wheels car of the year 2009

GolfVolkswagen

A brilliant range crowned by the lustworthy GTI lands motoring’s most coveted award

wheelsW

inn

er

Win

ner

Win

ner

Winner Winner Winner W

inner Win

ner W

inner W

inner Winner Winner

CAROF THEYEAR

wheels

WWWWWWWWW

r

nnner

Win

WWWWWii

www.wheelsmag.com.au

http://issuu.com/action/page?page=64

IN TERMS of difficulty, selecting a car of the year falls somewhere between a successful land invasion of Vietnam and teaching cricket to a cat. There is conflict. There is anguish. There is remorse.

Also, there are scratches.I caused most of those (the scratches, anyway)

during this year’s COTY process, but more of that later.

The 2009 COTY was a notable event, occurring as it did after a full year of global economic crisis. The full gravity of international financial collapse was brought home to judges when we assembled at Holden’s Lang Lang Proving Ground outside of Melbourne to find that there was no marquee.

Apparently all it takes for Holden to throttle back on the freebies these days is for the parent company in the US to go bankrupt.

Editor Bulmer directed troops to a nearby Bunnings where a stock of canopies was secured and we judges were able to begin our introductory day-long poking process. Two of us were rank newbies – me, a middle-aged newspaper columnist whose day job involves insulting politicians and trying to cadge free test cars from the motoring desk, and Samantha Reid, a 22-year-old Adelaide gal whose workplace of choice is the cockpit of open-wheeler racing cars.

Samantha’s able to perform complex high-speed driving manoeuvres and I’m merely able to write about them, but we were united in trying to demonstrate deep car wisdom. Motoring writers are intensely competitive, so I was delighted to be first to point out the uneven panel gap around the bonnet of an E-Class Mercedes. Talk about your decline in German manufacturing.

“That’s because it isn’t shut properly,” said Carey, gently leaning on the Merc’s bonnet. It closed like a QC’s argument.

Samantha did rather better, what with her delicate feminine ability to assess interior finish and quality. She was almost as impressive as Stahl, who spent some considerable time informing co-judges of the sound-dampening qualities inherent in certain dimpled plastic dash coatings. This lasted for as long as it took to locate the childproof locks. Not that it was part of the assessment, but Hawley took the longest.

Strange to say, but you could sell tickets to this largely static process.

The level of investigation is fascinating. If the Walkley Awards for journalism were this rigorous, they’d still be working out who the winners were in 1983. And this was before we’d even wheeled the cars out on to Holden’s test track.

If the Walkley Awards for journalism were this rigorous, they’d still be working out

who the winners were in 1983

This, the 47th running of Wheels COTY, threw up

the largest field of cars ever assembled at the event – all up, 57 cars

from 22 models and 16 manufacturers.

Numbers

Search party The hunt for COTY 2009 was a whopper. A perfect baptism of fire, then, for your narrator, Tim Blair

90GED BULMERThe man in the Big Chair wields the sword of democracy for this, his eighth Wheels COTY. He doubts he’ll ever match Robbo’s record, but would be happy enough to catch the old bugger out on the track. A Queenslander who’s known not to stress, although he does cause some.

JOHN CAREYIf you thought a move to Italy might have mellowed our brusque, bolshie former deputy editor, think again. Given to delivering short, withering and insightful assessments of both cars and peers, JC brings an avowedly absolutist perspective to proceedings.

MICHAEL STAHLBehind the glasses and slightly quizzical gaze spin the cogs of a unique mechanism. Had Sigmund Freud ever got to rummage in this noggin, he’d have found a library of discarded automotive trivia, vintage Italian motorcycles, and a hoard of Porsche 908 slot cars.

PETER ROBINSONRolling up the sleeves for this, his 38th Wheels COTY, Robbo continues to surprise the younger blokes with his encyclopaedic knowledge, energy and unbridled passion. Not to mention the sizzling pace at which he laps Lang Lang’s ride and handling course.

JONATHAN HAWLEYFew on the panel do as good a line in irony as ‘Horace’. Fewer still can match his ability to cut to the quick of a matter with a simple, insightful remark. Knows his grits, thanks to a lifetime in automotive journalism, and rivals Bill Cosby for a collection of crook knitwear.

BRUCE NEWTONNot every PR man’s best friend, ‘Bruiser’ has a deserved reputation for being hard but fair. Can sniff out a news story with the well- trained proboscis of a Fleet Street hack, but balances it beautifully with terrific industry knowledge and great road-test skills.

TIM BLAIRNot to be confused with Tony, or the director of the Blair Witch Project, first-time COTY judge Tim is political columnist and newspaper writer by day, motoring enthusiast by … well, whenever he can pilfer a good car off the motoring guys.

SAMANTHA REIDA COTY first-timer who instantly impressed with her A-grade driving skills and solid analysis, Sam somehow manages to juggle racing open-wheelers with studying engineering, working as a Murcotts driver training instructor, and brewing coffee.

THE COT9COURT MARSHA9

0Ride and handling sealed road (4.0km)

Public road simulation with bumps, off-camber corners and a railway line crossing. Used for on-limit handling, bitumen ESP effectiveness, braking stability, and steering characteristics.

Ride and handling gravel road (1.4km)

Slippery sand over hard-packed clay, and a slight crown. Used to assess handling and ESP effectiveness. In cars without ESP, we’re looking for stability and safe, predictable handling.

Dirt ABS testApproached at

80km/h, the driver brakes at the first in a line of equally spaced cones. When the car stops, a quick countback from the last cone to the stopped position gives an indication of ABS effectiveness.

Rough ride road (1.0km)

Straight with potholes, patches, lumps and bumps driven at a steady 100km/h. A very tough test of ride comfort. Also great for detecting rattles, squeaks and other indicators of design or assembly quality faults.

Double lane-change (120m)

Simulates emergency avoidance manoeuvre at 80km/h. Primarily assesses ESP system on bitumen. Judges also test with the system switched off, to assess core dynamic ability.

Circular track (4.7km)

One standing start lap. Judges must use lane designated for their speed and not exceed strict 180km/h limit. Objectives are to assess performance, high speed stability and noise levels.

Wet ABS testAnother 80km/h

brake test, this time on wetted concrete. Equally spaced cones give judges an indication of ABS effectiveness in the wet.

Static poke and prod After short presentation

on the model’s genesis, the panel inspects its every orifice. Exterior and interior design, packaging efficiency, seating, cargo space, versatility and quality all go under the spotlight.

For seven consecutive days, judges are immersed in the COTY process. The first three days are spent at Holden’s Lang Lang Proving Ground, where presentations on each car are made, exteriors and interiors assessed, and core dynamic ability tested (see below). Cull number one is then made, and only eight contenders of 22 make it through to the penultimate round. Stage Two consists of three days of driving loops on the Mornington Peninsula, which includes a mix of urban and rural driving. Votes are cast, and only four contenders make it through to Stage Three. For the final day, judges go four-up with the grand finalists and make their decision. And on the eighth day, the judges (finally) rest…0000

That began on day two. The leader of Holden’s Lang Lang test personnel sat us down for a chat beforehand. “This is not a racetrack,” he said. “There are no run-off areas. There are culverts and trees.” He finished with the cheery line: “If you do go off the course, there will be consequences.”

Message received. I wasn’t exactly anticipating doing anything racey, since modern tyres are mostly so good that average punters like me rarely reach anything close to the limit of adhesion on public roads even during enthusiastic driving. By the time we reach those limits, we’re over them.

But modern tyres cover a multitude of suspension sins that can only be exposed by a closed-course pounding. In these circumstances, flaws are made evident that would only be noticed in crucial real-life driving moments. The sort of moments that introduce far more serious consequences than just culverts and trees.

Veteran COTY fixer James Lacey rode with me for a lap to make sure I wasn’t going to hold everyone up too much due to chronic slowness. “That would be understeer,” he said calmly as we ploughed through a slow left-hander in the Lexus RX350. Then, on a subsequent turn: “Roll oversteer on entry.” In my

notes, these events were respectively represented by the phrases “when does this stop?” and “YIKES!”

My, but the Subarus were interesting. They’d appeared big and clumpy during the probing, but that impression was false. On the course they became even bigger and clumpier. Again, this dynamic gigantism would’ve been much slower to surface had we been tooling around at normal speeds.

Although, come to think of it, the steering’s 1970s-level vagueness would have been apparent during a parking exercise at a supermarket. Somewhere in Ota, Japan, at Subaru headquarters, a bunch of very talented engineers – the guys who designed earlier Subies – are tunnelling to freedom from their basement prison. The genius who composed Subaru’s once-perfect pedal placements is probably being waterboarded.

The Subarus were interesting. Note the steering’s 1970s-level vagueness

CALL A (HOLDEN) CAB Holden’s Korean-designed Cruze offers really admirable interior space by being cleverly cab-forward. And it doesn’t look weird like a Civic sedan.

DASH IT ALL Alfa Romeo Mito Sport’s instrument panel surface looks like a magic marriage of carbonfibre and leather, with the sex appeal of both. It’s also a recipe for vision-blurring reflections on the windscreen.

HANDLING BREAKTHROUGHThe Nissan GT-R’s flush-fitting door handles are what design is all about. Flush fit brings aero advantages, yet they actually improve a door handle’s functionality.

NOT NOKIA-ING IT, BUT… Ford Fiesta’s media-control unit on the instrument panel brings the funkiness and familiarity of a mobile phone keypad. But why do we keep thinking base-spec Nokia, circa 2006?

DESIGN HIGHS AND LOWS MICHAEL STAHL

In my notes, the Lexus RX was represented by the

phrases ‘when does this stop?’ and ‘YIKES!’

them just so for an array of possible opener shots. I couldn’t make out Helmut’s shouted directions

during one shoot, so he wandered over to give me some advice: “It’s easier to hear me if your window is wound down.” Er, yes. Sorry about that, commandant.

Robbo had missed the first two days due to family commitments but arrived on the third to apply his decades of knowledge to this year’s crop. Gentle and professorial by nature, Robbo could easily pass for a retired academic, if you can imagine a retired academic who is interesting to talk to. And who can drive. I mean, really drive.

It was a little distracting on the first day when some of Holden’s test team borrowed the

Mercedes E63 AMG for a sprint while we were staring at Volvo interiors, but listening to Robbo take it across the back of the course was a whole other thing. It sounded like a Can-Am race from 1968. Then he’d get out and make an exquisitely precise observation about some barely-noticeable panel alteration over

the previous model.Now came the culling. Alfa’s pretty Mito was

always going to struggle. Someone had written “please crush me” in the dust on its rear window

during the first day; judges obliged. BMW’s majestic 730d copped it from Reid: “I thought it was a boat.” Ford’s Fiesta had numerous fans, but fell down on detail. Stahl and Newton didn’t much care for the Holden Cruze, although Carey dubbed it “bogan chic”.

“Flubbery” and “springy” were Reid and Stahl’s dismissal of the Kia Cerato. They were right, but Newton was impressed by the rapid rise in Korean quality, far more so than he was by the two Lexii.

“Vomitous” was one printable description. Bulmer, always observant in this area, noted that

The most expensive car this year was the

$234,900 E63 AMG; the cheapest Ford’s $16,450

Fiesta. The 57-strong field totalled $3.47m. Average

price? $60,900. Bargain.

Cashed up

Besides lapping the test course, complete with real-life-mimicking bumps, rail lines and surface changes, there were two other elements – the dirt course where Bulmer once measured Toyota’s roof-gravel friction coefficient, and an 80km/h emergency lane-change. Both presented unique challenges for the novice COTY pilot.

Especially aboard the Kia Sorento. I thought I’d punched some struts through the front suspension towers at one point on the dirt, but that grinding metal-on-metal sound turned out to be Kia’s shotgun ESP abruptly kicking in. The amount of variation in these systems, across the entire vehicle market, is striking. All of them do their job, to various degrees, but some do it by shutting the driver down instead of coaxing.

That said, it’s fun to toss any ESP-equipped car sideways at Lang Lang’s slippery dirt course and simply wait for the Invisible Hand of Safety to pull everything back into line. (Idea for a prank: try this with an atheist in the passenger seat. Scream “Jesus, save us!” as you lose control, then stare at your passenger in amazement when the car “miraculously” self-corrects. Afterwards, drive to church in awed silence.)

The lane-change, marked out with traffic cones, witnessed two breakthroughs. One involved Newton, who tried to whip the oddly-shaped Subaru Exiga through there at a speed clearly above 80 and actually made it. The other involved Reid, who invented the use of cone in verb form. “Yes,” she replied, when asked if she’d hit any. “I coned.”

I also coned, but thankfully none of us treed or culverted. Even so, we were kept back at the end of the day to wash cars so they’d sparkle for snapper Helmut Mueller. Then we had to arrange

X-CEES ALL The Volvo XC’s suite of safety systems that enable it to maintain distance, brake automatically, warn of vehicles in blind-spots and sense rain, means designers have to package more eyes than a fruit-fly.

SWITCH TURN-OFF Seems someone switched water-coolers in Subaru’s exterior and interior design departments. The same insidious chemical might explain this ill-fitting, messy and inconsistent cluster-fu… uhh, cluster of switches.

THE PURSUIT OF CHEESE Lexus’s leather interior may be begging to be recycled into Gold Coast loafers, but the inverted-trackball ‘mouse’ is clever and intuitive. Even better if you’re already left-handed.

SORUNOVER Kia’s Sorento has its reversing-camera monitor cleverly inset in the interior rear-view mirror. Too bad the image is all but obscured by reflections. Yeah, reflections. In a mirror. Who knew?

the ESP was either “all over you or having a nap.”Carey coned twice in Mazda’s 3, his only coning of

the week, and wondered why the otherwise up-to-the-mark interior featured so few fan speeds. “Yeah, I know,” added Hawley. “I can barely sleep at night for worrying about that.” The turbo MPS, which sends a GT-HO-load of power solely through its front wheels, was “evil”, according to Stahl.

I felt the same about the 370Z, an unpredictable oversteerer. Three other judges experienced the same thing. “It’s meant to be hairy-chested,” countered Stahl. So are lots of blokes at Sydney’s Mardi Gras, but that’s no reason to be in it.

Those scratches I mentioned earlier? Nissan’s engineers might find a few on the GT-R’s undertray. My fault. In a car loaded with more traction devices and balance adjusters and drift halters than an entire mid-’80s F1 grid, I somehow managed to slide clean off the road at Lang Lang’s slowest corner. I swear the onboard telemetry briefly flashed the word “idiot”. Fair call.

The GT-R made it through to the second cut along with a small batch of anointed others. Next came two days of real-world work near the beautiful coastal town of Blairgowrie. Paired with Stahl, the reality aspect was heightened a little. A typical ride went something like this: Clip apex. Accelerate. Hostile opinion about hippies. Left-foot brake, downchange, apex, vivid description of Japanese online comics, up one gear, fond reminiscence of bizarre childhood incident, redline. Brake, downchange, chewing gum inserted, scientific theory assessed and discarded, apex, up one gear, Harley owners psychoanalysed, up another gear, obscure foreign film explored in detail, park.

Then we’d take notes, sometimes a little too influenced by in-car chat. For example, my notes about the Honda Odyssey include Stahl’s idea that a Bonneville salt flats version, complete with spun aluminium wheel discs, would look really cool. As well, councils should sponsor ‘support your local cult’ days.

During these drives, the formerly insurmountable problem of selecting one car above the others began to fall away. The same happened for all other judges, too, although it wasn’t spoken of.

Everyone knew that one car stood tall. But then, gathering at a large table to make final

assessments and cast our votes – on individual pieces of paper, to be handed to the editor – a plan was hatched. We’d all vote for the Toyota Prius instead, just to mess with Bulmer’s head.

Not that the Prius was a total outsider; it made it all the way to the final cut, after all. But it was a long way short of our real winner. We were scribbling down our bogus votes when Stahl realised that Reid, sitting next to Bulmer, wasn’t in on the prank. So he launched into a distractionary tactic that should become part of COTY legend.

“Look!” he said, pointing to nearby trees. “Is that a toucan?”

The editor turned to examine this freakish phenomenon; toucans, native to Central and South America, are rarely found in coastal Victoria. A note was passed to Reid. Unanimity was secured. Bulmer gathered our votes and retired to count. The table fell silent upon his return.

“We’ve got a decision,” he said. Then, following a considerable pause: “You’re all a bunch of pricks.”

That was the final, friendly scratch of COTY 2009. The vote – the real vote – was taken again. This time there were votes for two cars, but one clear winner. In the end, it wasn’t really that difficult at all.

A plan was hatched. We’d all vote for the Prius, just to mess with Bulmer

STOCKBROKER BELT They’re not new, but the pillarless Benz coupe’s belt-handers still raise a smile and an unconscious, “Oh, thank you.” Too bad that’s pretty much it for the coupe’s good news.

DOOR JAR The Lexus is still a Toyota where you don’t look. The $82-$108K RX uses simple, stamped ‘knuckles’ for its door hinge mounts; rivals’ castings are stronger, better, and more expensive.

WHERE TO START? The random placement of Engine Stop/Start buttons – a pretty universal function – highlights the complete crock that is ‘ergonomic design’. Nissan can’t even agree between its own models.

DESIGN NO-LIGHT We still can’t work out if the Skoda Superb’s split hatchback/boot thing is a good or bad idea. Or even, what was the idea. Extra weight, complexity and ugliness? Quite possibly.

8 www.wheelsmag.com.au

ATMGD-OTYAerodynamics might add downforce, but nothing short of good old-fashioned traction will get the lid off your beer bottle. So the Aid to Mechanical Grip Device OTY award goes to the VW Golf, and the lever-action bottle opener fitted to its centre console.

BO-OTYAny AMG product should be handed Burn-out of the Year as a matter of course … except nobody could turn-off the E63’s traction control. Yours truly managed to push every button imaginable for no good reason during my two laps of Lang Lang, then attempted to launch into the lane-change and dissolved into a cloud of tyre smoke. Nobody could repeat it.

MF-OTYAlso only one contender for Mispronounced Fish of the Year award and that was Herr Stahl, who instead of ordering hake for dinner, made it sound more like hark-ay. Nobody laughed (much) until Tim Blair subsequently asked for the flake…

TO THE CARS...TO THECARS...90

THE OTHER OTYS JONATHAN HAWLEY

WWiinnnnnnneeeerr WWWWWWiinnnnnerr WWWWWiinnnnnnneeerr WWWWWiinnerW

inn

er

Win

ner

Win

ner W

inner Winner Winner Win

ner W

inn

er Win

ner Winner Winner Winner

CAROF THEYEAR

wheels

Winnerr

nner

Win

ner W

inner

COFCCY

w

WWWWWWWW

rr

OY

rr WWiinnnneer WWWiinnnneer WWinner Winner

“Nothing in the safety package (with seven airbags, including driver’s knee-bag) was

withheld from the base model”

Proving Ground Proving Grou

nd

Pro

vin

g Ground Proving Ground Provin

g G

rou

nd

P

rov

ing

Gro

un

d

CAROF THEYEAR

wheels

Proving GroundStage

If there’s a tougher environment than Holden’s Lang Lang Proving Ground in which to test the best new models

released in any given year, we’re yet to find it. This year, no less than 57 variants

of our 22 nominated models were trucked to the sprawling automotive

test facility south-east of Melbourne for three days of poking, prodding and punishment at the hands of our eight

judges. Armed with little more than note pads, driving shoes and a highly tuned

backside, their first job was to find eight stars in the 22 starters.

ONE

ITS NAME means ‘myth’ in Italian, but the Mito fails to translate Alfa Romeo’s obvious aspirations. While the three-door hatch captures attention with its individual exterior design treatment and stylised interior, the driving falls well short of keeping the promises implicit in its looks. Based on the same platform as Fiat’s best-selling model, the Punto, the Mito aims for sportiness, but misses.

“Where do I start with the chassis?” wondered Jon Hawley. “The suspension has all the control and precision of a Def Leppard drum solo.” Other judges were less imaginative with their criticisms, but there was complete agreement on the nature of the Mito’s problems.

The stiffly sprung Alfa’s ride is poor, but its damping also proved unable to prevent occasional bottoming-out on the lumpier parts of Lang Lang. The unyielding suspension was also blamed for dodgy directional stability. The inherent shiftiness of the Mito’s simple torsion beam rear-end was compounded by the quickness of its almost feel-free electric-assisted steering. “Fast initial steering out of phase with suspension,” said Peter Robinson. “All over the shop like a mad woman’s spaghetti,” noted Bruce Newton, who also thought the performance of its ESP “lamentable”. Most of the judging panel penned something similar.

But the Mito isn’t a total disaster to drive. Its turbocharged 1.4-litre engine (only the more powerful Sport was provided by importer Ateco for COTY testing) made several new friends. These included COTY newbie Samantha Reid, who thought the engine “smooth and refined”, adding

that “performance is impressive from a small four”. Although there were specific complaints from some judges – including too-heavy throttle pedal, too-long gearshift throws (no auto is offered) – there was broad consensus that the engine was a good thing. Especially, it was noted, when its fairly frugal thirst was taken into account.

Thanks to its shared platform, the Mito is also a practical package, with useful rear-seat room and cargo capacity. Better than a Mini, thought those judges who had spent time in both. But while the interior’s distinctively Italian design found general approval, annoying reflections from its carbonfibre-look dash in bright Australian sunlight were noted by several judges. Stahl was one: “Windscreen and instrument reflections give you the shits.”

While neither the Mito’s ESP nor ABS were judged well set-up for Australian conditions, particularly dirt, the car’s standard inclusion of key passive safety systems helped earn it good ratings for overall safety.

It was value that ensured the Mito’s early exit from Wheels COTY 2009. Even considering the lengthy list of standard safety hardware, the Alfa is very expensive for a small and sporty three-door hatch. Judges checked the $32,490 price of the basic 88kW low-boost model and the $37,490 tag on the 114kW Sport version, and came to rapid conclusions.

Editor Bulmer neatly summarised the reasons why the Mito didn’t progress beyond Stage One: “Suspension tune let it down … and it’s too costly.” Succint as always, Ged. JOHN CAREY

“Points into corners fantastically well,

but rear feels rolly”

Alfa Romeo MitoThe judges chorus to Alfa Romeo’s chassis engineers: “Where for art thou?”

BODYType 3-door hatch, 5 seats

L/W/H 4063/1720/1446mmWheelbase 2511mm

Track (f/r) 1483/1475mmCargo capacity 270L

Weight 1145kg DRIVETRAIN

Layout front engine (east-west) FWDEngines & transmissions

1.4-litre 4cyl turbo (114kW/230Nm) 6-speed manual

CHASSISSuspension: front struts, coil

springs, anti-roll barrear torsion beam, coil springs

Brakes ventilated discs (f); solid discs (r)

Tyres 205/45R17Spare space saver

Safety

Three-position DNA switch (‘Dynamic’,

‘Normal’ and ‘All weather’), offers the driver a choice

between three set menus of settings for the ESP, electric-

assist power steering and by-wire throttle

systems. Verdict? Gimmick.

ADR81 test consumption 6.5L/100kmMinimum fuel grade 95 RON (unleaded)Greenhouse emissions153g/km CO2Pollution standard Euro 5

Fuel/enviro

e-position h (‘Dynamic’, d ‘All weather’), river a choice

ee set menus of he ESP, electric-wer steering ire throttle

s. Verdict? mick.

Driver aids ABS, EBD, EBA, TC, ESPSeatbelts front pre-tensioners/load limitersFront airbags Side airbags Curtain airbags Knee airbags (driver) Crash rating five star (NCAP)

$ MoneyPrices $37,490 (Sport)3-year retained value 54.6%Service interval 15,000km

IT WAS crowned the best compact luxury soft-roader in a Wheels comparo during 2009, but that wasn’t enough for Audi’s popular new Q5 to progress past the first stage of the COTY process.

And it was the rougher patches of the ride and handling circuit at Holden’s Lang Lang Proving Ground that exposed an old Audi bugbear and effectively bumped off the Q5.

“There’s a real compromise in terms of ride comfort,” noted Carey, before inevitably adding: “It’s time to mention the Territory.”

The shadow of Ford’s dynamically excellent locally-built 2004 COTY winner looms large over all soft-roaders that have since ventured to COTY. Only Benz’s second-generation ML (2005) and VW’s Tiguan (2008), have risen anywhere near the same heights, managing to make the top four.

The rest have plainly struggled. Raised ride heights, light-duty all-wheel-drive systems and kerb weights of around two tonnes often equal a compromised drive and few votes from the judges.

On the Lang Lang knobs and stutters, the various Q5s were at best “stiff-legged” and at worst “unbearable” depending on the suspension mode dialled up and who was doing the driving.

That the Q5 was so lumpy was a major disappointment. It is, after all, based on Audi’s much-heralded new MLB structure, which moves the front axle line farther forward in relation to the (longitudinal) engine, supposedly improving weight distribution and therefore handling.

MLB has already spawned the A5 and A4, the former a disappointment in 2007 COTY judging, the latter making it through to the top four last year. By that graph then, the Q5 is a step backward.

Just as damning, was the fact that, for most judges, the new Volvo XC60, a direct competitor for the Q5, was the better drive.

“I thought the Volvo steered better,” noted Bulmer. He wasn’t alone.

While the Q5’s Torsen permanent AWD system is competent enough, ABS braking on dirt lacked bite and the ESP tune was as dull-witted and obvious in its responses as a career backbencher.

It wasn’t all bad or embarrassing for the Q5, its various petrol and diesel powertrains drawing strong praise from the judges. But as per A4 last year, it was the entry-level 2.0-litre turbo-petrol and turbo-diesel models that were regarded as the best value, well ahead of the more expensive V6.

“This engine brings the package alive,” wrote Hawley of the 2.0-litre turbo petrol engine.

As did the Q5 interior, which exudes typical Audi levels of quality, design and execution, although Stahl had a sense of deja vu: “The interior is nice, but haven’t I seen it all before in the A4/A6?”

Indeed there was a familiar feeling that, like many Audis before it, the Q5 is close to the target without hitting the bulls-eye. As good as many have been, maybe, but we still await that rarest of beasts – the truly compelling Audi.

BRUCE NEWTON

Audi Q5Luxury soft-roader finds the going hard at Lang Lang

STAGE

BODYType 5-door wagon, 5 seatsL/W/H 4629/1880/1653mm

Wheelbase 2807mmTrack (f/r) 1617/1613mm

Cargo capacity 540L (1560L seats folded)

Weight 1740kg (2.0TFSI); 1770kg (2.0 TDI); 1865kg (3.0 TDI)

DRIVETRAINLayout front engine (east-west) AWD

Engines & transmissions 2.0-litre 4cyl turbo (155kW/350Nm);

2.0-litre 4cyl turbo-diesel (125kW/350Nm); 3.0-litre V6 turbo-diesel (176kW/500Nm); 7-sp dual clutch (2.0 TFSI/2.0 TDI/3.0 TDI)

CHASSISSuspension: front double A-arms,

coil springs, anti roll barrear multi-links, coil springs, anti roll barBrakes ventilated discs (f); solid discs (r)

Tyres 235/65R17 (2.0 TFSI/2.0 TDI); 235/60R18 (3.0TDI)Spare space saver

“Above its competitors for interior class, but not steering and handling”

The Audi-designed EA888 engine (also in

Golf GTI MkVI) shares only cylinder spacing with the

EA113. Changes include the shift from belt to chain cam

drive and the addition of ‘valvelift’ to variable

valve timing.

Tech head

$Safety

Money

Fuel/enviroADR81 test consumption 8.5L/100km (2.0 TFSI); 6.8L/100km (2.0 TDI); 7.5L/100km (3.0 TDI)Minimum fuel grade 91 RON unleaded (2.0 TFSI); diesel (2.0 TDI/3.0 TDI)Greenhouse emissions 197g/km CO2 (2.0 TFSI); 179g/km CO2 (2.0 TDI); 199g/km CO2 (3.0 TDI) Pollution standard Euro 5

Driver aids ABS, EBD, BA, TC, ESPSeatbelts front pre-tensioners/load limitersFront airbags Side airbags Curtain airbags Knee airbags Crash rating five star (Euro NCAP)

Prices $59,900 (2.0 TFSI/ 2.0 TDI); $71,900 (3.0 TDI)3-year retained value 63% (2.0 TDI); 62% (2.0 TFSI/ 3.0 TDI)Service interval variable

BMW’s big luxury sedan was a car that sometimes polarised the COTY panel. While voices were never raised, the 7 Series was one of those cars that somehow managed to sharply divide opinion. Driving dynamics and interior design provoked profound disagreement.

“It’s like driving a very fast, very plush lounge,” wrote Bulmer, clearly impressed with the way the 7 Series handled around Lang Lang. “It’d be a beaut trans-Europe express.” Hawley, too, liked the BMW’s blend of ride comfort and body control.

“Pretty hideous at speed,” was the brutal verdict from Bruce Newton. “‘Normal’ suspension means sharp turn-in, followed by wallowy, barge-arsed floating about.” The ‘Comfort’ mode of the car’s Active Dynamics variable damping system, other judges found, was way too soft. ‘Sport’ and ‘Sport Plus’ improved handling, but at the cost of a more jittery ride. And there were complaints, too, about the remoteness of the steering. While the big sedan may satisfy some drivers, BMW has clearly missed the suspension and steering sweet spot.

It’s a similar story with the interior. Some judges liked BMW’s simplification of the car’s control layout, compared with the previous model. Yet Stahly found the cabin a letdown. “Interior very clean and modern, but not very opulent; looks like a big 3 Series.” Luxury car buyers rightly expect much more than mere spaciousness for something wearing price tags ranging from $198,800 for the six-cylinder turbo-diesel 730d to close to $400,000 for the twin-turbo V12 petrol-powered 760Li.

Failing to win universal acclaim for its dynamics and interior, the BMW was always going to have difficulty persuading all the COTY judges that it represented value. Especially when its poor resale value – a long-running 7 Series problem – was taken into account.

But there were aspects of the 7 Series that almost everyone agreed on. The least-expensive 730d’s drivetrain, for instance. Most judges thought the performance and general refinement of both engine and six-speed automatic beyond reproach. Lexus LS hybrid-beating fuel consumption and carbon-dioxide emissions were further positives.

All other 7 Series engines are turbocharged petrol-burners. Although the in-line six, V8 and V12 all bring incremental fuel consumption improvements compared with previous model equivalents, the BMW’s bulk and weight ensures relatively high numbers. While better, the new 7 Series brings no efficiency breakthrough tech to the luxury car class.

As expected for a luxury car, the 7 Series’ list of passive and active safety hardware earned high marks. Its ABS was judged well set-up for slippery Australian dirt, but the ESP system clearly struggled to keep the car in line through the double lane-change’s orange cones. The judges’ notes contained such descriptions as “sloppy” and “taily”.

With the judges divided on some of the 7 Series’ core attributes, it was destined to fall from favour. The end came sooner rather than later, and it departed COTY 2009 at the close of Stage One.

JOHN CAREY

BMW’W ss bibigg lluxury sedan was a car that somemetitimemes polarised the COTY panel. WWhihilele v voioices were never raised, thhee 77 SSereriies was one of thosee c cararss ththatat s somom hehow managed to shshararplplyy didivide opinionon. . Driving dynamimicscs a andnd i interior desisigngn p prorovokedprprofofououndnd d disagreemenentt.

“It’s lilikeke d driri iving a very fast, very plush lounge,”wrote Bulmer, clearly impressed with the wayay t thehe 7 Series handled around Lang g LaLangng. “I“It’t’d be a beaut trans-Europpee exexppress.” Hawley, too, liked the BMW’W ss blblendd of ride comfort and body control.

“Pretty hideous at speed,” was the brutal verdict from Bruce Newton. “‘Normal’ suspension meanssharp turn-in, followed by wallowy, barge-arsedfloating about.” The ‘Comfort’ modde e ofof t thehe car’s Active Dynamics varariaiablblee dadamping system, otheer r judgess f fououndnd, was way too soft. ‘Spoportrt’ aandd ‘Sport PlPlus’ improved handldliningg, b b tut at the cost of a more jittery y riridede. AA dnd there were complaints, too, about ththe remoteness of the steering. While the big g sedan may satisfy some drivers, BMW has as clearly ymissed the suspension and steering swesweet spopott.

It’s a similar story with the interiorior. SSoome judges liked BMW’s simplificationon ooff ththe car’scontrol layout, compared with thhe pprevious model. Yet Stahly found the cabbin a letdown. “Interior very clean and modernrnn, but not very opulent; looks like a big 3 Seriess.” Luxury car buyers rightly expect much more th n mere ththan mere

ngng weariringng pspaciousneness fforor s somometethihingng wea iri g price tagsm $ $19198,8 800 for thhe six-cylinderarangngining g frfromom $$19198 80 nder

turbo-did esel 730d to close to $400,000 for thetut rbo di thetwin-turbo V12 petrol-powered 760Li.

FaFaililiningg to win universal acclaim for its dynamicsand interior, the BMW was always goingng t too hahave difficulty persuading all ththee COCOTTYY judges that it represented vavaluluee. EEspecially when its poor resale vavalulue – a long-running 7 Series problem – wastaken into account.

But there were aspects of the 7 Series that almost everyone agreed on. The least-exppenensisiveve730d’s drivetrain, for instance.e. MMoostt jjudges thought the performance e anandd general refinement of f bobothth enengiginene a dnd six-speed automataticic b beeyond reproach.Lexus LS hybrid-d bebeatatiing fuel consumption and cacarbrbonon d-diioxide emissions were further positives.

All other 7 Series engines are turbocharged petrol-burners. Although the in-line six, V8 and V12 all bri i l f l sumptionV12 all bring incremental fuel consumption imimprprovovememenentsts c comompapareredd with pre ivious moddell equivalents, the BMW’s bulk and weight ensures relatively high numbers. While better, the new 7 Series brings no efficiency breakthrough tech to the luxury car class.

As expected for a luxury car, the 7 Series’ list ware earnedof passive and active safety hardware earne

high marks. Its ABS was judged well set-up forwas judgeery slippery AAustralian dirt, but the ustr lAAA ESP system clearly

struggled to keep the car in line through the double tlane-change’s orange cones. The judges’ notes contained such descriptions as “sloppy” and “taily”.

With the judges divided on some of the 7 Series’ core attributes, it was destined to fall from favour.The end came sooner rather than later, and it departed COTY 2009 at the close of Stage One.

JOHN CAREY

BMW 7 SeriesThe judges were divided, and even its lounge-like comfort couldn’t heal the rift

STAGE

BODYType 4-door sedan, 5 seats



Weight 1865kgDRIVETRAIN

Layout front engine (north-south) RWDEngines & transmissions

3.0-litre 6cyl twin-turbo diesel (180kW/540Nm) 6-speed auto

CHASSISSuspension: front A-arms, coil

springs, anti-roll barrear A-arms, coil springs, anti-roll bar

Brakes ventilated discs (f); ventilated discs (r)Tyres 245/50R18

Spare run-flatsr, up to 2yrs

www.wheelsmag.com.au 17

“An engine of huge proportions that feels like a V8”

$

Safety

MoneyFuel/enviro

Charge

ADR81 test consumption 7.2L/100kmMinimum fuel grade dieselGreenhouse emissions192g/km CO2Pollution standard Euro 5

Driver aids ABS, EBD, BA, TC, ESPSeatbelts front pre-tensioners/ load limitersFront airbags Side airbags Curtain airbags Knee airbags Crash rating not tested

Prices $198,8003-year retained value 47%Service interval variable

BMW’s Brake Energy Regeneration marginally improves

fuel economy by relieving the engine of the burden of charging the battery. Unlike a hybrid, stored

electrons can’t help propel the car.

THE CRUZE marks a departure for Holden, abandoning Europe as a source of small cars in favour of Korea and, from later this year, adopting local manufacturing when the Cruze goes on-line at Holden’s South Australian plant. For now we have just the imported sedan version with petrol and diesel engine choices, and it was these two variants (in CD and CDX trim) that fronted the judges at COTY 2009.

Initial impressions were good, apart perhaps from the exterior design which Stahl thought to be “overdone and clumsy, especially at the front” but Bulmer found “attractive; distinctive.” Inside, things get a lot better, especially in the back seat which is generous in leg- and headroom for two people (and the boot is enormous), but raised a question about the Cruze’s exterior dimensions. Nominally a small car, Robbo reckoned it to be “a lot of car for the money, half a size bigger than rivals with greater interior and boot space.”

The interior was generally judged to be good looking and usefully ergonomic, with “lotsa bling” (according to our erudite editor), although Sam Reid thought the big, plasticky gauges were a distraction. “CD interior really impressive. A Camry with character!” noted Stahly. “Bogan chic,” grunted Carey.

Driving impressions, however, ranged from positive to not-so-good, and ultimately settled on a middle ground. Not surprisingly, the characteristics of the petrol and diesel engines are significant.

The oil burner – mated to either a five-speed manual or six-speed auto – offers typical grunt, though it falls off boost on upchanges, making the smoother automatic the better option.

The 1.8-litre petrol engine won few fans. “The manual is S-L-O-W,” said Bruce Newton. “Makes a lot of noise for not a lot of go; it’s painful listening to the thing rev out, especially over the last 1000 revs,” said Bulmer. “But the auto is S-L-O-W-E-R…” scribbled Newton.

Things got better dynamically, with the Cruze proving a stable handler that’s unsurprisingly geared towards understeer, especially in the CD with its smaller 16-inch (Korean) tyres. The CDX (on 17in rubber) ups the ante: “There’s some passive rear-end steer that helps turn-in, and long-wheelbase stability as well,” said Stahl. But the steering was “totally disconnected” (Robbo) or “pretty awful” (Carey), and ABS and ESP performance poor (see breakout).

So no, the Cruze didn’t progress beyond Lang Lang. Strong on value, safety features and interior space, with a diesel promising good performance and low fuel consumption, it was dynamically only average and the petrol engine weak. A lack of all-round ability was its most frustrating flaw, given its blend of strong practical features but detailed shortfalls with steering, performance and noise suppression in the diesel. “It may be an owner’s car, but it’s not a driver’s car,” said Carey.

JONATHAN HAWLEY

On-paper promise that struggles in the transition to the real world

Holden CruzeTTHHEE CCRURUZZE marks aa deppartuurere for HHHoldeen, ababandodonin ngn Europope e as a sourcce of smaall carrars in faf voour oof Korer a anand, from lateeer this year, adopting local manun facturing gg whw ene thee Cruze goes on-linne at Holden’s South Australian plp ant. For now we eAAhavee just the impopp rted sedanan vere sionn with h pep trolo ana d didiesele engine chchhoices, and iit t waw s ththese twt ovariana ts (inin C CCD annd CDCDX X trimi ) tht at ffronteded tthehee juudgd es at COC TY 202009.

Initiaal l impresssiiono s s wew re ggood,d, aapapap rtr pperhahaps fromo tttheheh eextxteree ior r deded siis gnggn wwhihih chch SStatt hlhl tthohought toobebe ““ovo erdodod nenene a andn cccluumsmsy,y,y esppeceeciaalllly yy ata tthehehe ffror ntnt” ”but BuBulmlmerer ffououo ndnd “ “atattracactiiivevve; ; didistststinininctc ivivve.e ” ” InnInnsisidedede, thhinini gs g getet a lloto bbettteteter,r eeespsps ecceciaiaialllly y y ininn thehehe b bbacaca k k seseseatata whwhicich h isisis gggenenenererououous inin legeg- anand d heheh adadroroommm f f fororor twowowo pepep opopplele (((anana d dd thththe e boboboototo iiis ss enennororrmomomoususus),) bbututu rrraiaiaiseseed d d a aa quququesesstitionon aaaboboboututut tthehe CCCruruzeze’s’s e eextxtxterererioioi r rr diddimemeeensnsnsiooionsnsns. . ..NNNomo inini alallylyy a a sssmammallll cccararar, , RoRoRobbbbbbo o o rerereckckckonnonededed i i it t t tototo b b bbe e e “a“a“a lolot tt ofof ccarr fffororor t tthehehe m mmononnoneyeyey, , hahahalflflf a a a s ssizizze e e bibibiggggggererere t tthahahan nnriririvavavalss wwwititithh h grgrgreaeaeateteter rr inininteteteriririororor aa andndnd b bboooooot t t spspspacacace.e.”””

TTTTheheh iiintntnterere ioioioi r r wawaw s ss gegegenenenerararalllllly y y jujujudgdgdgededed ttto o o bebebe gggooooood d dlololoookokokininini g g gg ananand d d usususeffefululullylyly ee ergrgrgonononomomomicicic,, wiwiwiththth “ ““lololotsttsa aa a blblblb inining”g”g (a(a(accccccororrdididingngngn t t o o o ouououo r r r erererudududititite e edededitititororor),),)), a aaltltlthohohougugugugh h h SSSSamamamam ReReReeididid ttthohohougugughththth ttthehehe b bbigigig, , plplplasasastititickckcky y yy gagagagaugugugugeseseses wwwwerererere e ee a a aadididistststtrararactctctioioion.n.n. “ “ “CDCDCD ii intntntererererioioioor r r r rerererealalalallylylyy ii impmpmpmprerereesssssssivivivve.e.ee. AAA C CCamamamryryryy w wwititith h h h chchchchararara acacacacteteteter!r!r!r!” ” ” ” nonononoteteteted d d SSSStatatatahlhlhlh y.y.y.y. “B“B“Bogogogoganananan c c c chihihihic,c,c,c,” ” ” ” grgrgrgrununununteteteted d d d CaCaCaCarerererey.y.y.y.

DrDrDrDrivivivivinininingg g g imimimimprprprpresesesessisisisionononons,s, h hhhowowowoweveveveverererer, , , rarararangngngngedededed f f ffrorororom mmmpopopoposisisisititititivevev ttttoo oo nonononot-t-t-t-sosososo-g-g-g-goooooo d,dd,d, aaaandndd uuultlltltltimiimatatatelelelelly yy yyyyy sseses tttleleed dd ononon a aaa mimim dddddddlelelee g grorounund.d. NNotot sssururrururprprpprprprprpp isisisisiisisisininininininglglglglglgglgggly,yyyy, t thehe cchahhh raaractctccctc erere isistititiccscs ofofofofofoo t tt thehehehe ppp petettrororroroolll l ll l anaananddd ddididd esesessseleleleleleee e eee eeeenngngngngngnnn ininii eseesess aa a a aarerereerereere sssssss s sigigiigigiiigigninifiificacantnt. .

The oil burner – mated ttoo eeitittheheh r r a a fifiveve-s-sspepepep ededd mam nual or six-speed auutto –– o offfffffeerers s s tytypipipicacacacal l l l grgrgrgrununu t, thoughg it falls off f bobooso tt ononon u uuupcppcp hahahh ngngesesss, , mamamam kikingn the sms oothher autommaticc thhehe bbetetee teteter r r opoptitiononon.

TTheh 1.88-litre ppete rol l eenenngiginenenene w wonon f ffewewewew f faanaa s. ““The maanualll iis ss SS-L-O-O-WWW,”” sssaiaid d dd BrBrBrBrucuce e NNewewewwtotot n.nn “Makess aa looot fof nnoiisee ffforr nott aa llototot oo o off ff gogog ; ; itittt’s’s’s p pppaiainfnful listeniningngtotot thehee tthihih ngngg rrevv ooututut, esesespepepepeciciciialala lyly o ovevvever r r ththe e last 110000 0 reevsv ,” saiaaid d Buulmlmmerrr. . ““BBBButututut t t t thehehe a aututto o oo isisisi SS-L-L-OO-W-EE-R-R…”…” scs rirr bbb lell d dd NNewewe totot n.n.

TTThihih ngngngs s gogot t bebeb ttttt ererrrr d ddynynynynamamama icicalallylyyly, , wiwiw tth the Cruruzeze prrovovvinining gg a aa stststababablelee h h haannndldldllererere t tthahat’t’s s ununsusurpr riisinglyly gegegeararededed ttowowwarardsd uundndndddererererststststeeeer,r, e espspsspececiaially in thee C CD D wiwithth i iitststs smamamaallllererr 11 16-6-6--inninnchchchch ( (KoKorer anan) )) tytyreres. The CCDXDX (o(o(onn n 171717ininin r rrubububbebeber)r)r) uupppspspss t t tthehehehe a antnte:e:e “ “TTheherer ’s some papapasssss ivivive ee rererearararr-e-e-eendndnd s sstttteteeeerererer t t tthahah t t heheheh lplpll s s tuturn-in, aandnd lololonggng-w-w-wheheheelelelbababasesese s s statataaaabibibiililililitytytyt a aas s weweweellll,”,” s saia d d Stahll. . BuButt thththe ee stssteeeeeeririringngng ww wasasas “““ttttotootatatatallllllly y y didiscscononnenectcted” (RRobbbobo) ) ororor “““prprprp etetettytyty aaawfwfwfululul” ” (((CCCCarararareyeyee ),), a anndnd AABBSS and ESSP Ppepeerfrfrforororrmamamam ncncnce e e popopoororor ( ( ((((((sesesesee e brbreae kokoutut).).

SSSo oo nonono, , , ththththe ee e CrCrCrCruzuzuzuze e ee dididididndndndn’t’t p proroogrgresess s bebeyond Lanang g LaLaLaL ngngng. .. . SSStrtrtrronononng g g g ononono v vv valalalallllueueueue, , , , sasass fefetyyy ffeaeatuturer s and innteteririororr spspsppacacacce,e,e,e, w w w witititith h h h a a aa didididieseseseselelele lll p p pprrororomimim sisingngg g gooood d pep rforrmaancnce e anananand d dd lolollow ww w fufufufuelelelel c c ccononononsusususummmmmpmpmpmptitititionoon, ititt w wasas d dynynamicalllyly o onlnly y avavavavererereragagagage e ee ananannd d d d ththththe e e pepepepetrtrtrtrrrolololol e e eengnginine ee weweakak. . AA lack ofof alalalall-l-l-l-rrororounununund d d d ababababililillitititity y y y wawawaas s ss itititits s s s momosts fffruruuuststraratit ng flaw, ggivivenen itititits ss s blblblblenenenend d d d ofofofof s s s strtrtrtronononong g g g prprprpraaaaracacacactitit cacac l l fefeataturureses bbut dettaiaileleddshshshshororortftftftf lalalalllslsls ww wwitititith h hh ststststeeeeeeeeririririnnnnngngngng,, peperfforormamancnce andsusuppppreesssiooi n n ininin ttheheh d dd dieieieieieeesssssssessesesesesellllll.l ““““ItItItItItcacaar,r, b bututt i it’tttt s sss nononon tt a ddrdd i

Onn-paapeerr prommise thaatt strruuugggles in the trannssitionn totoo tthhhee rrreeeaaalll wwwwoooorrrrlllddd STAGE

BODYType 4-door sedan, 5 seatsL/W/H 4597/1788/1477mm


Cargo capacity 400LWeight 1380kg (1.8 CDX man); 1415kg (1.8 CDX auto); 1506kg (2.0 CD man);

1522kg (2.0 CD auto)DRIVETRAIN


1.8-litre 4cyl (104kW/176Nm) 5-speed manual/6-speed auto (CDX); 2.0-litre 4cyl diesel (110kW/320Nm) 5-speed manual/

6-speed auto (CD)CHASSIS

Suspension: front struts, coil springs, anti-roll bar rear multi-links, coil

springs, anti-roll barBrakes ventilated discs (f); solid discs (r)

Tyres 205/60R16 (CD); 215/50R17 (CDX)Spare full size

“Inconsistent, but safety, pricing and spec make Cruze a proposition that’s hard to ignore”

The critics were vocal when it came to Cruze’s long ABS stops on dirt and relatively slow-acting ESP, mainly because Lang Lang would have been the very place the driving aids were tuned. “Astonishing for something wearing a Holden badge,” said Carey. The big question is: will the locally-built Cruze show a marked improvement in ABS and ESP performance?

Tune out

ADR81 test consumption 7.0L/100km (CDX man); 7.5L/100km (CDX auto); 5.7L/100km (CD man): 6.8L/100km (CD auto)Minimum fuel grade 91 RON (unleaded); diesel Greenhouse emissions 166g/km CO2 (CDX man); 179g/km CO2 (CDX auto); 149g/km CO2 (CD man); 180g/km CO2 (CD auto)Pollution standard Euro 4

Fuel/enviro SafetyDriver aids ABS, EBD, BA, TC, ESPSeatbelts front pre-tensioners/ load limitersFront airbags Side airbags Curtain airbags Knee airbags Crash rating five star (ANCAP)

$ MoneyPrices $23,990 (1.8 CDX man/2.0 CD man); $25,990 (1.8 CDX auto/2.0 CD auto)3-year retained value 53% (2.0 CD/1.8 CDX auto); 54% (1.8 CDX man)Service intervals 15,000km

BY ANY measure, the quality of Korean cars has progressed significantly in recent years. Unfortunately, that progress has not been enough to win over hardened COTY judges, with the result that not one Hyundai, Kia or GM-Daewoo/Holden has ever made it beyond the initial COTY cull.

So, would Cerato be Korea’s breakthrough car? Back in March 2009, Wheels had declared this

second-generation Kia compact sedan the best vehicle yet to come out of Korea. While that may sound encouraging, past experience has also shown that a positive first-drive impression can come dramatically unhinged in the COTY crucible.

Adding another challenge, the Cerato lobbed into the small-car melting pot in a year when the Mazda 3 and Volkswagen Golf came up for renewal and the Holden Cruze was presented for the first time. No shortage of potential comparisons, then.

The judges verdict? Exit at the first hurdle. So, on the surface nothing has changed. But that would be doing the Cerato an injustice. After all, the Cruze suffered the same fate, and the 3 lasted only one round longer.

And delving into the judges’ comments revealed recognition that the Cerato offered more than just the traditional Korean pricing advantage.

“If you’d have told me even a couple of years ago that a Kia would drive this well I’d have laughed,” declared Bulmer. “Very competitive performance and dynamics.”

“A massive advance by Kia,” wrote Peter Robinson. “There are obvious failings, but it’s further proof the Koreans are progressing.”

Those obvious failings? Every judge complained

about the chemical tang of the Cerato’s interior. It’s a negative that impacts even before design or materials are considered. “Erk!” summarised Stahly, a man of renowned olfactory sensitivity.

The other common complaint was excessive steering kickback over the ride and handling track’s bumps, crannies and holes. Undoubtedly the worst of any car in the 2009 COTY field, Hawley called it “vicious”, Carey settled on “bad”.

There were other niggles and issues: the ‘Euro’ tune suspension was too sharp, the doors shut with a hollow ‘bong’ and the interior materials quality was obviously specced down to a price.

But what a price: $18,990 for the S and $22,990 for the SLi. Both come powered by the same modern, strong, if sometimes intrusive Theta II 2.0-litre four-cylinder engine, offer plenty of interior space and a sizeable boot. The most dubious value? Paying $2000 for a pedestrian four-speed auto.

While all Ceratos come with six airbags and ABS, the ‘S’, along with the Fiesta CL and LX, earned the unhappy distinction of being the only cars in the COTY field without standard ESP. Unfortunately for the upper-spec SLi, that served mostly to highlight the importance of well-tuned stability control. Where the S swerved and returned with control, an obvious sign of its fundamental dynamic integrity, the SLi’s ESP grabbed at wheels in an unpredictable manner.

The Cerato is proof that Kia, and indeed the entire Korean car industry, is making definite progress. But yet more progress and refinement is required to be a COTY Stage Two contender.

BRUCE NEWTON




Weight 1347kg (S man); 1359kg (SLi auto)DRIVETRAIN


2.0-litre 4cyl (115kW/194Nm) 5-speed manual (S man); 4-speed auto (SLi auto)

CHASSISSuspension: front struts, coil springs,

anti-roll barrear torsion beam, coil springs

Brakes ventilated discs (f); solid discs (r)Tyres 195/65R15 (S man);

215/45R17 (SLi auto)Spare full-size

STAGEPersuasive value and promising dynamics avoid egg-noodle on face

Kia Cerato

“Not horrible … it presents pretty well, especially considering the price”

ADR81 test consumption 7.8L/100km (S man); 7.9L/100km (SLi auto)Minimum fuel grade 91 RONGreenhouse emissions 186g/km CO2 (S man); 187g/km CO2 (SLi auto)Pollution standard Euro 4

Fuel/enviro

Driver aids ABS, EBD, BA (TC, ESP standard on SLi)Seatbelts front pre-tensioners/ load limitersFront airbags Side airbags Curtain airbags Knee airbags Crash rating four star (NCAP)

Safety

Hyundai subsidiary Kia benefits from the

Hyundai-Mitsubishi-Chrysler co-development program that

produced Cerato’s Theta II engine. It’s a better unit than the Hyundai i30’s

older, Beta engine.

Theta

Prices $18,990 (S man); $22,990 (SLi auto)3-year retained value 51.4% (S man); 50% (SLi auto)Service interval 15,000km

$ Money

KIA’S second-generation Sorento could hardly be more different than the original 2002 effort. Instead of a ladder frame chassis and separate body it now features a monocoque construction with a longer cabin; the engine sits east-west driving the front wheels (or all four – more later) and seven-seat capacity is standard across the range. Clearly, instead of a tarted-up mud-plugger, this Sorento aspires to a life as family all-rounder.

Getting a handle on the variants isn’t easy. Although both petrol and diesel engines are available, the former only comes in the price-leading ($36,490) Si model, which is 2WD and auto only. But the Si can also be had with diesel and 4WD in auto and manual. All other models, including the single $45,990 SLi that appeared at COTY, have the diesel donk and all-paw traction.

And what an engine this diesel is. Developed in-house by Kia, along with the six-speed automatic to which it’s mated, the 2.2-litre R-series oil-burner is powerful, torquey, smooth, quiet and about 20 percent more fuel efficient than the old 2.5-litre unit it replaces. So that’s a couple of big ticks in the COTY criteria labelled performance, efficiency and environment. “The drivetrain is really sweet!”, summarised Stahl, somewhat less objectively.

There’s nothing awkward about the Sorento’s thoroughly contemporary exterior styling, although the quality of interior materials and aspects of the packaging left most judges cold. “Cheap, hard plastics,” sniffed Samantha (yet as a leather freak, she noted the standard cowhide seat trim) and Newton also bemoaned the lack of soft-touch plastics. Even less impressive for a vehicle touted

by Kia as having best-in-class third-row seating space was the lack of legroom, and the awkward knees-up seating position in the rear pew for two (admittedly slightly larger than child-size) bodies in Bulmer and Carey.

Dynamically, the Sorento has problems too. “The steering remains a weakness,” shot Robbo after experiencing the combination of sharp kick-back in bumpy corners and excessive loading-up as the power assistance was beaten by the lane-change manoeuvre. The Sorento may not have been alone in the latter department, but its lack of body control, excessive understeer, “rubbish tyres” (Carey) and ordinary ride were also consistent criticisms.

As usual, all COTY contenders were treated as cars, not off-roaders, yet the Sorento failed to shine on the dirt roads for which it was conceivably designed. Essentially a front-driver, with the rear axle kicking in when traction is dodgy, the Sorento was nonetheless underwhelming for its grabby, late-acting ESP that also made some alarming graunching sounds and ABS that produced far longer stopping distances than some sedans on the gravel. “I have no confidence in this vehicle doing anything I tell it to,” Samantha opined in closing.

Yet for all that, the Sorento’s style, equipment, value, safety features and that lovely drivetrain won it high praise, even if its dynamic clumsiness and suspect packaging meant it didn’t progress. Robbo summed up Kia’s latest effort to beat more established SUV rivals best. “Wake up, world, Kia has arrived. It’s no exaggeration to rank the Sorento above the Volvo XC60 diesel at $65,000.”

JONATHAN HAWLEY



Cargo capacity 258L/1047L (rear seat folded)Weight 1959kg DRIVETRAIN

Layout front engine (east-west) AWDEngines & transmissions

2.2-litre 4cyl turbo diesel (145kW/436Nm) 6-speed autoCHASSIS

Suspension: front struts, coil springs, anti-roll bar

rear multi-links, coil spring, anti-roll barBrakes ventilated discs (f); solid discs (r)

Tyres 235/60R18Spare full size

STAGE

Kia may have come of age, but dynamic maturity not yet evident

Kia Sorento

ADR81 test consumption 7.4L/100kmMinimum fuel grade dieselGreenhouse emissions194g/km CO2 Pollution standard Euro 4

Fuel/enviro

Driver aids ABS, EBD, BA, TC, ESPSeatbelts front pre-tensioners/ load limitersFront airbags Side airbags Curtain airbags Knee airbags Crash rating five star (NCAP)

Safety

Prices $45,9903-year retained value n/aService interval 15,000km

$ Money

“Fairly standard SUV performance and dynamics … not too bad”

Efforts to find the Sorento’s rear-view camera had judges stumped … until

they looked at the interior rear-vision mirror, onto the

left-hand side of which is projected the view

from behind.

Revealed

MIXING admirable and awful in roughly equal proportions, the Lexus RX was both praised and panned at COTY 2009. Brilliant drivetrains, excellent overall refinement, impressive efficiency from the petrol-electric powered 450h version and high-quality interior presentation on the one hand, then poor handling and ride, awful steering, incompetent ESP, and questionable exterior design elements on the other.

With its suspension failing to deliver complete control or cosseting comfort, two judges pointed fingers of blame in the obvious direction. “Ride is wallowy and harsh at the same time; a Lexus for Florida,” noted Robinson. “Floaty, fat-bummed-American ride and body control,” wrote Stahl.

With Americans making up the great majority of buyers for the RX, Lexus would naturally give their preferences priority during design and development. All well and good, but it means the luxury five-seat SUV isn’t well suited to Australian road conditions.

The RX’s ESP, for example, is sometimes almost useless. “ESP so slow to react that you could get a round of golf in before it saves you,” was Hawley’s observation. He wasn’t alone in having doubts about the system’s ability to arrest slides and maintain control on slippery Australian dirt. Another judge noted that poor ESP calibration for dirt “is becoming a traditional Toyota – and, by extension, Lexus – shortcoming.”

Yet the good parts of the RX are very good indeed. Drivetrain refinement, for example, is superb. “It has an engine?” asked Michael Stahl.

“It feels like ‘flux capacitor’ drive.” The strong performance of the petrol-electric hybrid 450h in comparison to the conventional V6-powered 350 received several glowing mentions. Bulmer was alone in asking whether the hybrid did anything better than “a decent diesel”. Other judges were duly impressed by the 450h’s excellent city-driving fuel efficiency.

While the high quality of the RX’s cabin wasn’t questioned, some judges found the design a little too plain. “Interior pretty pleasant, but anodyne,” was Stahl’s summary.

For safety, the RX also scored high. In line with its premium pricing, it packs a pretty full arsenal of passive and active (although not always effective, as noted earlier) safety systems.

The RX’s value case was slightly assisted by the luxury-car tax reduction gained by the 450h’s low 6.4L/100km ADR81 consumption number, well below the 7.0L/100km threshold. In the first two of the Lexus’s three equipment grades (Prestige, Sports and Sports Luxury) the hybrid option adds a reasonable $7000 over the conventional RX350.

But there were judges who found it hard to reconcile the RX range’s premium pricing ($81,900 for the 350 Prestige to $107,900 for the 450h Sports Luxury) with its un-premium driving dynamics. The poor handling, ride and steering evoked a visceral reaction from one judge. “It makes my guts queasy,” said Bruce Newton. The other panellists might have had stronger stomachs, but at the close of Stage One they still, as one, voted to chuck it.

JOHN CAREY

Lexus RXImpeccably built and whisper quiet, but couldn’t find a murmur of support

STAGE



Cargo capacity 446LWeight 1975kg (RX350);

2205kg (RX450h) DRIVETRAIN

Layout front engine (north-south) AWDEngines & transmissions 3.5-litre V6 (203kW/346Nm)

6-speed auto (RX350); 3.5-litre V6 (183kW/317Nm), electric motors front and rear, total output 220kW/317Nm

(RX450h)CHASSIS

Suspension: front struts, L-arms, coil springs, anti-roll bar rear double wishbones, coil springs, anti-roll bar


Tyres 235/60R18 (RX350); 235/55R19 (RX450h)Spare space saver

“Braking is competent but its weight is really obvious when cornering”

Prices $81,900 (RX350); $107,900 (RX450h)3-year retained value 56% (RX350); 61% (RX450h) Service interval 15,000km

$

SparkyThe RX450h has a

3.5-litre Atkinson Cycle V6 and 123kW electric motor

powering the front axle. A second, 50kW electric motor

kicks in to drive the rear wheels on loose surfaces

or when slip is detected.

Driver aids ABS, EBD, BA, TC, ESPSeatbelts front pre-tensioners/ load limitersFront airbags Side airbags Curtain airbags Knee airbags Crash rating not tested

SafetyADR81 test consumption 10.8L/100km (RX350); 6.4L/100km (RX450h)Minimum fuel grade 95 RON (unleaded)Greenhouse emissions 254g/km CO2 (RX350); 150g/km CO2 (RX450h)Pollution standard Euro 4

Fuel/enviro

CALL US precious, but the Mercedes-Benz E-Class coupe got off on the wrong foot with the COTY judges over a philosophical issue.

The somewhat contrived styling was more than forgiven with the knowledge that, at 0.24Cd, the coupe has the slipperiest body of any production car today – and that includes slug-shaped hybrids.

Nope, our problem was with the E-Class coupe’s not being an E-Class at all. It was built on the platform of the W204 C-Class (our ’07 COTY, so no bad thing) to be the new CLK, but was rebadged shortly before launch as an E-Class.

“That’s a cynical marketing gouge for more dollars,” grumbled Bulmer.

Mercedes-Benz insists that 60 percent of the coupe’s components and technology are shared with the W212 E-Class sedan, but it’s still like paying for a Minogue and only getting Danni. Relative to the previous CLK, the 350 six-cylinder steps up by $2000, but the 500 V8 by $20,000 (incidentally, $30K more than a C63 AMG).

In COTY terms, it immediately made the judges focus on the coupe’s contribution to technological advancement, and value for money.

Whatever. At least it’s a pillarless coupe, meaning you don’t have to drive your grandpa’s Mercedes, while still enjoying the practicality of folding rear seats. Not all judges liked the interior styling, however, with Carey noting that it “lacks the interior bling of the sedans”. Others noted the headroom deficit to the BMW 3 Series.

But you would expect a full complement of safety kit, and the Benz delivers abundantly, breezing to a

five-out-of-five in the active and passive safety pre-scores. There was, however, a lurking surprise …

We were puzzled by the E250 CDi, not only for its gravelly NVH at idle, but simply by wondering who would want a diesel coupe. The sweet spot of the range was the E350, which Hawley described as “well balanced; more than a poseur’s car.” It was confident and comfortable up to about eight-tenths, when the ride became jostly and flustered by overly soft rebound damping.

Far more importantly, a dynamic issue revealed itself more fully in the E350 and worse yet in the E500. Through the 80km/h lane-change – an aggressive, but world-standard exercise (and minus moose) – the steering loaded up quite severely as the power-assistance was clearly overwhelmed.

“Steering load-up or lack of assist through lane-change – and it’s a rear-wheel drive, for heaven’s sake,” Carey moaned. In the E500, it only added to the car’s dynamic shortcomings. All loved the simmering, sinister V8, but as Robbo succinctly put it, “the V8 stretches the chassis.”

We’re at a loss to explain why this steering issue has never surfaced in the smaller C-Class, although, other than the diesel and the (unique, re-engineered) C63, it has different and smaller engines which would suggest different front-end hardware. The E-Class coupe has neither the cohesion and class of the E-Class sedan, nor the agility, honesty and relative value of the C-Class.

Kicked out of COTY at the first hurdle, but coming soon to a real estate agent near you.

MICHAEL STAHL

BODYType 2-door coupe, 4 seatsL/W/H 4898/1786/1397mm


Cargo capacity 450LWeight 1695kg DRIVETRAIN

Layout front engine (north-south) RWDEngines & transmissions

2.1-litre 4cyl turbo diesel (150kW/500Nm) 5-speed auto (E250 CDI); 3.5-litre V6

(200kW/350Nm) 7-speed auto (E350); 5.5-litre V8 (285kW/530Nm) 7-speed auto (E500)


anti-roll barrear multi-links, coil springs, anti-roll bar

Brakes ventliated discs (f); ventilated discs (r)Tyres 235/45R17 (f) 255/40R17 (r) (E250 CDI); 245/40R18 (f) 265/35R18 (r) (E350);

235/40R18 (f) 255/35R18 (r) (E500)Spare space saver

STAGE

E-Class? Not exactly. Yet more than a C … and scored higher than a D

Mercedes-Benz E-Class coupe

ADR81 test consumption 5.3L/100km (E250 CDI); 9.5L/100km (E350); 11.0L/100km (E500)Minimum fuel grade 95 RON (unleaded); diesel (E250 CDI)Greenhouse emissions139g/km CO2 (E250 CDI); 222g/km CO2 (E350); 256g/km CO2 (E500)Pollution standardEuro 5

Fuel/enviro

Driver aids ABS, EBD, BA, TC, ESPSeatbelts front pre-tensioners/load limitersFront airbags Side airbags Curtain airbags Knee airbags (driver) Crash rating not tested

Safety

Prices $97,500 (E250 CDI); $127,500 (E350); $174,500 (E500)3-year retained value 57.6% (E250 CDI); 57.8% (E350); 53.3% (E500)Service interval variable

$

“Lacks the dynamic refinement of the sedan. I’m not surprised there’s no AMG version”

Like E-Class sedan, all coupes get nine airbags – dual front, front and rear side, full length curtain and driver’s knee. The coupe’s longer doors also mean it gets an auto belt feeder, which uses an electric motor to extend a plastic ‘arm’ (and your front seatbelt) when doors are closed. Click-clack and all…

CAR of the Year judges are an objective lot: blinkered by reason, blindfolded against hyperbole and able to apply the sword and scales of justice to cars of any price or shape. But that doesn’t mean we’re not human and I doubt any of us couldn’t help glancing at the saffron-yellow 370Z and its silver side-kick every now and then thinking, soon, yes soon, you will be spanked.

Don’t mistake this as just a bigger-engined version of the 350Z either. The details and concept might be similar, but the tighter shape on a new platform – the 370 is only 4250mm long – and lower weight together with the increased grunt go a long way towards promising performance and agility akin to a hairy-chested MX-5.

Still waiting to drive the Zed we gave it the usual thorough inspection, noting the usefully more upmarket interior with the deep-set gauges in front of the driver and glitzy centre stack of controls. For all that, Sam Reid couldn’t help noting that the two-seater with its lift-back rear needed a safety barrier to keep flying objects out of the business end of the cabin. Then again, the short and flat luggage area wasn’t going to hold anything very big.

Finally, on with the driving, only to find the 370Z to be more like a hyperactive and somewhat recalcitrant muscle car than a purebred sporty. Not that there were any complaints about performance: with 245kW on tap from the brawny 3.7-litre V6 – “a brute-iful engine,” in Newton’s words – it reeled

Type 2-door coupe, 2 seatsL/W/H 4250/1845/1315mm


Cargo capacity 213LWeight 1471kg (man.) 1485kg (auto)

DRIVETRAINLayout front engine (north-south) RWD

Engines & transmissions 3.7-litre V6 (245kW/363Nm) 6-speed manual/7-speed auto

CHASSISSuspension: front multi-links,

coil springs, anti-roll barrear multi-links, coil springs,

anti-roll barBrakes ventilated discs (f);

ventilated discs (r)Tyres 225/50/R18 (f); 245/45R18 (r)

Spare space saver

in the scenery at a rate only bettered by its GT-R stablemate.

But was it fun? No, the 370Z was a handful. “The electronics only just manage to cope with dynamics that feel quite evil … at least around Lang Lang,” said Carey. The combination of stiff suspension, a short wheelbase, twitchy handling and no shortage of instant propulsion endeared the Zed to nobody. Robbo complained it “snaps into oversteer”, while Stahly looked under the rear for a live axle.

Refinement is lacking in a number of areas, not least a solid ride quality bordering on harsh, and “lots of noise, engine NVH and tinny body sound” according to Stahly. The six-speed manual gearbox is heavy-shifting and baulky, and while the seven-speed automatic might be fast and responsive (with a delightful electronic blip of the throttle on downshifts), Carey was not enamoured with the manual selector’s orientation of up for upshifts, down for downchanges. “It feels more wrong in a sports car than in something with sporting pretensions,” he said.

Not all judges shared the general negativity, though. “A good fun sports car,” said Bulmer. “A bit coarse, but I like it.”

Performance-for-dollar-wise, the 370Z looked good, but its lack of manners, practicality, any particular application of technology or environmental considerations meant it wasn’t going through to the next stage of COTY 2009.

JONATHAN HAWLEY

Nissan 370ZOld-school sports action not enough to get the judges to say aye to Zed STAGE

“Zed is Japan’s Corvette. Heavy controls, snap oversteer, demands concentration”

ADR81 test consumption 10.5L/100km (man.); 10.4L/100km (auto)Minimum fuel grade 95 RON (unleaded)Greenhouse emissions 249g/km CO2 (man.); 247g/km CO2 (auto)Pollution standard Euro 4

Fuel/enviroDriver aids ABS, EBD, BA, TC, ESPSeatbelts front pre-tensioners/ load limitersFront airbags Side airbags Curtain airbags Knee airbags Crash rating not tested

Safety

Prices $67,990 (man); $70,990 (auto)3-year retained value 55%Service interval 10,000km

$ MoneyCompared with the 350Z, to 370 is 15kg lighter. Yes, it is smaller (the wheelbase is 100mm shorter) but by utilising an aluminium bonnet, doors, tailgate and some suspension components, and a carbonfibre tailshaft, Nissan reckons it has avoided adding around 100kg.

Weight it out

WAY BACK in 2003, the J31 Nissan Maxima was a surprise COTY hit, lauded for its stylish exterior, cutting edge interior, gutsy VQ35DE V6 engine and outstanding value proposition.

It didn’t progress further than the second round because of its squidgy dynamics, but that car was still remembered fondly by the veteran judges when the J32 Maxima was presented at COTY ’09.

Unfortunately, when the dust had settled, the fourth-generation Maxima had done nothing to replace its predecessor in their affections.

“A car for the comatose,” was Carey’s cruel, pointed and apt conclusion.

The problem is that the Maxima has made little obvious identifiable progress in those six years. The exterior is evolutionary to the point of glacial, its interior is slightly more spacious but has lost the Ikea-ish individuality, and the dynamics remain as uninvolving as ever.

The latter is a particular problem considering Nissan made a big play at the car’s media launch about its attempts to tune some sport and involvement into the Maxima via the stiffer Global D platform, heavily revised multi-link rear suspension, and hydraulic power steering borrowed from the recently superseded 350Z sports car.

Mind you, if you’ve caught the television advertising you’ll realise the marketing message is just the opposite: you spend most of your time in traffic jams so why buy a hard-riding sports sedan? Go with Maxima instead.

The messages are obviously tuned to different audiences, but in this case the truth is very much in the advertising.

The Maxima’s limited abilities are highlighted by Nissan’s decision to add a 2.5-litre V6 to the line-up alongside the virtually carry-over 3.5-litre (up 15kW, down 7Nm, fuel economy improved slightly).

Driving via Nissan’s Xtronic CVT – as the 3.5 has since it’s halfway through the J31 lifecycle – the 2.5 feels flat by comparison with big bro. But that lack of punch also means the obvious limitations of the Maxima’s chassis are not so easily breached.

“The VQ35 is an engine to make you sit up and take notice,” noted Bulmer. “Unfortunately it’s more engine than the softly, softly chassis can handle. The result is excessive understeer in tight stuff and generally arriving at corners quicker than the suspension can handle.”

But what the smaller engine also does – along with the decision to transfer production from Japan to Thailand – is sharpen the price.

At $33,990, the 250 ST-L retails right in the heart of Mazda 6 and Toyota Camry territory. It brings with it six airbags, ABS and ESP as well as leather trim, dual-zone climate control, six-CD audio, eight-way power adjustment of the driver’s seat, alloy wheels and xenon headlights.

It’s a $4000 climb to the entry-level 3.5-litre model, the 350 ST-S, then a hefty $9000 jump to the $46,990 350 Ti with features such as sat-nav, a reversing camera, Bose audio and a sunroof.

Yes, it’s an impressive pile of stuff. But there’s one element missing from this car that won’t be found in the equipment or options lists. It’s something the old Maxima had a suggestion of, but which has now been expunged: character.

BRUCE NEWTON




Weight 1522kg (ST-L) 1576kg (Ti) DRIVETRAIN


2.5-litre V6 (134kW/228Nm) CVT auto (ST-L); 3.5-litre V6 (185kW/326Nm) CVT auto (Ti)


anti-roll barrear multi-links, coil springs, anti-roll bar


Spare full size

STAGE

Sharp pricing of base model not enough to offset the dullness evident elsewhere

Nissan Maxima

“Like driving your father’s leather lounge suite, only with a drony CVT soundtrack”

Driver aids ABS, EBD, BA, TC, ESPSeatbelts front pre-tensioners/load limitersFront airbags Side airbags Curtain airbags Knee airbags Crash rating not tested

SafetyPrices $33,990 (ST-L); $46,990 (Ti)3-year retained value 46% (ST-L); 45% (Ti)Service interval 10,000km

$ MoneyFor all its equipment, the Maxima has some odd omissions: the steering wheel doesn’t adjust for reach, and there’s no rear screen for the 350 Ti’s DVD player. Ti buyers might also raise an eyebrow over the fact the wheel and tyre package is the same as that fitted to the $13,000 cheaper 250 Ti. ADR81 test consumption

9.5L/100km (ST-L); 10.2L/100km (Ti)Minimum fuel grade Greenhouse 91 RON (ST-L); 95 RON (Ti)Greenhouse emissions 226g/km CO2 (ST-L); 243g/km CO2 (Ti)Pollution standard Euro 4

Familiar

THE FIRST cull at COTY can be a brutal process. Some cars are debated fiercely; their merits, deficiencies and relevance dissected by passionate, knowledgeable and strong-willed judges. It can get heated, aggro and even personal.

Far worse, though, is when a car elicits no support, no enthusiasm and no debate. Such a fate befell Nissan’s second-generation Murano soft-roader, which copped a Stage One cull without a murmur. Intriguing looks, massive equipment levels and an inviting cabin weren’t enough to save it.

As it did for the Audi Q5, Lexus RX and the Volvo XC60, Lang Lang’s challenging mix of surfaces exposed the Murano’s dynamic shortcomings.

“Great as a static display,” was Stahl’s typically humorous, yet stingingly accurate, summation.

It shouldn’t have been this way. Nissan spent plenty of time and effort on the new Murano. Underpinned by the latest ‘Global D’ platform, the multi-link rear suspension is new, torsional and lateral stiffness is claimed to be much improved and NVH reduced by up to 75 percent.

Carried over is an uprated version of Nissan’s award-winning VQ35 V6 that adds 19kW and 18Nm, yet also manages to drop consumption from 12.3 to 10.9L/100km. Refinements of the Xtronic CVT and all-wheel-drive system complete a solid drivetrain.

But for Carey, the end result drew some forthright criticism and he savaged the “unresponsive, sloppy steering and poor ESP”.

The Murano was a car no judge found redeemable in terms of its drive experience. Its SUV styling and imagery sells the open-road and off-road dream, but it came across as an urban people-carrier, happiest at low speeds where its dynamic shortcomings would be unchallenged.

An urban environment also best suits its comfortable, spacious cabin. This really is a nice place to visit, capable of fitting adults front and rear in any of its five seats. The trims are nicely tailored and the whole atmosphere speaks of a higher price point than where the Murano is positioned.

As does the equipment level. The base model ST is not only $3000 cheaper than the old model at $46,990 but also contains a long list of gear, including six airbags, ABS, stability control, xenon headlights, 18-inch alloys, leather trim, dual-zone climate control, six-CD audio and cruise control.

Add another $8900, and the top-spec Ti scores sat-nav, a rear-view camera, Bose audio, electric steering column adjust, heated rear seats, powered tailgate and much more.

Laudably, the Murano now has a full-size spare tyre. Those with long memories might recall the original Murano copped a flat tyre in COTY 2005. Replacing it with a space-saver went down like a lead balloon with the judges.

No such dramas for the 2009 version of Murano. In fact, it proved drama-free ... but also enjoyment-free. Enough said.

BRUCE NEWTON

Nissan MuranoEverything you need for the urban jungle, but little left for COTY STAGE

BODYType 5-door wagon, 5 seats L/W/H 4835/1885/1730mm



Layout front engine (east-west) AWDEngines & transmissions

3.5-litre V6 (191kW/336Nm) CVT autoCHASSIS


rear multi-links, coil springs, anti-roll bar


Spare full size

“This cockpit could be a pleasant place for tootling around the ’burbs at 6/10ths”

ADR81 test consumption 10.9L/100kmMinimum fuel grade 95 RON (unleaded) Greenhouse emissions259g/km CO2Pollution standard Euro 4

Fuel/enviro

Driver aids ABS, EBD, BA, TC, ESPSeatbelts front pre-tensioners/load limitersFront airbags Side airbags Curtain airbags Knee airbags Crash rating not tested

Safety

Every exterior panel of the Murano is

new. However, its height, width and wheelbase are still same as the original

model. The only significant variation in terms of

dimensions is its extra 65mm length.

Same extentSS

Prices $55,8903-year retained value 60%Service interval 10,000km

$ Money

TWICE A winner in the 1990s, the latest Liberty bucked the trend and flunked out of COTY at the first hurdle, lacking real support from any judge.

Examining and driving the various examples of an extensive model range at Lang Lang raised concerns that began at first sight.

“Styling is disastrously unappealing,” wrote Robbo.“Makes the Koreans look attractive,” muttered Carey.

Of course, styling is subjective, but it’s hard to see how this combination of creases and overblown wheelarches advances the look of Liberty from its pert, tautly-proportioned predecessor.

More positively, what these ill-conceived proportions encase is a much larger car. The Liberty has grown in almost every vital measure. For example, rear legroom is up by an incredible 99mm, transforming the interior from a cramped 2+2 to a true five-seat adult-friendly conveyance.

Unfortunately, it’s a case of feel the width and never mind the quality, as judge after judge gave the dour, plasticky and ergonomically confused interiors the thumbs down.

Things improved, though, when attention turned to the Liberty and Outback’s drivetrains.

In atmo 2.5i models, a chain-driven (rather than the usual belt-drive) CVT replaces the old four-

speed auto, and a six-speed manual replaces the five-speed, improving economy by as much as nine percent. Being more frugal as an AWD-CVT than a Camry or Mazda 6 front-drive auto impressed all and helped the Subaru’s efficiency scorecard.

The torque-laden turbocharged GT, the “peachy” flat-six 3.6R and even the new 2.0-litre diesel found solely in the Outback also earned plaudits.

The Liberty’s traditional dynamic strengths were still evident, yet diluted somewhat. The nose-heavy diesel Outbacks were the least compelling and the Bilstein suspension of the GT model was deemed too harsh, though the lush 3.6R hit a real sweet spot and even the base models earned praise.

“Very good ride, nice steering,” said Carey of the 2.5i. But Stahl stammered about the GT: “It’s my least favourite of the lot. Ride is harsh, engine lacks personality – prefer the 3.6R.”

For all judges, the Liberty and Outback’s tendency to slew into substantial oversteer was a debatable feature in a family car, and the late intervention of the ESP only exacerbated the issue.

Combine all these inconsistencies, and the fifth-gen Liberty just didn’t add up. Rookie judge Sam Reid, unencumbered by Liberty’s past, summed it up: “It’s a car that’s not sure what it wants to be.”

BRUCE NEWTON

Narrow sweet spot resides in a range riddled with inconsistencies

Subaru Liberty & Outback

STAGE

BODYType 4-door sedan; 5-door wagon,

5 seatsL/W/H 4745/1780/1505mm (sedan);

4785/1780/1535mm (wagon); 4790/1820/1615mm (Outback)

Wheelbase 2750mm (sedan/wagon); 2745mm (Outback)

Track (f/r) 1530/1535mmCargo capacity 476L (sedan);

490L (wagon/Outback)Weight 1398kg (2.5i sedan manual);

1538kg (2.5i wagon CVT); 1571kg (3.6R sedan auto); 1522kg (GT sedan auto); 1551kg (Outback 2.0D Premium manual); 1569kg (Outback 3.6R auto)

DRIVETRAINLayout front engine (north-south) AWD

Engines & transmissions 2.5-litre flat 4cyl (123kW/229Nm) 6-speed

manual/CVT auto (2.5i); 3.6-litre flat 6cyl (191kW/350Nm) 5-speed auto

(3.6R/Outback 3.6R); 2.5-litre flat 4cyl turbo (195kW/350Nm) 6-speed auto (GT);

2.0-litre flat 4cyl turbo diesel (110kW/350Nm) 6-speed manual

(Outback 2.0D)CHASSIS


rear A-arms, coil springs, anti-roll barBrakes ventilated discs (f); solid discs (r) (2.5i/Outback 2.0D); ventilated discs (f):

ventilated discs (r) (3.6R/GT/Outback 3.6R)Tyres 215/50R17 (2.5i); 225/50R17 (3.6R); 225/45R18 (GT); 225/60R17

(Outback)Spare full-size temporary spare

(Liberty/Outback)


ADR81 test consumption 12.4L/100kmMinimum fuel grade Greenhouse 98 RON (unleaded) Driver aids ABS, EBD, EBA, TC, ESP

Seatbelts front pre-tensioners/load limitersFront airbags yesSide airbags yesCurtain airbags yesKnee airbags noCrash rating not tested

“Drives much better than it looks. Feels sturdy and well-engineered, but lift-off oversteer is a worry”

The Liberty/Outback boost the airbag count to seven, adding a driver’s knee ’bag. Like all of the Subaru range, Liberty/Outback have received the full five stars from ANCAP for occupant protection, and the full three stars for pedestrian safety.

’bags of fruit ADR81 test consumption 8.9L/100km (2.5i sedan manual); 8.4L/100km (2.5i wagon CVT); 10.3L/100km (3.6R sedan auto/ Outback 3.6R auto): 9.7L/100km (GT sedan auto); 6.4L/100km (Outback 2.0D Premium manual)Minimum fuel grade 91 RON (2.5i/3.6R): 95RON (GT); diesel (Outback 2.0D)Greenhouse emissions 209g/km CO2 (2.5i sedan manual); 198g/km CO2 (2.5i wagon CVT); 242g/km CO2 (3.6R sedan auto/ Outback 3.6R auto); 228g/km CO2 (GT auto); 168g/km CO2 (Outback 2.0D Premium manual)Pollution standard Euro 4

Driver aids ABS, EBD, BA, TC, ESPSeatbelts front pre-tensioners/ load limitersFront airbags Side airbags Curtain airbags Knee airbags (driver) Crash rating five star (ANCAP)

Prices $33,990 (2.5i sedan manual); $39,490 (2.5i Premium wagon CVT); $51,990 (3.6R sedan auto); $54,990 (GT sedan auto); $43,990 (Outback 2.0D Premium manual); $48,490 (Outback 3.6R auto)3-year retained value 62% (2.5i sedan auto); 63% (2.5 Premium wagon CVT); 65% (3.6R sedan auto); 66% (GT sedan auto): 65% (Outback 2.0D Premium manual); 66% (Outback 3.6R auto)Service interval 12,500km

$

Fuel/enviro

SafetyMoney

“Even if the Honda Odyssey hadn’t been here it wouldn’t

have shone. Average”

SUBARU hit the ground running late in 2009 with a bewildering array of Liberty models that included not only a sedan and wagon with three engine options and another three transmissions, but also the country-focused Outback that added a diesel engine to the mix. To top it off came this, the Exiga, a car carrying the Liberty badge, but needing a bit of explanation.

It’s a people-mover, the first we’ve seen from Subaru in Australia and as the name (well, the first part of it) suggests, is based on the previous Liberty platform with quite a bit of the new model’s running gear including the 2.5-litre flat four, six-step CVT transmission and all-wheel drive. That’s the only mechanical spec available here; we chose the upmarket Premium version with leather, power seats and sat-nav, which added to an already high equipment level that includes a DVD system to quieten kiddies in the back seat.

The judging panel, however, couldn’t quite come to grips with the Exiga’s reason for being. “I’m just not sure what the point is,” muttered Bruce Newton after discovering the Exiga seats only six, not the usual seven of a raft of rivals, and the rear row was none too roomy. Bulmer thought the wheel-mounted paddleshifts (for a CVT transmission, no less) “bizarre”, and bemoaned the interior’s “mass of cheap, hard-looking, grainy black plastic that would have done Peugeot proud 10 years ago.”

And yet, there was no doubt the Exiga presents a strong passive-safety argument with a full complement of airbags, and there is arguably

value as well – ignoring the lack of a seventh seat – with prices starting at $37,490. The ABS also pulled up impressively quickly on loose gravel. Performance is good, too, with a typically gutsy roar from the biggish flat-four and acceptable acceleration, although, as with the Liberty, opinions were divided about the operation of the CVT transmission. “Really annoying; immediately ignores your pedal inputs,” said Stahl. “Smooth,” was the verdict from both Newton and Carey.

But that was about it for positives. The Exiga’s boxy, boggle-eyed, high-bonneted styling was universally reviled: “Like a grey market import,” said Stahl, while Samantha reckoned it could be a safety issue: “It’s so ugly, it may actually distract people,” she said.

But it was the lack of on-road refinement and wayward dynamics that nailed the lid on the Exiga’s COTY aspirations. Direct steering and sharp turn-in was mismatched to a very asymmetrical tendency to lift-off oversteer, and the Exiga’s tail-happy handling was at odds with its family nature. “The rear end feels disconnected from the front, as if it has a mind of its own,” said Bulmer, and grabby, unpredictable ESP on the dirt didn’t help.

Road noise levels were high, the front end was prone to bottoming out on big bumps, the middle row of seats shook and rattled and, overall, driving enjoyment could best be described as low. “A car with an identity crisis,” summarised Newton, and nobody could disagree.

JONATHAN HAWLEY



Cargo capacity 195/460L (rear seat folded)Weight 1568kg DRIVETRAIN

Layout front engine (north-south) AWDEngines & transmissions

2.5 flat 4cyl (123kW/229Nm) 6-speed CVTCHASSIS

Suspension: front struts, coil springs, anti-roll bar rear A-arms, coil springs,

anti-roll barBrakes ventilated discs (f); solid discs (r)


STAGE

People-mover aspirations fail to move the people who vote

Subaru Exiga

Driver aids ABS, EBD, BA, TC, ESPSeatbelts front pre-tensioners/ load limitersFront airbags Side airbags Curtain airbags Knee airbags Crash rating five star (ANCAP)

Safety

Prices $41,990 (Premium)3-year retained value n/aService interval 12,500km

$ Money

ADR81 test consumption 8.6L/100kmMinimum fuel grade 91 RON (unleaded)Greenhouse emissions202g/km CO2Pollution standard Euro 4

Fuel/enviro

So what does Exiga offer over other Libertys? There’s one extra seat, 40mm more headroom, a sliding middle row, and folding third row.

Plus more cupholders than a Greyhound

bus.

Space

FOR VIRTUALLY all the judges, the XC60 was the pick of the prestige SUV bunch, eclipsing the Audi Q5, Lexus RX 350/400h and the Nissan Murano.

It’s certainly good looking, has a beautiful interior, a strong safety story (including the unique City Safety feature – see breakout), brisk drivetrains and confident ride and handling.

That the XC60 still wasn’t good enough to graduate to the next stage of judging says how compromised these heavy, tall vehicles are (a theme already explored previously with the Q5). Nevertheless, had the XC arrived in a year with less outstanding automotive talent it may have progressed further.

Certainly, the XC60 is a far more developed driving proposition than its older brother, the XC90, something in which the modern EUCD architecture (shared with the competent Land Rover Freelander 2) no doubt plays a significant role.

There’s evidence of adept chassis tuning, and the same can be said of the ESP calibration, which made the XC60 the best behaved of any SUV at COTY ’09.

There was an air of pleasant surprise from each judge who sampled the XC and general agreement this is a good Volvo. But there were diverging views about dynamics. Hawley eulogised, calling the ride “superb”, before adding: “the engines work well with the transmissions, and the chassis continues to impress: good body control, nice steering, rear-end is glued. I can’t believe I’m enjoying a Volvo like this…”

But Robbo was less enamoured: “Ride doesn’t match quality image. Moves around excessively on rough roads.”

It made a difference which XC60 you drove. The turbo-petrol 3.0-litre straight six T6 is responsive, crisp and sporty. The turbo-diesel 2.4-litre D5 five-cylinder is slower, noisier and “all flubbery”, according to Stahl, in its body control.

And yes, we did have the dramatically uprated D5 with its twin sequential turbochargers, piezo injectors, new-gen control system and so on. All this results in an extra 15kW and 20Nm, a fuel consumption cut from 8.5L/100km to 7.6L/100km and 0-100km/h in 8.9sec, down from 9.9sec.

The only thing that didn’t seem to have been improved is the amount of diesel clatter entering the cabin. That’s disappointing because the clean, elegant design and quality materials deserves a more serene soundtrack.

Yet for all the admiration, there are fundamental interior problems. The front seats lack support, but, more importantly, rear-seat space is tight for adults despite the XC measuring up virtually identically against the far more spacious Q5.

“Very limited knee- and foot-room in the back considering its size,” noted Sam Reid.

True, but overall the XC60 gained attention for mainly the right reasons. There’s promise here. Hopefully, Volvo continues to move in the right direction.

BRUCE NEWTON

Volvo XC60Came chasing the Swede smell of success, but left without a rose STAGE



Cargo capacity 490LWeight 1912kg (T6); 1880kg (D5 LE)

DRIVETRAINLayout front engine (east-west) AWD

Engines & transmissions 3.0-litre 6cyl turbo (210kW/400Nm)

6-speed auto (T6); 2.4-litre 5cyl turbo-diesel (155kW/420Nm)

6-speed auto (D5 LE)CHASSIS


rear multi-links, coil springs, anti-roll bar



“Had the best ESP calibration of all the SUVs at COTY 2009”

The XC60’s City Safety is an automated braking system designed to prevent or minimise low-speed rear-enders. Active up to 30km/h, a laser sensor detects your “oh shit!” moment and the brakes are prepared or activated depending on the situation.

ADR81 test consumption 11.9L/100km (T6); 7.6L/100km (D5)Minimum fuel grade 91 RON unleaded (T6); diesel (D5)Greenhouse emissions 284g/km CO2 (T6); 201g/km CO2 (D5)Pollution standard Euro 5

Driver aids ABS, EBD, BA, TC, ESP Seatbelts front pre-tensioners/load limitersFront airbags Side airbags Curtain airbags Knee airbags Crash rating five star (NCAP)

Prices $64,950 (T6); $65,450 (D5)3-year retained value 54%Service interval 15,000km

$Fuel/enviro

Safety

Money


inn

er

Win

ner

Win

ner W


ner W

inn

er Win


CAROF THEYEAR

wheels

Winnerr

nner

Win

ner W

inner

COFCCY

w

WWWWWWWW

rr

OY


“Dynamically, the Golf is nothing short of delightful”

r

Public Domain Public Dom

ain

Pu

blic D

omain Public Domain P

ublic

Dom

ain

P

ub

lic

Dom

ain

CAROF THEYEAR

wheels

Open roadStage

With the inevitable wistful look over their shoulders at those cars that came close to making the cut but missed the cigar, our judges and COTY entourage

decamp to Stage II. Here, a dipping, diving and occasionally pot-hole-blasted road route promises to reveal still more

insights about the dynamic prowess of the survivors, while coarse-chip

bitumen and paired teams of judges cycling through front and rear seats ask big questions about refinement, packaging, ergonomics and myriad

other day-to-day issues.

TWO

FORD’S FIESTA came to Wheels COTY as a favourite having earlier won a tightly contested light car comparison that included the highly regarded Mazda 2 which shares the same architecture. As a manual, the 88kW 1.6 Fiesta perfectly demonstrates that affordable small cars can truly offer irresistible driving appeal with a level of handling, performance and refinement that separates the outstanding from the merely good. Note the all-important “as a manual”.

“A very capable little car,” enthused Carey. “Wonderful chassis, responsive engine, good mid-range, pleasantly tactile manual.”

“Exactly what every light car should be – fun to drive,” read my own notes.

The Fiesta’s chances of progressing to the final shoot-out depended upon the quality of the 71kW 1.4 automatic, a version that takes around half of all sales. Sadly, it was here Ford’s baby stumbled. Automatic small cars are a low priority in Europe, where the Fiesta was developed, and it showed. “Not just a small engine, a limp one as well,” protested Hawley. “Won’t rev and needs to, if it’s to fill the holes between the ratios. Weak performance up hills; really misses the extra capacity and ratio of the manual.”

Next year, from its US launch, Fiesta gets a new six-speed dual-clutch transmission (with automatic mode, naturally) tied to the 1.6-litre engine. If we’d been presented with this combination, the Fiesta might have gone all the way.

Ford’s baby conforms to the class standard with front struts, a rear torsion-beam axle and twin-cam 16-valve four-cylinder engine. Nothing radical here, except for the new – and expensive at $24,990 – Econetic TDCi variant, a low-emission, low-consumption model that brings taller gearing, low rolling resistance rubber and a 66kW diesel that’s been retuned to produce an outstanding combined 3.7L/100km and 98g/km of CO2.

“Feels like a real car,” enthused Samantha Reid. “You wouldn’t know you were in a super-sipper,” agreed Stahl, though Hawley wasn’t convinced: “Let down by tyres that seem low on grip.”

The Fiesta line-up is three-tiered with three- and five-door styles and the two transmissions. A safety pack, that includes a “pretty good” stability control system and curtain airbags, is standard only on the more sporting Zetec, but is a $1000 option on the lower-priced CL and LX models.

While not all the judges were convinced by the Fiesta’s dramatic design, most accepted that the funky styling gave it a leg up over its light-car rivals. Debate centred around the ergonomics of the Nokia-styled dashboard, with controls swooping across the console top. There are some soft textured surfaces, but also plenty of harder plastics. There was also evidence of less than stellar quality: the interior mirror fell off on Lang Lang’s rough- road section and the air-con proved incapable of contending with mid-’30s temperatures.

PETER ROBINSON

Ford FiestaFord’s new baby walked tall ... until the 1.4-litre automatic version let things slip

BODYType 3-door hatch (CL/Zetec), 5-door hatch

(LX/Econetic), 5 seatsL/W/H 3950/1722/1481mm (CL/LX/

Zetec); 3950/1722/1471mm (Econetic)Wheelbase 2489mm

Track (f/r) 1474/1456mmCargo capacity 281L (CL/LX/Zetec);

295L (Econetic)Weight 1085kg (CL); 1125kg (LX); 1091

(Zetec); 1088kg (Econetic) DRIVETRAIN


1.6-litre 4cyl petrol (88kW/152Nm) 5-speed manual (CL/Zetec); 1.4-litre 4cyl petrol

(71kW/128Nm) 4-speed auto (LX); 1.6-litre 4cyl turbo-diesel (66kW/200Nm)

5-speed manual (Econetic)CHASSIS

Suspension: front struts, A-arms, anti-roll bar

rear torsion beam, coil springs, anti-roll barBrakes ventilated discs (f); drums (r)

Tyres 195/50R15 (CL/LX); 195/45R16 (Zetec); 175/65R14 (Econetic)

Spare 175/65R14


“It’s the urban version of the X-Trail – AWD but off-road applications”

“Econetic diesel felt more sportily oversteery than petrol-powered models … weird”

$

The Fiesta shares approximately 50 percent of its parts with the jointly developed Mazda 2. Yet, because it uses about 55

percent high-strength steel, the body is 10 percent

stiffer, and around 40kg lighter.

ADR81 test consumption 6.1L/100km (CL/Zetec); 6.5L/100km (LX); 3.7L/100km (Econetic)Minimum fuel grade91 RON (unleaded); diesel (Econetic)Greenhouse emissions 143g/km CO2 (CL/Zetec); 164g/km CO2 (LX); 98g/km CO2 (Econetic)Pollution standardEuro 5

Driver aids ABS, EBD (BA, TC, ESP opt on CL/LX, std on Zetec/Econetic)Seatbelts front pre-tensioners/load limitersFront airbags Side airbags (opt on CL/LX)Curtain airbags (opt on CL/LX)Knee airbags (driver, opt on CL/LX) Crash rating four star (NCAP); five star with seven airbags

Prices $16,450 (CL); $20,490 (LX); $21,490 (Zetec); $24,990 (Econetic)3-year retained value 57% (CL); 54% (LX); 55% (Zetec/Econetic)Service interval 10,000km

Fuel/enviroSafety

Money

2 similar

2STAGE

AUSTRALIA, you need your bloody head read: this affair with two-tonne, four-wheel-drive SUVs is just no good for you. If what you really need is an affordable, seven-seat luxury car, the Honda Odyssey climbs all over what you’re driving now.

The 2009 Odyssey isn’t so different from its predecessor – it’s based on the same architecture, and the 2.4-litre four-cylinder engine now has a delicious five-speed auto – but the crucial inclusion of three-point seatbelts opens the COTY door. ESP (or vehicle stability assist, in Honda-speak) also makes its debut with this model.

Trailing the Odyssey on the road, it appears barely larger or taller than a VW Golf. But it’s an absolute triumph of interior packaging. Bulmer longed to put it alongside the best-selling Kia Carnival: “Similar seating capacity, but Carnival seems a class – or even two – bigger outside.”

“Maximum transport for minimum waste,” noted Jonathan Hawley. All of which boded well against COTY’s efficiency score.

Some of the external and internal styling detail is pretty chintzy, and the paint finish, though deep, is disappointingly rough. But in its overall luxury ambience and pure bums-for-the-bucks factor, the $49,990 Odyssey Luxury is excellent value.

Same story on the move. The Odyssey shows a blend of handling and ride quality that’s somehow reminiscent of a Jaguar; the NVH refinement is nearly of the same calibre, with tyre noise more

audible in the middle-row. The driver benefits from easily the best driving position of anything of this seating capacity. But for the view in the mirror, you could be piloting a good, mid-level luxury sedan.

It’s also the driver that gets the worst of the Odyssey. The futuristic and far-flung dashboard makes the instruments difficult to read and the afterthought-ish audio system beyond easy reach. And most judges felt there ought to be sat-nav and a reversing camera included.

The ABS and ESP calibrations work adequately well on tar but aren’t at all suited to Aussie dirt. “Adios, cones – miles out,” noted Newton of the l-o-n-g ABS stops. “ESP on dirt is slow-witted,” wrote Carey. “Not a Honda forte.”

But powering our true disappointment is the engine itself. The 132kW four-banger is capable of delivering adequate performance, but it’s simply working too hard all the time. Its labouring at low revs and the hunting of the transmission detract from the luxury ambience of the cabin, and more noticeably, does no favours for the Honda’s fuel consumption. We averaged 11L/100km on our urban/rural road loop, well off the ADR average of 8.9.

But compare that against your lard-arsed Pajero or Landcruiser and you’re still streets ahead. Likewise in handling, cabin comfort, dynamics, running costs, vision and driving position. The Odyssey just missed the cut for COTY’s final four. But don’t let it miss your list.

MICHAEL STAHL

Honda OdysseyDeceptively spacious MPV is the antidote to lardy SUVs, but its engine could torque a bigger game


Wheelbase 2830mmTrack (f/r) 1560/1560Cargo capacity 259L

(708L seats down)Weight 1700kgDRIVETRAIN


2.4-litre 4cyl (132kW/218Nm) 5-speed automatic

CHASSISSuspension: front

double A-arms, coil springs, anti-roll bar rear double A-arms,

coil springs, anti-roll barBrakes ventilated discs (f);

solid discs (r)Tyres 215/55R17

Spare space-saver

“Terrific interior package – a smart design. Could do with a bit more engine, though.”

$

Safety

Money The three rows of seating are amply and equally generous. “There’ll be little argument over who gets to sit where,” said judge Reid. “Many would argue [the electrically-folding third row] has more space than the second.”

Full houseADR81 test consumption 8.9L/100kmMinimum fuel grade 91 RON (unleaded)Greenhouse emissions 212g/km CO2Pollution standard Euro 4

Prices $49,990 (Luxury)3-year retained value 56.9%Service interval 10,000km

Fuel/enviro

Driver aids ABS, EBD, BA, TC, ESPSeatbelts front pre-tensioners/ load limitersFront airbags Side airbags Curtain airbags Knee airbags Crash rating five star (JNCAP)

2MAZDA’S first-generation 3 was a firm Wheels favourite. Affordable, well built, good looking, reasonably fuel efficient, decently equipped and a fine drive, it was an outstanding small car. Its only serious problem was road noise on Australia’s coarse-surfaced roads. While the second-generation 3 easily made it to Stage Two of COTY 2009, the longer the judges spent with it, the less convinced they became that Mazda had done enough to update and uprate its best seller.

“I feel vaguely disappointed,” worried Bruce Newton. “Am I underestimating a fine car, or is it just not the goal that Mazda usually kicks?” It was a question that other members of the panel were also asking themselves. Key areas of concern were dynamics and value.

The Neo, Maxx, Maxx Sport and SP25 models, for instance, all suffered from a sudden shortage of power steering assistance through the double lane-change manoeuvre during Stage One. And the MPS was a real handful around Lang Lang. “You don’t so much steer it as hang on for the ride,” wrote Bulmer. On the proving ground’s bumpy ride and handling circuit, the turbocharged front-driver had simply too much power and pace for comfort. Big doses of torque steer competed with the hot hatch’s stiff suspension set-up to erode directional stability.

When the time came to consider value, the price of the 3 MPS (similar to the superior Golf GTI) counted against it. Yet, at the bottom of the range the 3 Neo was outstanding value – its price undercuts the more basic and less powerful Golf 90TSI Trendline by close to 20 percent.

Another source of general unease was NVH.

Road noise is less than the old car, but some judges had expected more. “Refinement could be better,” pronounced Jon Hawley. Robbo supported this view. Built on an updated version of the first-generation 3 platform it seems the new model can’t leave its problems behind.

Yet the new 3 also preserves some of its predecessor’s greatest strengths. Handling (except for the problems noted earlier) is a definite cut above the class average, for example. Resale values are among the best in class, too.

For those models equipped with the updated version of the previous model’s 2.0-litre engine (Neo, Maxx, Maxx Sport), performance and fuel efficiency remain reasonably competitive. But the performance of the sportier SP25, now equipped with the larger 6’s fine 2.5-litre four, is noticeably more eager. Even more impressive is the new turbo-diesel, a lower boost version of the 2.2-litre four used in the 6. This is a pleasantly punchy and very refined engine that in the opinion of at least one judge was “a match for or better than anything from Europe”.

There was praise, too, for other 3 virtues. Although the less expensive models may lack some passive safety hardware, all have superbly calibrated and very effective ESP and ABS. The Mazda, in fact, shamed many more expensive COTY contenders for effectiveness of its active safety systems.

There’s no question that in some ways the 3 remains outstanding. But the world has moved on since the first generation, and its replacement has failed to keep pace. Other small car specialists … one in particular … have done better.

JOHN CAREY

Mazda 3All the strengths of its predecessor … without sufficient advances of its own

STAGE

BODYType 4-door sedan, 5-door hatch, 5 seats

L/W/H 4580/1755/1470mm (Neo/ diesel sedan); 4460/1755/1470mm (Maxx hatch); 4490/1755/1470mm (SP25 hatch);

4505/1770/1460 (MPS hatch)Wheelbase 2640mm

Track (f/r) 1535/1515mm (SP25 hatch); 1535/1520mm (Neo, Maxx, diesel, MPS)

Cargo capacity 430L (sedan); 340L (Maxx hatch); 300L (SP25/MPS hatch)

Weight 1263kg (Neo sedan); 1282kg (Maxx hatch); 1438kg (diesel sedan);

1342kg (SP25 hatch); 1456kg (MPS hatch) DRIVETRAIN


2.0-litre 4cyl (108kW/182Nm) 6-sp man/5-sp auto (Neo/Maxx); 2.2-litre 4cyl diesel

(110kW/360Nm) 6-sp man; 2.5-litre 4cyl (122kW/227Nm) 6-sp man (SP25); 2.3-litre 4cyl turbo (190kW/380Nm) 6-sp man (MPS)

CHASSISSuspension: front struts, A-arms, coil springs,

anti-roll bar rear multi-links, coil springs, anti-roll bar

Brakes ventilated discs (f); solid discs (r)Tyres 195/65R15 (Neo/Maxx); 205/55R16

(diesel); 205/50R17 (SP25); 225/40R18 (MPS)Spare space saver


“An orthodox small car with a sporting attitude – but it’s no better than the last one”

$

ADR81 test consumption 7.9L/100km (Neo sedan man); 8.2L/100km (Maxx hatch auto); 5.7L/100km (diesel sedan man); 8.6L/100km (SP25 hatch man); 9.9L/100km (MPS hatch man)Minimum fuel grade 91 RON (Neo/Maxx/SP25); 95 RON (MPS); diesel (3 diesel)Greenhouse emissions 187g/km CO2 (Neo sedan man); 193g/km CO2 (Maxx hatch auto);150g/km CO2 (diesel man); 204g/km CO2 (SP25 hatch man); 235g/km CO2 (MPS hatch man) Pollution standard Euro 4 Driver aids ABS, EBD, BA, TC, ESP

Seatbelts front pre-tensioners/ load limitersFront airbags Side airbags (option on Neo)Curtain airbags (option on Neo)Knee airbags Crash rating not tested

Prices $21,990 (Neo sedan man); $28,300 (Maxx hatch auto); $29,715 (diesel sedan man); $30,500 (SP25 hatch man); $39,690 (MPS hatch man)3-year retained value 65% (Neo sedan man/Maxx hatch auto); 64% (SP25 hatch man); 67% (MPS hatch man); n/a (diesel sedan man)Service interval 10,000km

Fuel/enviro

SafetyMoney

RigidNew 3 benefits from

Mazda’s gram-by-gram weight-loss strategy. Extra

use of high-tensile steel has saved 11kg over the old 3,

while the new interior saves another 3.3kg.

2THE ATMOSPHERE at COTY ’09 was a bit like being on a talk show when everybody knows that the special guest, prowling the green room, is a six-metre saltwater crocodile. Or more accurately, Godzilla.

We’ve already been floored by the Nissan GT-R’s performance, and not only against a stopwatch. If our classic COTY criteria are applied as a measure of performance of intended function, technological advancement and value for money, Godzilla seemed primed to scatter everything in its wake.

It has a long technology story to tell, what with advances like plasma-coated cylinder bores and the carbonfibre-plastic ‘bib’ in the engine bay that channels crash energy to the diecast aluminium suspension uprights, firewall and door frames. Such weight-saving, alternative-material technologies are right up our alley.

However, with its 3.8-litre twin-turbo V6 and a suite of electronics to govern the dual-clutch transmission, all-wheel drive and multi-mode suspension, the GT-R is still a weighty beast at 1740kg.

It’s a pretty big car, but still “not a four-seater, unless you want your legs crushed, shoulders bruised and a big headache,” as Sam Reid wrote.

Most judges loved the exterior styling, though Reid found the front end “a little bland.” No impressing this gal. Well, not until the GT-R’s console-mounted Engine Start button was thumbed, whereupon Godzilla swatted us with its mighty claw.

“Prodigious everything!” gushed Newton. “Grip, go, stopping power … a violent experience, totally dedicated to hooking up and going hard.” Hawley felt likewise: “No real evidence of turbo lag, just jet boost,” he wrote. “One hell

of a lot of car for Lang Lang,” noted Carey.Reid described the GT-R’s brutal performance as

“an amazing experience,” but the ESP’s allowance of quite a lot of side-slip even in its standard setting caused some concern for “those who believe they can switch it off.”

Ah, the switches. Prior to Godzilla’s launch, we’d read of the various ESP and suspension modes, and had perhaps expected that the GT-R would be three cars in one (for one-third the price it should be). Sadly, it ain’t really so.

Physics are physics, and even in a 1740kg package you can’t get this sort of performance, traction and pointability with boulevard-cruising comfort. As a $160K sports-premium coupe, it’s not all that luxurious, with an unrelenting ride quality and a chorus of race-car-like clunks and whines. And as a track-day car, it’s 300-400 kilos too heavy.

“Brilliant at going fast, sucks at going slow,” wrote Newton. “Poor drivetrain refinement at low speed,” noted Hawley, adding that “the execution is less impressive than the level of technology employed.” “Bumpy ride, but relative to handling/performance, I reckon it’s acceptable,” wrote racer Reid, who’ll probably forgive anything for 357kW.

We needed the GT-R for the road segment; it had to make it through to the second cut. But there, as we’d half-expected, Godzilla proved to be too focused and frenetic to deliver anything close to its performance potential in a real world of potholes and plodders.

Carey said it best: “Road Car of the Year is what we’re awarding, and [the GT-R] isn’t that.”

MICHAEL STAHL

Nissan GT-RIt’s given Porsche a touch-up from here to the Nürburgring, so why didn’t Godzilla conquer COTY?

STAGE

BODYType 2-door coupe, 2+2 seatsL/W/H 4650/1895/1370mm



Layout front engine (north-south) AWD

Engines & transmissions 3.8-litre V6 twin-turbo

(357kW/588Nm) 6-speed dual-clutchCHASSIS

Suspension: front double A-arms, coil springs, anti-roll bar

rear mutli-links, coil springs, anti-roll bar

Brakes ventilated discs (f); ventilated discs (r)

Tyres 255/40R20 (f) 285/35R20 (r)Spare tyre repair kit



“Hurls you at the horizon. Instant, awesome power delivery. Angry mechanical note”

$Safety

MoneyADR81 test consumption 12.4L/100kmMinimum fuel grade 98 RON (unleaded)Greenhouse Emissions 298g/km CO2 Pollution standard Euro 4

Driver aids ABS, EBD, EBA, TC, ESPSeatbelts front pre-tensioners/ load limitersFront airbags Side airbags Curtain airbags Knee airbags Crash rating not tested

Prices $159,800 (Premium)3-year retained value 60%Service interval 10,000km

GT-R had racer Sam Reid grinning at every

turn, while Carey declared it “coit-clenchingly quick”

and clearly had half a weather eye on the gum

trees that flank Lang Lang’s handling

loop…

Monster


inn

er

Win

ner

Win

ner W


ner W

inn

er Win


CAROF THEYEAR

wheels

Winnerr

nner

Win

ner W

inner

COFCCY

w

WWWWWWWW

rr

OY


“Oozes sophistication, refinement and development”

r

Pointy endStage

Final Round Final Roun

d F

i na

l Rou

nd Final Round Final Round

Fin

al

Ro

un

d

Fin

al R

ound

CAROF THEYEAR

wheelsThe cream inevitably rises, so finally,

after six exhausting days, our judges have reduced the field down to the four

best cars of 2009. If there were more gongs to go around they’d each be

deserving, but this is COTY and only one can prevail. To clear the final hurdle,

though, each car must prove its mettle with a full complement of passengers on board, as judges nit-pick details of seat comfort, head- and legroom, drivetrain

refinement and NVH issues. It’s picky, pedantic and peppered with

increasingly prickly debate.

THREE

3IT WAS Michael Stahl who penned COTY’s Note of the Year, prompted by driving the E63 to reflect on his colourful past and not-so-wealthy present. “Jeez, if I hadn’t wasted so much money on girls and drugs and motorcycles, if I’d studied harder at school, started a career in real estate or banking, I … uhh … so many regrets! (Sob).” The $234,900 AMG is that sort of car…

Yet the real action, the stuff that carried the Mercedes right through to COTY Stage Three and a shot at the big prize, was happening at the other end of the E-Class range. The latest generation of Mercedes-Benz’s mainstream model embraces engine downsizing. And it works brilliantly.

The performance and refinement of the 150kW 1.8-litre direct-injection turbo four of the E250 CGI was noted by all. With its torque boosted to useful levels, even the car’s five-speed automatic wasn’t a problem. Though naturally a little less refined, the all-new 2.1-litre turbo-diesel four of the 125kW E220 CDI (at $80,900 the least expensive of the line-up) and 150kW E250 CDI was equally impressive.

Although fuel costs may not be foremost in the mind of the typical Mercedes-Benz customer, these fuel sippers helped earn the E-Class line-up surprisingly good overall efficiency and environment ratings. And the larger engines aren’t bad either. The 3.0-litre V6 turbo-diesel of the E350 CDI has an ADR81 fuel consumption number that’s less than the E250 CGI, and the petrol

Talented executive express line-up that powered to the business end

Mercedes-Benz E-Class sedan

3.5-litre V6 of the E350 slips well beneath the 10.0L/100km mark. The two V8s? Let’s just say that the 5.5-litre E500 and 6.2-litre E63 are not cars for those who stay awake at night worrying about their carbon footprint.

The efficiency of the E-Class’s four-cylinder engines and the car’s brilliantly slippery body meant the Mercedes earned ticks for its tech. Likewise with safety. The company has a long-standing reputation for being one of the best, and the new E-Class will do nothing to harm it. As usual, Mercedes delivers more passive safety than most, for instance adding its Pre-Safe system to a long list of standard airbags. And the E-Class boasts a full array – and then some – of active safety systems, too. Although its ABS might have worked a little more effectively on dirt, the subtle effectiveness of its ESP on the same surface was noted by most judges.

The E-Class’s interior was, except for some minor ergonomic problems, seen to nail its luxury sedan objectives. Two judges believed the rear seat should have been more comfortable (their complaints concerned the angle and shape of the backrest) and Samantha Reid thought the indicator was in an odd place (although liked the dash’s layout and quality, and fell instantly in love with Mercedes-Benz’s super-simple cruise control wand).

Opinion on the car’s exterior design was divided. “Will Mercedes-Benz ever design stylishly elegant

IT WAS Michael Stahl who penned COTY’s Note of the Year, prompted by driving the E63 to reflect on his colourful past and not-so-wealthy present.“Jeez, if I hadn’t wasted so much money on girls and drugs and motorcycles, if I’d studied harder at school, started a career in real estate or banking, I … uhh … so many regrets! (Sob).” The $234,900 AMG is that sort of car…

the real action, the stuff that carried the Yet the real action, tMercedes right through to COTY Stage Three and a shot at the big prize, was happening at the other end of the E-Class range. The latest generation of Mercedes-Benz’s mainstream model embraces

Talented executive express liecutive express line-up that powered to the business end

STAGE

3.5-litre V6 of the E350 slips well beneath the10.0L/100km mark. The two V8s? Let’s just say that the 5.5-litre E500 and 6.2-litre E63 are not cars for those who stay awake at night worrying about their carbon footprint.

e E Class’s four-cylinder The efficiency of the E-Class’s foengines and the car’s brilliantly slippery body engines a d hmeant the Mercedes earned ticks for its tech. Likewise with safety. The company has a long-standing reputation for being one of the best, and the new E-Class will do nothing to harm it.As usual, Mercedes delivers more passive safety than most, for instance adding its Pre-Safe system


L/W/H 4868/1854/1464mm (E220 CDI/E250 CGI/E350 CDI); 4891/1872/1442mm (E63 AMG)

WB 2874mm Track (f/r) 1580/1600mmCargo capacity 540L

Weight 1735kg (E220 CDI/E250 CGI); 1825kg (E350 CDI); 1840kg (E63 AMG)

DRIVETRAINLayout front engine (north-south) RWD

Engines & transmissions 1.8-litre 4cyl petrol (150kW/310Nm) 5-sp auto (E250 CGI); 2.1-litre 4cyl turbo-diesel

(125kW/400Nm) 5-sp auto (E220 CDI); 3.0-litre V6 turbo-diesel (170kW/540Nm)

7-sp auto (E350 CDI); 6.2-litre V8 (386kW/630Nm) 7-sp auto (E63 AMG)


anti-roll barrear multi-links, coil springs, anti-roll barBrakes ventilated discs (f); vent. discs (r)Tyres 225/55R16 (E220 CDI); 245/45R17 (E250 CGI); 245/40R18 (f) 265/35R18 (r) (E350 CDI); 255/40R18 (f) 285/35R18 (r)

(E63 AMG)Spare space saver

“It’s the urban version of the X-Trail – AWD but without off-road applications”

SafetyFuel/enviro

$ MoneyADR81 test consumption 6.1L/100km (E220 CDI); 6.9L/100km (E350 CDI); 12.6L/100km (E63 AMG)Minimum fuel grade 98 RON (unleaded); dieselGreenhouse emissions 162g/km CO2 (E220 CDI); 139g/km (E250 CGI); 182g/km CO2 (E350 CDI); 295g/km CO2 (E63 AMG)Pollution standard Euro 5

Driver aids ABS, EBD, BA, TC, ESPSeatbelts front pre-tensioners/ load limitersFront airbags Side airbags Curtain airbags Knee airbags (driver) Crash rating not tested

Prices $80,900 (E220 CDI); $93,900 (E250 CGI); $131,900 (E350 CDI); $234,900 (E63 AMG)3-year retained value 57.5% (E220 CDI); 57.7% (E250 CGI); 57.9% (E350 CDI); 46.6% (E63)Service interval variable

Unlike most north-south fours, the cams of

M-B’s new 2.1-litre turbo-diesel are driven from the rear of the crank, not the front. This cuts

height at the front of the engine to help meet

new pedestrian regs.

Rear drive?

cars again?” wondered Peter Robinson. Bruce Newton, on the other hand, thought it looked good. What did impress everyone was how ‘normal’ the E-Class looks, despite its excellent (Prius equalling) drag co-efficient of 0.25.

So, the new E-Class is an advancement over the old model, a first-rate drive in all forms, it introduces timely efficiency tech, and is high on safety. That leaves just value to be considered. “Questionable, especially higher up the range,” read one judge’s note, although others thought Mercedes-Benz’s prices reasonable compared with (equally high-priced) direct competitors.

Still, for a big-money luxury sedan to advance to COTY’s closing stage is an indication of the E-Class’s all-round excellence. But each judge has only one vote, and there can only be one winner. In another year the Mercedes-Benz might have triumphed, but in 2009 there was another brilliant German car at COTY…

JOHN CAREY

“E63’s got an absolute animal of an engine; angry, snarling, and completely addictive”

Some design-sensitive COTY judges

lamented the new E-Class’s lack of elegance and heavy-handed application of retro

features. Yet readers of Germany’s Auto Bild voted

the E-Class the best-looking car in the

world.

Taste?

WWWiinnnnnnneeeerr WWWWWWiinnnnnerr WWWWWiiinnnnnnneeerr WWWWWiinnerW

inn

er

Win

ner

Win

ner W


ner W

inn

er Win


CAROF THEYEAR

wheels

Winnerr

nner

Win

ner W

inner

COFCCY

w

WWWWWWWW

rr

OY


“With premium quality and refinement in a volume car, how can Mercedes-Benz,

BMW et al maintain the gap?”

3THE SUPERB’S progress to the final round of COTY astonished many judges. Few anticipated the left-field limo from obscure Skoda could overcome preconceptions to surpass all expectations. In terms of quality, spaciousness, comfort and, yes, even driving appeal, the Superb impressed at every stage of the process.

The trend-setting Superb’s large (4.8-metre) car/small (1.8-litre) engine concept previews the 2011 four-cylinder Falcon and demonstrates that a cleverly engineered, soft-turbo, small-capacity engine really can deliver respectable performance with outstanding economy.

Who is going to argue with 0-100km/h in 8.5 seconds, when it’s combined with 8.4L/100km economy? Not Hawley, “Really impressive engines, especially the petrol 1.8 – smooth, powerful enough and quiet.”

“What a nice car” noted Newton. “Super drivetrain which battles way above its size. Who needs anything bigger?”

The fact was that the range of abilities displayed by all three Superbs – front-drive 118kW 1.8 TSI and 125kW 2.0 TDI, and all-wheel-drive 191kW 3.6 V6 – make for a compelling package … if you

accept the car’s self-conscious styling, with its slightly-too-long proportions. Stretching the Golf architecture to a massive 2761mm wheelbase (up 183mm) without increasing the tracks results in a clumsy appearance that was questioned by some judges.

“Weird hatch/boot enforces awkward styling – the C-pillars, for example – for dubious benefit,” protested Stahl, “and the grille looks crap.”

If the sheet metal frightens some, the cabin is a treat in a very Volkswagen-esque manner. Nothing wrong with derivative treatment when it means near Audi-standard build quality and materials, comprehensive equipment levels (nine airbags, dual-zone climate control and a classy sound system) and an incredibly spacious rear seat, at least for two adults. Is it possible to have too much leg room and to sit too high? Maybe the Superb really is the Czech S-Class, at a third the price.

The boot, too, is huge but some judges questioned the Twindoor access, a system that gives the choice between a (small) conventional boot opening and a fiddly-to-operate hatch, apparently to cater for both the European taste

Big Czech wrote itself into contention with an unexpected skill set

STAGE

Skoda SuperbBODY

Type 5-door hatch, 5 seatsL/W/H 4838/1817/1462mm


(1.8TSI/2.0TDI); 1543/1516mm (3.6 V6 FSI)

Cargo capacity 565L (1.8TSI); 540 (2.0TDI/V6)

Weight 1611kg (1.8TSI); 1655kg (2.0TDI); 1805kg (V6)

DRIVETRAINLayout front engine (north-south) FWD (1.8TSI/2.0TDI); AWD (V6)

Engines & transmissions 1.8-litre 4cyl (118kW/250Nm) 7-sp

DSG (1.8TSI); 2.0-litre 4cyl turbo-diesel (125kW/350Nm) 6-sp DSG (2.0TDI); 3.6-litre V6 (191kW/350Nm) 7-sp DSG (V6)

CHASSISSuspension: front struts, coil springs, anti-roll bar

rear multi-links, coil springs, anti-roll barBrakes vent. discs (f); vent. discs (r)Tyres 225/45R17 (1.8TSI/2.0TDI);

225/40R18 (V6)Spare full-size steel

GED BULMER

“It’s the urban version of the X-Trail – AWD but without off-road applications”

$ MoneyPrices $45,990 (1.8TSI); $48,990 (2.0TDI); $56,990 (V6)3-year retained value 61.9% (1.8TSI); 61.7% (2.0TDI); 61.6% (V6)Service interval 15,000km

SafetyFuel/enviro

ADR81 test consumption 8.4L/100km (1.8TSI); 6.9L/100km (2.0TDI); 10.2L/100km (V6)Minimum fuel grade 98 RON (unleaded); dieselGreenhouse emissions 200g/km CO2 (1.8TSI); 182g/km CO2 (2.0TDI); 243g/km CO2 (V6)Emission standard Euro 5

Driver aids ABS, EBD, TCSeatbelts front pre-tensioners/ load limitersFront airbags Side airbags Curtain airbags Knee airbags (driver) Crash rating five star (ANCAP)

Bottom line The Superb seems incredible value, in line with Skoda’s positioning as the VW Group’s value-for-money brand. But the only VW Passat with an identical engine – the 125kW TDI – is priced $1000 below the Superb’s $45,990. The entry level $42,990 petrol Skoda is $2K less expensive than the Passat, but the latter gets a 147kW 2.0-litre variant of the Superb’s 1.8 engine. Both V6s cost $56,990, but the Skoda packs a 191kW 3.6, the VW a 184kW 3.2-litre.

for sedans and the desire for hatchbacks in markets like Russia and China.

On the road the Superb feels far more agile and alert than its sombre styling suggests. For such a big car it never feels unwieldy: turn-in is crisp, the steering well-weighted if vaguely aloof, while body control is unexpectedly capable. The ride, however, is a little fidgety on irregular surfaces.

An enthusiastic Carey noted, “Skoda has the best chassis set-up people in the VW/Audi Group, at least when it comes to doing suspension and steering that works well in Australia. They get the balance between ride and handling right, pretty well every time.”

Still, the ABS calibration was ranked no better than average on gravel and the ESP performance judged inconsistent.

All local Superbs get VW’s DSG dual-clutch transmission: six-speed with the relaxed and muscular diesel and grunty 3.6-litre, narrow-angle V6, seven-speed with the 1.8 petrol.

Despite doing so well against the Function, Efficiency, Technology and Safety criteria, when it came to the crunch, the Superb’s shortfalls relegated it to a respected and worthy third-stage finisher.

PETER ROBINSON

“Really impressive engines, especially the petrol 1.8 turbo”

Launched in March, the Superb went on sale in late June. After

a slow start due to a lack of supply, 130 had been sold to the end of November. At that

rate, the Skoda will just meet COTY’s 250 sales

per year eligibility criteria.

NNumbers


inn

er

Win

ner

Win

ner W


ner W

inn

er Win


CAROF THEYEAR

wheels

Winnerr

nner

Win

ner W

inner

COFCCY

w

WWWWWWWW

rr

OY


“Ride and handling are best in class”

3TOYOTA’S third-generation Prius is a car with some amazingly small numbers, like its 3.9L/100km ADR81 fuel consumption test result and 89g/km carbon dioxide emissions.

But improving performance was one of the main objectives with the new Prius. Toyota redesigned or renewed most of the hybrid drivetrain. A 1.8-litre engine replaces the 1.5-litre used in earlier generations. The new 2ZR-FXE four is basically a development of the Corolla’s engine, featuring efficiency-enhancing Atkinson Cycle valve timing and minus a serpentine belt to drive ancillaries (with electric everything, including air-con and power-steer, the Prius doesn’t need one). Teamed with an uprated electric motor (its 60kW maximum power is a 20 percent increase) the maximum ‘system output’ of the hybrid drivetrain is a neat 100kW.

“Strong enough performance,” noted Hawley. Other judges agreed. Unlike past Priuses, sluggishness isn’t a problem with the third-gen model. Toyota seems to acknowledge that even hybrid drivers might occasionally want snappy acceleration. The new Prius has ‘Power’ mode button (as well as the expected ‘Eco’ and ‘EV’),

which noticeably sharpens throttle response. And the car’s ‘default’ drivetrain mode (which operates when none of the three other modes is selected), brings decent performance. The only complaint about the Toyota’s hybrid drivetrain, noted by both Robbo and Sam Reid, was an occasional hesitation when moving from rest.

Overall, COTY judges were impressed by the new Prius’s, well, ordinariness. “Crashes and thumps a bit, but I keep thinking it’s commendable how normal the Prius is to drive,” noted Stahl. While its steering and brakes may feel a little strange (“artificial” and “remote” were common notebook entries), its ride could be smoother, and its ESP needs greater finesse (a complaint common to all Toyotas), most judges acknowledged that the new Prius is a significantly better drive than before. But it’s not yet a driver’s car.

Seven standard airbags, the presence of expected active safety tech (ESP and ABS) and the i-Tech version’s Mercedes-like Pre-Crash system earned the Prius solid ratings against the safety criterion.

Judges were impressed, too, by Prius’s user-

Toyota PriusImproved hybrid tech is clever; its unobtrusiveness especially laudable

STAGE



Track (f/r)1524/1520mmCargo capacity 446L

Weight 1370kg (1420kg, iTec) DRIVETRAIN

Layout front engine (east-west) FWDEngines & transmissions 1.8-litre 4cyl (73kW/142Nm);

AC electric motor (60kW), CVT autoCHASSIS

Suspension: front struts, A-arms, coil springs, anti-roll bar

rear torsion beam, coil springsBrakes ventilated discs (f);

solid discs (r)Tyres 195/65R15

Spare space saver; repair kit


“It’s surprisingly refined on the road, in terms of NVH and ride”

By-wire transmission lever offers regulation R, N and D plus B (for

Brake). Engaging B handily encourages the CVT to emulate engine braking.

Driver aids ABS, EBD, BA, TC, ESPSeatbelts front pre-tensioners/load limitersFront airbags Side airbags Curtain airbags Knee airbags (driver) Crash rating five star (NCAP)

Safety

Prices $39,900; $53,500 (i-Tech)3-year retained value 57%Service interval 10,000km

$ Money

Fuel/enviroADR81 test consumption 3.9L/100kmMinimum fuel grade 95 RON (unleaded)Greenhouse emissions 89g/km CO2Pollution standard Euro 5

friendliness. There were positive comments on its interior’s spaciousness, flexibility, ease of entry and egress, visibility and pleasant feeling of airiness.

Value, however, split the judges. Some believed the car’s level of technology (and Toyota quality) justified its price. Others argued that it was expensive for a car of its size and performance.

So, although it scored better than anything else at COTY 2009 for efficiency and was rated highly for its technology and safety, there were questions about the Prius’s value and function. There’s no reason why a hybrid shouldn’t steer, handle and ride as well as any other kind of car. If Toyota ever manages to make Prius that car, mused one judge, they could have a COTY winner on their hands. But not this time...

JOHN CAREY

“Holy swooping dashboards! Flying buttress centre console is pretty wild”

New Prius gets four driving modes: EV

(Electric), Eco (economical driving), Power (sharper throttle response) and a default mode. And, yes,

the judges preferred Power

Modes


inn

er

Win

ner

Win

ner W


ner W

inn

er Win


CAROF THEYEAR

wheels

Winnerr

nner

Win

ner W

inner

COFCCY

w

WWWWWWWW

rr

OY


“The Golf MkVI GTI is one of the cars you must drive, not just before you die, but

before the end of this week”

Winner Winner Winnner WWWiinnnneerr WWWinnnneerr WWWinnnnerr WWinnner Winnneerr WWiinnnneer

WWiinnnnnnneeeerr WWWWWiinnnnne WWWWWii eerr WWWWWiinner

WORDS MICHAEL STAHL PHOTOS CHR IS BENN Y

Win

ner

W

inn

er W

inne

r Winner Winner Winner W

inn

er Win

ner W

inner W

inner Winner Winner

CAROF THEYEAR

wheels

nner

Win

ner W

inner

COFCCY

w

WWWWWW

OY

rr WWiinnnneer WWWiinnnneer WWinner WinnerWWiinnnnnneeeerr WWWWWWiinnnnnnnnnerr WWWWWWWWWWWWiiiiiiiinnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnneeeeeeee

erWWW WWiinnnnnnneeeerrWinnerWinnerWi Winnerr

WW

rrr

Volkswagen GolfA brilliant range crowned by the lustworthy GTI lands motoring’s most coveted awardA A A A brbrbrbrilililillililili rrrrddddiiii ooooriririringngngngg’s’sss m m mmososososttt t cococoveveveveteteteteddd d awawawawwararararA brilliant range crowned by the lustworthy GTI lands motoring’s most coveted award

XDL

HIRTY-SOME years ago, two all-new models were released to the world; one from Germany, the other from Japan. Each rounded out their introductory year by waltzing off

with the Wheels Car of the Year award.

Thirty-some years later, the Honda Accord nameplate has consistently been at the top of the sales charts in the US and Japan, and in 2008 (in Accord Euro guise) took its second Wheels gong. And the other?

Well, the Volkswagen Golf has consistently been Europe’s top-selling car and is the third biggest-selling nameplate in automotive history. And in a coincidence of continuity, the Volkswagen Golf is Wheels’ 2009 Car of the Year.

It’s far too easy, considering this sixth-gen Golf’s evolutionary styling and largely carried-over platform, to underestimate its advances. Indeed, VW claims to have improved more than 1000 components while inevitably working to increase the rigidity of the chassis. Other than the roof, not a single exterior panel and little of the interior is common with the Golf V.

The fact that each Golf VI requires 10 fewer hours to build is great news for Volkswagen, sure. But slashing this time to 25 hours – in hand with a palpable improvement in materials quality – also tells a significant story in the car’s design, production engineering, use of materials and the environmental impact of building five or six million examples over its life-span.

Golf VI kerb weight gains have been admirably contained, with the GTI picking up only 40kg (versus Golf V), the base petrol adding 82kg but the base diesel actually shedding 10kg. And you’ll note we didn’t say ‘base 1.6 petrol’ or anything so simplistic, because Golf VI’s suite of innovative powerplants is making us change the way we think about describing engines.

The ‘base’ petrol engine is described as a 90TSI, emphasising its 90kW output (with 200Nm at, get this, 1500rpm). Its actual capacity – just 1.4 litres – might be a marketing detraction from the way this turbocharged, direct-injected engine actually delivers in the real world. Costing, at $25,990, only $500 more than the outgoing base-model 1.6 Trendline (and with a seven-speed DSG a $2500 option), the ‘base’ 90TSI’s outputs and equipment actually warrant comparison with a mid-level Golf V model.

Same story, but with more tech and more performance is the 118TSI petrol, which uses the trick ‘twin-charged’ (super- and turbocharged) 1.4 engine for its 118kW and 240Nm. And straddling the petrol models are a pair of diesels, the 77TDI (1.6) and 103TDI (2.0), the latter something of a greenie’s GTI.

Ahh, the GTI…We’ll get to that in a minute. The point is that

the Golf’s all-turbo engine family is spearheading an inevitable Aussie swing towards the smaller-capacity, forced-induction engines encouraged by European tax regimes.

And we’re liking it, not just for the incremental guilt-ridding improvements in ADR81 fuel consumption and CO2 output, but on the road as well. “A very persuasive case in favour of downsizing petrol engines,” nodded Carey.

The 90TSI Golf’s pricing is about 20 percent higher than that of the base Mazda 3, the Golf’s default rival in this year’s COTY line-up. COTY judges were quick to ask themselves whether the Golf’s chassis refinement, class-above NVH sophistication and palpably better interior went most of the way to justifying the margin.

“There’s a solidity of presentation and materials that grows on you,” noted Newton, “a feeling of

Only available on GTI, VW’s XDL ‘extended electronic differential lock’ incorporates a yaw sensor and detects slip from the unloaded inside wheel via the ESP. It then brakes that wheel to give what VW calls an AWD-like feeling. COTY judges loved the handling, especially in the lane-changing discipline but were less enamoured

of the Golf’s ESP system itself.

Locker

“Superb balance and performance, combined with all the right aural accompaniment. That

exhaust pop! Let me take it home!”

quality and integrity. It’s difficult to think of a better four-seat, C-segment hatchback.”

As one climbs the range, the Golf gets cheaper against its opposition, but the Mazda 3 does not get correspondingly better. But it must be noted that at the top of the tree, Mazda’s 2.3-litre turbo MPS easily out-grunts the 2.0-litre turbo Golf GTI and undercuts the DSG-equipped Golf by more than $1000 (in the Luxury-spec MPS tested at COTY). Yet there wasn’t a COTY judge who felt the manic Mazda could front any value argument against the sophisticated GTI.

Ahh, the GTI…You’ll note we’ve gushed over the Golf and yet we’ve

said little about the driving. COTY isn’t only about the driving. But if the Golf ticks a lot of boxes in the areas of technology, efficiency and value for money, it goes beyond the call of duty in the way it does business.

Okay, it’s not the sexiest thing out there. “Is this the world’s most boring, anally retentive-styled car?” asked Hawley at the initial judges’ walk-around. “Interior and exterior are bland – or, as others might say: ‘clean and exuding quality,’” wrote Reid, sarcastically, “but it does feel like a baby Benz for one-third the price.”

It also delivers safety equipment that, in COTY’s pre-scoring count, scored the perfect five-from-five like a Mercedes-Benz. Scanning the safety-equipment list for all Golf models including the GTI, it was interesting to note that nothing in the safety package (with seven airbags, including driver’s knee-bag) was withheld from the base model.

It has front seats that would be at home in a car one or two classes above. The rear seating is only slightly less impressive: “good rear-seat space, cushion a bit flat and short, no centre armrest,” noted Carey of the 90TSI, while giving kudos to its rear vents and great visibility. Only the weak air-conditioning and shortage

of storage space (other than cupholders) let the package down.

Dynamically, the Golf is nothing short of delightful. Even the 90TSI was quick to win

fans, starting with Bulmer: “If that’s a 1.4-litre donk, that’ll do me … sprightly, energetic, eager,

mated to a car with fundamentally good steering and balance. Oozes sophistication, refinement and development.”

Robinson, though miffed at the absence of cruise control in the 90TSI, went even further. “The level of overall refinement is worthy of two classes higher … balance and weighting of all controls [are] BMW-like in their consistency and tactility. Ride and handling, best in class.”

Perhaps Hawley was trying harder in the base car. “Plenty of body roll, which turns to roll-oversteer, but if the trade-off is this beaut ride, I’m happy,” he noted.

Tellingly, the Golf’s electrically assisted steering drew no particular comment, but marks against the dynamics went to the dirt-road performance of the ESP and ABS. An A-pillar vent was ill-fitting on one of our cars, but that was absolutely the sum-total of glitches or rattles across our five test examples.

We chose the base 90TSI for our four-up test. If this little $26K gem hadn’t wormed into our hearts already – which it had – then this would seal the deal. Neither performance, nor certainly ride, suffered at all unacceptably for having four full-sized bods on board. That’s not something one often says of a ‘small’ car.

The 118TSI, meanwhile, obviously stepped up performance and the sporting intent of its handling; though not obviously enough for some judges in interior presentation (it’s $7K dearer). “The DSG adds an even sportier edge – this is GTI-lite,” wrote Newton. “A cracker!” was Bulmer’s summation. “Firmer

TSI engines impressed. Even four-

up, base 90 earned a “goes great!” from Stahly. GTI’s

carryover 17in alloys looked dated to some; machine-finish 18s are optional.

Retro red stripes are back for GTI

Details

The Golf first won COTY in 1976, earning a huge rap from Wheels’ editors as, “A classless car that is superior in virtually every way.” It was a significant victory in the year that the anti-pollution ADR27A struck and Wheels threw COTY entry open to all new cars released in Australia. We described Golf MkI as a “total package”. Thirty-plus years later, the same accolade also applies to Golf MkVI.

Winner

ADR81 test consumption 6.2L/100km (90TSI); 4.9L/100km (77TDI); 6.5L/100km (118TSI); 5.6L/100km (103TDI); 7.6L/100km (GTI)Minimum fuel grade 95 RON (unleaded); dieselGreenhouse emissions 143g/km CO2 (90TSI); 129g/km CO2 (77TDI); 150g/km CO2 (118TSI); 147g/km CO2 (103TDI);178g/km CO2 (GTI)Pollution standard Euro 5

Driver aids ABS, EBD, BA, TC, ESPSeatbelts front pre-tensioners/ load limitersFront airbags Side airbags Curtain airbags Knee airbags (driver) Crash rating five star (NCAP)

Prices $25,990 (90TSI); $28,690 (77TDI); $32,990 (118TSI); $35,690 (103TDI); $42,990 (GTI)3-year retained value 62% (90TSI/77TDI); 63% (118TSI/103TDI); 65% (GTI)Service interval 10,000km

$

Safety

Money

Fuel/enviro

PIC

: CR

IST

IAN

BR

UN

ELLI


L/W/H 4199/1785/1479mm (90TSI/77TDI/118TSI/103TDI);

4199/1785/1464mm (GTI)Wheelbase 2574mm

Track (f/r) 1540/1513mm; 1533/1514mm (GTI)

Cargo capacity 350LWeight 1322kg (90TSI); 1310kg

(77TDI); 1362kg (118TSI); 1418kg (103TDI); 1380kg (GTI)

DRIVETRAINLayout front engine (east-west) FWD

Engines & transmissions 1.4-litre 4cyl turbo (90kW/200Nm) 5-speed man (90TSI); 1.4-litre 4cyl

turbo (118kW/240Nm) 7-speed DSG (118TSI); 1.6-litre 4cyl turbo-

diesel (77kW/250Nm) 5-speed man (77TDI); 2.0-litre 4cyl turbo diesel (103kW/320Nm) 6-speed

DSG (103TDI); 2.0-litre 4cyl turbo (155kW/280Nm) 6-speed DSG (GTI)

CHASSISSuspension: front struts, A-arms,

coil springs, anti-roll barrear multi-links, coil springs,

anti-roll barBrakes ventilated discs (f); solid (r)Tyres 195/65R15 (90TSI/77TDI);

205/55R16 (118TSI/103TDI); 225/45R17 (GTI)

Spare space saver

suspension and better ride compromise,” wrote hot-shoe Hawley, adding, “Sits flatter, points more accurately … I’ll have this one!”

The 1.6-litre 77TDI diesel hardly warrants the description “weak link,” but it’s the only example of average-ness in the entire engine family. With 77kW/250Nm it’s a tad ponderous at times and nowhere near as enjoyable as the almost equally torquey 90TSI petrol. “Vibey little sucker at low revs, gets the tingly pedals going,” noted Newton, “but it smooths out and away you go.”

“Not as characterful as the petrol 1.4, but not a lot wrong with it,” opined Bulmer.

Still, its ADR81 figure of 4.9L/100km was obviously the best of the bunch, comfortably besting the 103TDI (2.0-litre) diesel’s 5.6 and 90TSI’s 6.2.

The 103TDI is altogether more rewarding, albeit around $4000 dearer. A chrome grille, 16-inch alloys (which contributed a bit more tyre noise), greater seat adjustment, steering-wheel audio buttons and rear centre armrests help offset that.

Our car had the $1400 optional park-assist, which most gave up as a wank: it’s no quicker to reverse park than the sort of person who can’t reverse park.

All of which leaves the GTI.“Driving the GTI,” wrote Reid, “you

suddenly understand the Golf obsession. It’s nearly double the price, but a league above its cheaper siblings.”

That might be going a bit far; its siblings

are pretty damned good. But the Golf VI GTI is one of the cars you must drive, not just before you die, but before the end of this week. All the bigger-car confidence, quality and calm of the rest of the Golf range comes together with effortless, smooth, 155kW performance and class-leading hot-hatch grip and responsiveness.

“Flat-out everywhere with complete confidence,” wrote Newton. “Crowns a superbly balanced and diverse model range.” Even the infamously unemotional Carey wrote: “GTI suspension settings? Refined stiffness … firmly damped, but rounds off the sharp stuff pretty well.” Which is, actually, pretty unemotional.

Again, the only dark mark against the GTI was in its ESP behaviour on dirt; it may as well not have it. But when the exhaust makes that little fluttery fart with every instant, motorcycle-like upshift of the DSG…

The GTI does indeed crown a model range that offers the value and agility of a small car with the comfort and refinement of a very good medium one.

We’ll leave it to Peter Robinson, who awarded the very first Golf its COTY back in 1976, to pose the question to other manufacturers: “[With such] premium quality and refinement in a volume car, how can Mercedes-Benz, BMW et al maintain the gap?”

“It’s a bit more expensive than the class average, but worth it for the qualities”

Winner WWWWiinnnnneerr WWWWiinnnnnneerr Winnnneeerr WWWWinnnnneerr WWWinnn DCC Adaptive Chassis Control is

optional across the Golf range. The system automatically modifies damper characteristics

or is switchable to sports mode.

DCC

sports mode.

WWiiinnnnnnnnneeeeeerrr WWWWWWWiiiinnnnnnnnnneer W

Das Auto.

www.golfgti.com.au

VGA3625/WHEELS/GTI

NNNNNNNNNOOOOOOWWWW AAAAVAILABLE IN BLUSHINNNGGG RRRREEEEDDDDDDD..

The Golf GTI.It’s no wonder the Golf GTI comes in blushing red. The Golf range, including the GTI

has been awarded the oldest and most prestigious motoring award in the country,

2009 Wheels magazine Car of the Year. To discover the award winning performance

of the Golf GTI for yourself, visit your local Volkswagen dealer.


www.golfgti.com.au

www.golfgti.com.au

Das Auto.

Volkswagen Golf

Hugs tight corners and award judges.

magazine Car of the Year 2009.Wheels

www.volkswagen.com.au

VGA3625/WHEELS/GOLF


www.volkswagen.com.au

www.golfgti.com.au

wheels car of the year 2009

Documents

wheels coty

years coty process

free test cars

wheeler racing cars

largest field of cars

samanthas able

holdens lang lang

walkley awards