-door exotic sedan, the Panamera… looking very nice, much better in reality than the first photos indicated. And, yes, there is room inside to accommodate four adults with ease.BMW had an M version of its X5 and Audi updated the Q7. Troubles in Detroit aside, General Motors made a strong showing, lead by its Buick division, which sells more cars in China than in the U.S. In fact, GM sold over 350,000 vehicles in China in the first quarter of 2009.Haima Fushida Me EV Then we get into the Chinese cars and names that are not immediately familiar, labels like Chery, Roewe, Geely, BYD and the winner, Great Wall.It would be easy to pass off many of these machines as cute or derivative or rather plain… but not as easy as it once was.As examples, Roewe showed a pair of very nicely done sedans, the N1 concept and another sporting a famous badge now owned by the firm: MG6. There were hybrid or electric cars spread throughout the area, from cute little things like the Dongfeng I-Car, Great Wall Gwkulla and Chery M1 electric to honest-looking medium-size machines such as the BYD e6 to advanced concepts like the GAC HAEV and Brilliance EV concept. Again, not a list of names with which you are familiar. At least not for now.To some, it might seem simple to criticize or dismiss Chinese automakers, but long-term that would be a mistake. They may lack product to sell in numbers overseas right now, but as they proved in Shanghai (and last year in Beijing) they have enthusiasm, momentum plus a growing home market.

The guys from Audi’s quattro GmbH performance division were quite specific. When they whipped the covers off the R8 V10 at the Detroit motor show back in January this year, we asked whether it was really worth the extra $80K-ish over the sublime V8 R8. They simply smiled and said “yes”, without the faintest hint of doubt in their minds that the R8 V10 was something very special indeed.

But PR spin is one thing, another question entirely is: does this Audi really have the goods to go head-to-head with Porsche’s 911 Turbo? And that’s exactly what we’re in Spain – with the keys to one of the first R8 V10’s to roll off Audi’s Neckarsulm production line – to find out.Audi anoraks will no doubt spot the subtly revised front end with its chrome interlaced grille and altered LED headlamp graphics, then register the larger side air-ducts set in wider carbonfibre panels behind the doors and trick 19-inch alloys shod with Pirelli P Zero tyres. The visual differentiation is subtle, though – much less apparent than that between the 911 Carrera and the Turbo, for example – and we can’t help but feel Audi could, and should, have done more in the looks department.But it’s that engine mounted behind the snug two-seat cabin that takes centre stage – and you get to survey it in all its glory through the glass window that doubles as the engine bay cover. It’s essentially the same strato-revving, 5.2-litre V10 engine used in Lamborghini’s recently released Gallardo LP560-4, albeit detuned to introduce an added layer of low-end flexibility and greater refinement.Malaga is a favourite backdrop for European car launches. In summer it plays host to a heaving mass of sunburnt holiday makers. But this is winter, it’s barely ten degrees and the majority of hotels and resorts are locked down for a good few months yet. The roads that wind their way northwards into the surrounding hills are empty apart from the odd local. A good day to be at the wheel of the R8 V10…It doesn’t take long to discover that the newcomer possesses a more purposeful character than the R8 V8 – itself hardly lacking in the charm department. Yes, there is serious ability here. The new engine is not just great to behold but also wickedly potent. It is undoubtedly the finest part of the new car.True, the compact donk doesn’t possess quite the same spine-tingling qualities as it does in LP560-4, where more aggressively milled camshafts spinning with different timing and other detail changes see it deliver an extra 24kW and 10Nm. It’s less manic as revs are wound on in earnest, but to get hung up on comparisons with a car costing more than half as much again is to miss the point entirely. It may have ultimately been developed with user friendliness in mind, but the R8 V10 is still capable of sending your pulse off the scale when the traffic clears and you finally get to let it off the leash. Plant your right foot and you’re thrust forward in brutal fashion; the action in low gears is extreme, while in higher ratios a touch less so, but still possess the kind of incessant urgency not found in any other Audi.Such is the ferocity of it all, the R8 V8 feels almost tame by way of comparison.Audi’s quattro division’s official numbers put the sprint from zero to 100km/h at 3.9sec – some 0.7sec faster than the R8 V8. The way the engine note hardens to an intense mechanical scream over the last 1500rpm certainly makes it believable. It also claims the R8 V10 will double that speed in a further 4.2sec, reaching 200km/h in just 8.1sec. It doesn’t quite hit the old double ton flat out, the gearing leaving it preciously close at 316km/h. Not that you’ll ever feel short changed.If there is a weak point within the driveline, it is the optional R-tronic gearbox. Had Audi resisted temptation and equipped all of its launch cars with the standard, and superb, six-speed manual we wouldn’t have any reason for complaint. But we were thrown the key to an R8 V10 packing the R-tronic sequential manual. It does away with a clutch pedal and adds paddles behind the steering wheel while providing the driver with the choice of either manual or automatic modes, the latter offering an additional sport program. Sounds good in principle, but the shifts are too long-winded and switching into sport only adds an unpleasant thud through the driveline on each change of ratio.Still, it’s only a blip on what is otherwise one of the most complete and easy-to-drive supercars of our time. Audi quattro boss, Stephan Reil, says his engineering team ran over 8000 kilometres during testing at the ‘Ring. It shows. The new engine provides the means to fully exploit the low slung Audi’s underpinnings – a combination of aluminium intensive double wishbones all round. Despite a 225kg increase in kerb weight, inherent balance remains a defining feature. You feel good about driving it up to around nine-tenths. Beyond that, it demands respect. But you never feel the same sort of trepidation you experience attempting to get on top of the Lambo LP560-4.Audi has retained the same apportioning of drive as in the R8 V8, with 35 percent delivered through the fronts and the remaining 65 percent channelled rearward. This makes it feel a lot like a rear-driver when pushing hard onto the straights and braking late into corners. There is great control within the aluminium body – albeit with greater levels of roll than in the firmer and noticeably more hardcore LP560-4.So, an ultra fast, phenomenally responsive and immensely capable supercar – equally at home in the city as it is on the most challenging of back roads. On first impressions the R8 V10 is more desirable and a good deal more exclusive than the Porsche 911 Turbo. It is also far cheaper and a better everyday proposition than the Gallardo LP560-4. And yes, the Audi lads were right: it is worth paying the extra over the V8, which we now consider to be a little under done. Make no mistake, this is a car of great depth and completeness; arguably the best supercar in the real world. Audi R8 V10 Body aluminium, 2 doors, 2 seats Drivetrain mid-engine (north-south), all drive Engine 5204cc V10, dohc, 40v Power 386kW @ 8000rpm Torque 530Nm @ 6500rpm Transmission 6-speed automated manual Size l/w/h 4435/1930/1252mm Wheelbase 2650mm Weight 1625kg 0-100km/h 3.9sec (claimed) Price $360,000 (estimated) On sale Third quarter 2009

General Motors won’t be paying out its $1 billion debt instalment to bondholders by June 1.

At a Chinese motor industry summit in Detroit yesterday, GM’s Chief Financial Officer Ray Young told theWall Street Journal that the company was not even planning for the payments, as one of two conclusions would be reached – the company would have reduced its debt by exchanging shares and equity for the debt, like Ford has done, or the company will file for bankruptcy. The latter looks likely.Meanwhile at Ford, the company’s American dealer development program has taken an unexpected turn. The program allows for the less cashed-up dealer to invest in the Ford brand, building a store with Blue Oval money and then paying out the store with sale profits.Well, sales are rather slim at present, so Ford has decided to cut the weight of the dealer ties with a very, very good offer – own it outright for a dollar.According to Automotive News, the dealers need to prove to Ford that they have enough equity and finance to continue operating in the black. If they can do so by September 30, they can own the store in full for a buck. Ford will lose short-term cash in the offer, but will free up its financing obligations to the dealer.It sounds good in theory, but given the program was put in play to help less advantaged dealerships, how many could actually afford to take on the dollar deal?

MW was probably ready for this. After all, it’s been building ripper rear-drive compacts going back to the early ’70s and the 2002tii, and no doubt wondering why others didn’t get in on the act. Along with Mercedes, they should have been ready, of course, for the likes of Lexus to branch out from super-silent, super-soft luxury stuff into the realms of hardcore performance. Ready for the snorting IS F to start trampling all over the world’s favourite German turf. Question is, can it?

The current compact kings of performance are the M3 and the C63 AMG, at least while Audi pauses a moment between the outgoing RS4 and the next. That gap has been filled neatly by the IS F because, make no mistake, this is far more than a warmed-over IS250. Four years in the making, fitted with a brawny 5.0-litre V8, big Brembo brakes and a version of the LS460’s eight-speed auto, the IS F comes across as pure, rear-drive muscle-car exhilaration. Significantly, it’s also the first car of this ilk to come out of Japan.The similarities between the three are also significant. V8 power and rear-drive are givens, as are their four-door bodies – yes, you’ve probably heard the M3 has landed in Oz with a sedan – and their kerb weights fall within a 105kg envelope. Automatic transmissions deliver the goods (with conventional torque converters in the Mercedes and Lexus, and BMW’s dual-clutch seven-speeder in the M3) and while all manufacturers have gone to town on suspensions, wheels, tyres and electronic driver aids, aero add-ons and visual bling elements are a little more restrained.So we headed to Victoria’s north east to pit two established players against a Japanese interloper. The area offers plenty away from the dullness of the Hume Freeway: there’s Winton Motor Raceway, for example, where we stopped to give Leanne Tander a chance to don helmet and cut some laps. Benalla Airport’s main runway was the venue for straight-line acceleration runs, and the region has a fabulous mixture of long, empty back roads between wheat fields stunted by the summer sun and Alpine passes twisting sinuously towards cooler altitudes. Any attributes, good or bad, displayed by any of these cars had nowhere to hide in these environments.Before turning a wheel though, it’s worth perusing the price lists. If Mercedes-Benz caused something of a pleasant surprise last year by introducing the 6.2-litre C63 at $139,500 (neatly undercutting the M3 Coupe by $17,500 along the way), then Lexus has gone a step further. It has landed the IS F at $129K, with none of the typical German shenanigans of expensive options. Apart from the delete-option sunroof, what you see is what you get. The C63’s price has since risen to $144,365, and with the introduction of the four-door version, the M3 has dropped to $145,000, although you’ll need to add $7300 for the dual-clutch ‘box. Auto comes as standard (there’s no manual option) in the Lexus and Benz. Interestingly, items standard on the M3 Coupe such as electronic damper control (EDC) and M Drive cost extra on the sedan at $4000 and $3500 respectively.Despite the similarities of V8 powerplants, there’s a wide disparity in capacity among the three. The M3’s 4.0-litre unit may be the smallest, but it’s also built to rev and manages 309kW at a heady 8300rpm – as good a reason as any why it was never going to get a conventional auto. The Lexus, with an extra litre of engine capacity from its LS460-derived (and Yamaha re-engineered) 5.0-litre V8, only just pips the Bimmer in the power stakes, with 311kW on tap, but it peaks 1700rpm lower down and, with 505Nm versus 400Nm, trounces it for torque. But, unsurprisingly perhaps, it’s the 6.2-litre AMG mill that’s the grunter, churning out 336kW in its C-Class application, and a 600Nm torque peak that’s a full 50 percent up on the M3.And yes, the C63 is quickest in straight-line acceleration, but there’s not much between it and the M3. The big-hearted little Merc pounded across the 400 metre line in 13.24 seconds, barely a couple of tenths ahead of the BMW. It was a similar story to 100km/h (5.17sec versus 5.27), but what the numbers don’t show is the ease with which the driver can extract the C63’s full potential. Simply switch off the ESP, hold the brake pedal and give enough revs to brake traction, then hang on while the bellowing V8 hurtles you into the sunset with the crisp seven-speed auto shifting up perfectly on demand.Try that in the M3 and you get nothing but snaking wheelspin; in ordinary circumstances, it’s impossible to control when the automatic clutch will engage. Accessing the launch control program helps, but it’s not an easy task. Using the redesigned, but still painfully counter-intuitive iDrive controller, the driver needs to select the S6 mode of gearbox control, and ensure ESP is off. Then you crank the gear-speed and hold the gearshift forward (neither of these steps are properly explained in the owner’s manual), step on the gas and a full-noise launch happens automatically. If you’re lucky, and the program doesn’t become inaccessible to protect the gearbox and diff from abuse, it may give you a second go. In the meantime, any well-pedalled V8 Commodore will have left the M3 driver in its tyre smoke.As in the C63, acceleration in the IS F is virtually a stomp and romp event, thanks mostly to that velvety eight-speed auto. And although the soundtrack is a little more subdued than the Merc’s and lacks the M3’s crisp metallic buzz, it still growls like a bear with an empty porridge bowl. Only problem is, it’s a bit behind the play on outright performance. None of the three matched their manufacturer’s claims, but the IS F’s 0-100km/h time of 5.74 and standing 400 metres in 13.85 was furthest away.Not that the Lexus ever feels slow on the road. It has big-hearted performance that matches its pumped bonnet and wheelarches, and while not short on bottom-end grunt, things really start to happen past about 4000rpm. There’s a ‘sport’ button hidden annoyingly to the left of the steering column that increases throttle response, steering speed and stiffens the dampers, while accessing manual shifting for the transmission is as easy as tapping on the paddles, or moving the lever across to the right.If muscle-car attitude equates to a lumpy ride, then the IS F delivers; a bit too much, in fact, because even with the suspension set to the more comfortable level, the rebound damping in the rear end pulls the body down hard over bigger bumps. It’s not uncomfortable or jiggly over smaller stuff (indicating the lower-profile tyres aren’t to blame) so in most circumstances the ride is certainly bearable. It’s just that compared with the M3 with its amazingly supple ride, given the sharpness and precision of its handling and body control, anything else starts to look ham-fisted. The C63 is somewhere between the two and, with no driver-select suspension modes, manages to be firm although not uncomfortable. But you start to wonder whether BMW’s damping experts practise witchcraft rather than normal engineering.This impression is confirmed on the racetrack where the M3 easily overcame its power and torque inferiority to post quicker lap times than its more hairy-chested rivals. But it also continues to be a precision tool on the road. If the sedan has lost any torsional rigidity compared with the 20kg-lighter M3 coupe, you’ll never pick it. The combination of rapid-action steering, a tremendously grippy rear end, sensibly linear torque delivery and perfectly controlled body movement make it a joy to drive. The dual-clutch manual gearbox reacts quickly to manual shifts, or smoothly and intuitively if left in drive. If anything, the manual variant’s combination of sheer speed and refinement has only been enhanced by this very clever gearbox.That’s not to say a good auto is left in the M3’s wake, as evidenced by the C63. The torque delivery of that monster V8 is dominating, and is the almost overwhelming aspect of the driving experience, but the seven-speed is never caught out. If you need to find a lower gear manually, it reacts relatively quickly; left to its own devices, it’ll do a better-than-average job. Throttle inputs need to be judicious if the ESP is switched off, but apart from progressive rear-end slip under power, there are no surprises here. The C63 reacts with all the big-engined brutality it can muster, although tempered by particularly pleasant steering and just a smidge of the understeer displayed on the circuit.The essence of the IS F is a little more difficult to bottle. Raw noise and performance are certainly there, and the sweet action of the eight-speed auto adds refinement that might otherwise be suspect given the meaty ride. It’s less keen on manual downshifts, giving an audible beep if revs are two high, and a noticeable pause if they’re not. The Lexus ESP can be switched off completely, or give another blast of the beeper when thresholds are reached, but the truth is that, on the road at least, those limits are pretty high. Eager turn-in is matched by ample traction on exit, power builds gratifyingly with revs and on the whole it’s an undemanding, easy natured car to drive quickly.In fact, one of the IS F’s most admirable attributes is that while it packs plenty of punch, it still has loads of Lexus-like refinement and usability. The main driver interface is via a touch-screen that is simplicity itself to operate, and certainly preferable to BMW’s hidden levels of menus, or Mercedes’ slightly less complex COMAND system. Noise levels are lower than in the other two – even the V8 induction noise under full throttle seems distant.The IS F even manages comparatively good fuel consumption (given the amount of track-work executed), averaging 15.5 litres/100km for the test, versus 17.2 for the M3, or 20.1L/100km in the C63.And because these are sedans we assume somebody will use the back seat. It’s a toss-up between the Mercedes and BMW for outright space and comfort, because either is only adequate in the rear. The IS F shares the IS250’s lack of headroom and knee space, and in the front its wide seats and centre console mean it’s cramped as well. Everything is pretty well presented, with a preponderance of weird, high-gloss, silvery carbonfibre trim. The M3 goes for more metallic silver inside (and the usual 3 Series problems with storage space for oddments) while the C63 has useful stowing space for phones and the like, and on our test car at least, sombre colours for the timber and leather.Engines L-R: Benz C63 AMG; BMW M3; Lexus IS F The good news is that there are now three compact powerhouse sedans, any of which offer bounteous levels of satisfaction, whether that be from the noise they make, sheer speeds achievable or just the joy of being behind the wheel. But we’re here to rank them, and so the Lexus must still come third. Japan’s first attempt at a V8 muscle car could have come off half-baked, but the IS F is a decent effort in terms of speed, excitement and value, all combined with the kind of drivetrain and NVH refinement long-term customers of the brand will surely expect. The important exceptions are ride quality, where it can’t match the amazing M3 in particular, the IS F’s inherent back-seat problems and the fact that the auto transmission could be a bit sharper.The M3, even in sedan form, remains the consummate track racer for the road. But even that description sells the BMW short because it is now far easier to live with thanks to a sensible automatic mode from the dual-clutch gearbox that doesn’t blunt the engine’s eagerness, and the extraordinary ride quality. And yet, the layers of complication added by aspects like the launch control, choosing between different blends of chassis, transmission and ESP sharpness and the complexities of iDrive can be infuriating.Plus it’s still the most expensive choice by a fair margin.The C63, on the other hand, asks little of its driver but delivers plenty. It has sledgehammer performance and sounds vicious when pushed hard, yet has just enough delicacy in the chassis to make any drive rewarding. All this comes from an automatic sedan that anyone can drive quietly if they want, even if the temptation is always there to shove the throttle hard and unleash the demons of hell. Compared with the M3 or even the IS F, the C63 seems uncomplicated and even brutal, but sometimes the simple things in life are best.

A suspect has been arrested after a speed camera operator was fatally shot on a freeway near Phoenix, Arizona, the first US state to controversially apply a state-wide camera network.

The 51-year-old victim, Doug Georgianni, was found near his radar enforcement vehicle, parked in a location to catch speedsters, after police answered reports of gun shots on the busy freeway.The employee of Redflex Traffic Systems, which operates the cameras under contract with Arizona’s Department of Public safety, was rushed to a hospital, where he died from his bullet wounds.Video equipment aboard the Ford Escape DPS vehicle, showed a Chevrolet Suburban that was believed to have been used during the shooting.The shooting appears to be road rage at its most destructive and a further sign that some people react badly to policies that appear to bring revenue to the state rather than saving lives..Scottsdale-based Redflex Traffic Systems is a unit of Redflex Holdings Group, headquartered in Melbourne, Victoria.DPS Director Roger Vanderpool said that Arizona’s speed camera program improves public safety but critics said its inclusion in the budget was a clear sign that boosting state revenue was the real motivation.

There are no signs of old-school moon headlamps, bubble bonnets, or trailing boots here – in fact, you could be pardoned for thinking this official teaser imagery from Jaguar is actually the current model XF.

The the company announced the arrival date and a short video at the Shanghai auto show yesterday: the all-new Jaguar XJ is due for global debut in London on July 9 (but not at the British Auto Show – the biennial motor show has fallen the way of the dodo in these harsh times…).It will come in standard and long-wheelbase body styles with the XF generation’s V6 and V8 petrol and diesel engines, is built on a next-gen ‘aerospace inspired’ aluminium platform architecture, and will boast first-time Jag options such as a full moonroof.Sales starting at the end of the year and delivery of the cars at the start of 2010, and more details are sure to follow in the coming months…For now, the official XJ site can be found HERE.