Advertisement

BMW F30 3-Series Test Drive Review – 320d diesel and new four cylinder turbo 328i sampled in Spain!

February 1, 2012 at 8:54 pm By Anthony Lim Filed Under BMW, Cars, Test Drive Reviews

Think BMW, and the first model that usually comes to mind – for most folk – is the 3 Series. Ubiquitous, the model has been at the forefront of things from the get-go, and while the brand has evolved its lineup to incorporate a host of new segment models from the ‘easy-to-figure three-model’ range of the past to the ‘just how many of them are there, really’ of today, the 3er has been very much the standard bearer for the brand, the one by which it has been defined, and association measured. Since 1975, five generations and more than 12.51 million units sold attest to that.

So when a full-model replacement comes about to continue the flag-waving, there’s plenty of bated breath, as well as the inevitable questions. How will it shape up? Will it turn things on its head? Does it change the game, again?

The answer is very nicely, yes and yes. Things haven’t exactly been easy for the 3er in recent times – the grip it has had in the entry-level premium sedan segment has been forcibly relaxed by competition that has studied and learnt from the benchmark, and done so very well. Arguably, the outgoing E90 didn’t help itself – from a design point of view, it was a little too safe, especially from the rear at the start of its life-cycle, almost as if the idea of changing things too much coming in from the E46 would alienate the buyer.

It also didn’t help that on the whole, the E90 felt like it was carrying a bit too much weight arriving at middle-age, and while undoubtedly there are a great many existing generation owners who might argue against this view, I’ve always felt the E90 to be too heavy-set – not ponderous – for its own good from a performance point of view. Simply put, a very able machine, but darker in character than its predecessors, missing that sense of overall sharpness, or that sprightly step, if you will.

Enter the F30, the sixth-generation incarnation of the type. It doesn’t just restore parity in the playing field, but takes the game a few steps further infield, and by all accounts should accomplish far more than the last one did in staying ahead of the chasing pack.

Full story after the jump.
[Read more...]

41 Comments      

Range Rover Evoque Test Drive Review in Sydney

January 12, 2012 at 3:10 am By Paul Tan Filed Under Cars, Land Rover, Test Drive Reviews

The Range Rover Evoque is a simple concept, yet one so brilliantly executed. Take everything that makes a Range Rover so desirable, and scale it down into a compact yet refined vehicle to meet the changing needs of the SUV owner.

The LRX Concept stunned us when it first made its debut, and Land Rover shocked us once again once the production Evoque made its debut – it still looks very much the futuristic concept SUV that the LRX Concept was. Like something sleek and sexy plucked out of the future, but roaming our roads today.

In an age where customers are demanding better fuel efficiency and easier maneuverability around town, Land Rover has conjured up a bespoke model that at first impression seems very much befitting of being called a Range Rover, as opposed to pulling a fast one like former stablemate Aston Martin with its controversial Cygnet city car.

The Evoque is also aimed at making the Land Rover brand appeal to a younger audience, as well as balance out the gender ratio. A regular Land Rover or Range Rover product normally sees about 80% male buyers – with the Evoque this has become a more balanced ratio of 50% male, 50% female.

So the Evoque is not only more accessible in terms of purchase price and running cost affordability compared to the other Range Rover models, it’s also made the brand more accessible to wealthy ladies, who currently are most likely buyers of SUVs like the Volvo XC60, Audi Q5, BMW X1 or BMW X3.

Land Rover offers two different body styles with the Evoque – a 5-door and a 3-door “coupe”, both of which are available in Malaysia. There are two engine options available at the moment – a diesel and a petrol, both turbocharged 4 cylinder engines. In Malaysia, you can have the petrol engine in either a 3-door or 5-door body while the diesel engine is available only as a 5-door.

The 2.0 liter petrol engine is shared with the Ford EcoBoost family, which is also available in Malaysia in the Ford S-MAX, the facelifted Ford Mondeo, the Volvo S60 and the Volvo XC60. The tuning in the Evoque is the most powerful version available currently – producing 240 horsepower at 5,500rpm and 340Nm of torque from just 1,750rpm. In the Evoque, the engine is rated to consume about 8.7 liters per 100km on a combined cycle.

The 2.2 liter PSA/Ford DW12 turbodiesel is also found in the Land Rover Freelander 2 and globally is used in various Ford, Jaguar and PSA Peugeot Citroen cars as well. In the Evoque, it makes 190 PS at 3,500rpm and 420Nm of torque at 1,750rpm – less horses than the petrol due to the shorter powerband but loads of torque to get the Evoque going.

The Evoque is loosely based on the Freelander platform and even rolls off the Freelander’s production line, but as the Evoque rides lower than the Freelander, parts of the undercarriage design was modified to maintain a level of ground clearance that you would expect from a vehicle with the Land Rover or Range Rover badge. So the new platform is referred to as the LR-MS platform, loosely based on the Freelander’s Ford EuCD platform.

The Evoque also has very minimal overhangs, especially at the rear – this improves approach and departure angles. Quite interestingly, we hear the LR-MS platform can be stretched further about 300mm if necessary to create a larger vehicle to slot in between the Evoque and the Range Rover Sport, should Land Rover ever decide to explore that segment.

Other than the choice of a 5-door and 3-door, there are also different trim levels which change a few design details on the car. There’s the Prestige, Pure and Dynamic trim – and the Dynamic trim is the sportiest design, which at the same time also reduces the Evoque’s approach and departure angle capabilities as it’s the most “road-going” of the three designs.

In Malaysia, the Dynamic Plus trim is available on the top of the line 2.0 liter petrol 3-door “coupe”, while the 2.0 liter petrol 5-door and the 2.2 liter diesel 5-door has the Prestige trim.

The Evoque may look small from the outside, but it is surprisingly very roomy in the interior. Land Rover engineers have done a brilliant job with the packaging of this car, maximizing every cubic inch of interior space possible within the exterior dimensions of the car. Shoulder room between the front two seats are very good – it actually feels like a larger SUV and it felt more comfier sitting in the Evoque compared to some other same-class SUVs.

The rear seats are able to seat two adults more than comfortably, with good legroom. If you’re going to carry more than one passenger often, I’d suggest you get the 5-door though, because while the 3-door has a proper adult-sized rear cabin, it’s quite of a pain getting into the rear, as the sporty design of the Evoque doesn’t allow for an easy entry and exit. Once you eventually climb in though, the space you have is quite surprisingly comfortably.

Plenty of the interior space went to the passengers, so there’s not much of boot space left. Although the official number is 575 liters (550 with the 3-door), it doesn’t seem all that big. No doubt, golf bags will fit very nicely but if you have something to put in of a particular shape, such as a luggage bag (see picture above), you can only fit one, and that’s it. Think of the Evoque’s boot as more of that of a hatch like a Golf or Focus, instead of the typical roomy SUV boot.

But as a city car, this shouldn’t really pose too much of a problem, and the rear seats can be folded down to make for more luggage space. When folded down, luggage capacity extends to between 1,350 liters to 1,445 liters for the 3-door and 5-door respectively.

Perceived quality is very good – there’s leather everywhere, and as a front passenger you’re basically looking at a massive expanse of leather in front of you, with beautiful stitched accents. The dash layout is recognisable as a Range Rover, but scaled down. The center dash area has a Volvo-like slant to it with a small storage area under the curve, but it’s quite a small compartment so you won’t be able to keep much at all.

Land Rover has resisted overblinging the interior – the choices of materials are classy and mature, with no overuse of chrome. Some interior designers tend to abuse chrome to make the switches and knobs of the interior feel like knock-off jewellery – the Range Rover Evoque stays clear of this. Most of the surfaces are matte or brushed. There’s also ambient lighting scattered about the cabin for a nice effect at night – you can see some of these lights in the image above.

Our test drive session started off at the Sydney Opera House, through the city. Driving through the city in stop and go traffic, our first impressions was that the Evoque has remarkably good NVH insulation. We set off in the diesel model and we could barely hear a clatter from inside the cabin at idle! Push off from a standstill and you get a nice smooth tone – the only thing that’ll remind you that this is not a petrol lump is the fact that the pitch never goes as high as you’d expect it to while gunning it because of the much lower redline.

City maneuverability was good, though as you’d expect from how the car looks like from the outside – rear quarter visibility wasn’t that good. The Evoque’s roof and shoulderline has the angles of a sports car, so expect outward visibility of a sports car as well. Side mirrors were huge though, so that helps.

We took the opportunity to try out the in-car entertainment and navigation system. With competitors using knob-style devices to control the screens in their cars, it’s easy to mistake the rotary gear selector knob (first seen in the Jaguar XF) for what you’d use to control the computer. The Evoque shares its in-car computer with Jaguar models, so what you have here is a nice touch screen interface with relatively large buttons so it’s easy to touch what you intend to select. Ergonomically, the interface is pretty tight.

Other than reading audio CDs, there’s also Bluetooth audio, USB audio as well as an iPod interface so you’re spoiled for choice when it comes to audio inputs. The iPod interface not only allows you to browse through your songs but it can also access your iPod’s customised playlists and etc. You can’t do the more advanced stuff like Genius mixes and etc though.

The audio output is pretty rockin’ as well – our test units were equipped with a Meridian sound system which delivered great clarity and punchy bass and remained crisp and clear up to insanely loud volume levels. No signs of rattling from the interior from the heavy bass thumping at this point – but then again we were driving new cars.

There are two different levels of Meridian systems available with the Evoque – a 380 watt 12 channel system with 11 loudspeakers (including a 2 channel subwoofer), or a more powerful 825 watt system with 15 channels driving 17 loudspeakers including a subwoofer, centre and surround loudspeakers.

Anyway, soon we out of the city to enjoy the country roads en route to Hunter Valley, a famous wine-making region near Sydney. We had the opportunity to test drive the marque’s previous smallest car – the Freelander – and found it to be surprisingly a fun drive. The Evoque is even better, thanks to the fact that it’s lower slung (27mm lower) and has both a stiff chassis and a suspension tuning that’s more to the firmer side of things.

But while this may mean loads of fun on the bends, I found that the ride can get slightly fidgety on rough patches. Our Malaysian spec Evoque wears 20 inch wheels with low profile tyres, which contribute to the Evoque’s good looks, but it remains to be seen how the car will ride on Malaysian roads.

The high shoulder line of the doors helps mask the commanding driving position and help convey a “sports car” feel to you when you’re seated in the driver’s seat. Land Rover also did a brilliant job at tuning the Evoque’s electric power steering as it didn’t get into the way of a fun drive – if you don’t notice that a car has an electric power steering system, it’s a mark of a good configuration with a natural feeling weight and ratio at different travel speeds.

The top of the range Dynamic Plus 3-door petrol model in Malaysia has Adaptive Dynamics, which has magnetic dampers that can adjust its settings about a thousand times a second. Unfortunately we did not have the opportunity to try that out as a car equipped with Adaptive Dynamics didn’t get cycled along into our possession as we swapped cars and drivers at pre-designated points throughout the journey.

In the models we got to try, the Evoque’s seats are very shapely, are amazing to look at and feel nice to the touch, but if you’re not built like a couch potato American, the side bolsters may not feel cosseting enough to support you during corners if you’re into that kind of thing. Not everyone – especially significant others from my experience – are into big side bolsters though.

There’s another variation of the seats (see picture below in red leather) that are available on the Dynamic Plus trim, which means in Malaysia it’s installed in the top of the line 3-door petrol 3-door Evoque. It doesn’t look like it has significantly more side bolstering though.

Being a dieselhead (we have a total of three turbodiesel company cars here at Driven), I was surprisedly that I found myself liking the petrol version more than the diesel. The diesel has gobs of shove when you start off and the engine note is very smooth – very unlike a diesel – but it tapers off very quickly, while the petrol engine starts off slightly weaker but rode its torque curve very well into the high ends of the rev range. It also feels more responsive.

However, neither the petrol or engines are overwhelmingly fast. I came away with the impression that perhaps the Evoque needs to have a higher end model with a more powerful engine, some kind of Evoque Sport if you will. At that price range, I expected to be blown away but the pace ended up feeling a little lacking. The gearbox is also a regular 6-speed automatic, and thus behaves like one – smooth with well thought out ratios, but shifts are not particularly quick and snappy.

Is the Evoque still a fun drive? Yes, but is it going to set your heart racing? It’s more likely to do it with its super good looks than an exciting drive. But then again that was never the Evoque’s promise to a buyer to begin with. It’s still way sportier than a big lumbering Range Rover where you’re more likely to feel like you’re sitting ON a big leather throne rather than IN a sporty cockpit like you would feel in an Evoque.

Our route throughout the country roads of Hunter Valley also took us to a big riding ranch where Land Rover had set up an offroading track for us to try out the Evoque’s off roading capabilities.

As I mentioned earlier, the Pure and Prestige trim has better approach and departure angles of 25 degrees and 33 degrees respectively, while the Dynamic’s sportier bodywork reduces this to 19 degrees and 30 degrees for approach and departure respectively. The Evoque’s maximum wading depth is 500mm. Front axle obstacle clearance is 215mm while rear axle obstacle clearance is 240mm.

The offroad track took us through various different off road situations – from as simple as a grassy dirty track to some very steep and tight inclines, both uphill and downhill! We also drove through a small river – at first just across it but later we got to a point where we snaked along in the middle of the river on the riverbed along the water flow, which was pretty fun – the key is not to stop or the Evoque’s weight will make your wheels will sink too much!

It was on this off roading track that we got to try the two buttons on the small control panel below the gear selector knob that allows you to control the Range Rover Evoque’s Terrain Response system, a highlight of all Land Rover products.

Terrain Response is a feature that Land Rover introduced on the Discovery in 2005. It basically allows the user to select a few modes according to what type of surface you are driving on. Terrain Response will control systems like DSC stability , the electric throttle, Hill Descent Control, Gradient Release Control, Hill Start Assist and Roll Stability Control to suit the type of surface you are on.

On the Evoque, you’ve got the Dynamic mode (only when Adaptive Dynamics is fitted to the car), the General mode, the Grass/Gravel/Snow mode, the Mud/Ruts mode, and the Sand mode. Land Rover set up signboards indicating what mode we should switch to on different areas of the off-roading track.

Most of the offroad modes actually dampen the throttle input significantly so it’s easier to feather the throttle for the precise inputs you need during tricky situations. Sometimes you also need to dial down the stability control a little as your Evoque’s wheel has to slip to get along on certain surfaces. We used the Sand mode on the riverbed.

As the Evoque doesn’t have a low ratio transfer case, the Rock Crawl mode that’s available on the Terrain Response system of other Land Rovers is missing.

In any case, even though the Range Rover Evoque may not have a low ratio gearbox (neither does the Freelander, BTW), an air suspension system that can raise ride height to comical levels or any other high tech offroading gizmo, it’s still able to do some light offroading, much more than your typical C-segment hatchback is able to do, but of course not as hardcore as a true offroading machine.

All in all, congratulations are in order for Land Rover for successfully doing a small Range Rover right, one with the desirability dial turned on really high. I’m still very curious to see how our Malaysian spec Evoque performs on Malaysian roads with its massive 20 inch wheels, but as there are no media test drive units in Malaysia yet it will have to wait. I’m also curious as to how the car drives and rides with the Adaptive Dynamics suspension system. And who knows, perhaps a shoot-out story next?

As a recap pricing-wise, the Evoque is priced at RM393,888 for the top of the line 2.0L Petrol Coupe Dynamic Plus, while the 2.0L Petrol 5-Door Prestige goes for RM363,888 and the 2.2L Diesel 5-Door Prestige is priced at RM353,888, all on-the-road excluding insurance.

Look after the jump for a mega photo gallery of the Evoque.
[Read more...]

47 Comments      


DRIVEN: Proton Exora Bold Turbo, our first impressions

December 22, 2011 at 4:30 pm By Danny Tan Filed Under Cars, Malaysian Makes, Proton, Test Drive Reviews

It’s the hottest model of the moment, and the most talked about for sure. It’s also the first recipient of Proton’s long awaited turbocharged engine, the Campro Charged Fuel Efficiency (CFE). It’s the refreshed Exora, the Exora Bold.

After countless sightings, both clothed and naked, Proton finally officially unveiled the Exora Bold and the range topping Exora Prime last Thursday. With an aggressive facelift and a new powertrain that’s so much more appealing on paper, the Exora is making a strong case to be the best MPV under RM100k.

We’ve driven it already – first impressions and full gallery after the jump.
[Read more...]

700 Comments      

Five-fold mega SUV shootout: Mitsubishi ASX v Nissan X-Trail v Honda CR-V v Hyundai Tucson v Peugeot 3008!

December 16, 2011 at 6:35 pm By Danny Tan Filed Under Cars, Feature Stories, Honda, Hyundai, Mitsubishi, Nissan, Peugeot, Test Drive Reviews

Granted, the sport utility vehicle segment has a different luster than that of more than a decade ago, when the class was fresh and burgeoning, and manufacturers were falling over each other to fill the slots in the new opening. Then, robustness was generally the operative word, so an SUV had to be tough to tackle terrain and yet be compliant enough for urban use. Not the easiest thing to manage, you can imagine.

Time – as well as trial and error – has seen the category become more refined, and the sparkle these days is probably better at wooing buyers. A more focused scope has come about, with the need to be able to traverse the great outdoors in rugged fashion pretty much left behind, like it should have been in the first place. Today’s SUV is very much a suburban-centric offering, aimed at the urban crowd for which a sedan doesn’t have enough space and presence, and a MPV too much, and boringly so.

Now, most of us know how capable these vehicles are, taken on their own, but how do they fare when pitted against each other? With that in mind, we decided to take a closer look at how they match up, pitting five examples – the Mitsubishi ASX, Nissan X-Trail, Honda CR-V, Hyundai Tucson and Peugeot 3008 – in a quintet face-off to see how it all shapes up.

There are other contenders, namely the new Kia Sportage, the Suzuki Grand Vitara, the long-in-the-tooth Ford Escape as well as the likes of the Chevrolet Captiva, for example, but adding more than what we ended up with would have made the task unmanageable. It’s all nice to read a nine or 10 SUV shootout, but doing one is another thing altogether.

That said, on with the show to see which one ends up as the king of this particular hill.

EXTERIOR

Danny says

The five SUVs assembled here range from a big box to one not much bigger than the hatchback it’s based on, from building blocks to fluidic sculptures, so there’s bound to be one to suit one’s taste. Agree?

I’m not much of an SUV kind of guy (the Audi Q5 is another matter), and there is no overwhelming favourite for me either, but I like the blend of sharp lines and compact proportions of the Mitsubishi ASX. This deep shade of red probably isn’t the most flattering, and it could do with a sportier set of wheels, but I like it best.

The most flamboyant of the group by a mile is the Hyundai Tucson. It’s very eye-catching, and like Anthony, I like that muscular rear three-quarters view the best. Not so in love with the fussy face, but this is a great example of a self-confident, expressive design, as opposed to the “play safe, don’t offend” looks of previous gen Koreans. It’s a gamble, but it’s paying off big time for Hyundai.

Never liked the popping eyes + double grille look of the CR-V, which for reasons unknown, brings a startled hippo to mind. The Honda is no longer repulsive thanks to familiarity, but it’s not pretty either, which brings us to the Peugeot. The 3008 is just too odd for me – the proportions, overhangs, and that face – I just don’t get it. Would love to interview the designer someday, just to know what inspired him. I quite like how its MPV sibling 5008 looks, though

One can’t fault the X-Trail for being a box, because that’s wholly intentional on Nissan’s part. The carmaker says that first-gen X-Trail owners (and there are many of them) love their SUV’s macho square cut lines, so they made more of the same. And with more rivals going the crossover route, the “keep it true” X-Trail may find itself serving a large number of taste buds.

As they say, one man’s meat…

Harvinder says

Lets face it. Looks are somewhat important when you talk about cars and it’s correct to assume so in this case. Good looking cars somehow attract us, but at end the of the day, if a car is good looking to one it doesn’t necessarily mean it is good looking to another. All subjective, to say the least.

In the case of these five SUVs I must admit that two cars stand out from the pack. One is the Peugeot 3008, while the other is the Hyundai Tucson. I think you can safely guess why the 3008 is in my standout list. Well, yes, you’re right, it stands out because it does look a little quirky, perhaps a little too modern for today’s tastes.

Don’t get me wrong, the 3008 does have some good angles, but definitely not as many compared to the rest of the line-up we have here. The taillights remind me of strawberries for some reason, while the front makes me think of JAWS. Weird, I know, but that’s what crossed my mind. Then we have the Hyundai Tucson at the end of spectrum, something that has gone through a lot to come this far.

At first glance, the Tucson strikes you as a good looking thing. Very sweet and pleasant from almost any angle. Hyundai’s designers have been working around the clock to come up with the designs they have now, which I must say, are rather appealing. In this case, just like other Hyundais at the moment, the form is treated with the fluidic design concept and it’s working well here.

However, I do feel that the car is a little too ‘fluidic’ for me, if you know what I mean. There’s a tad too much on the design lines, which I consider the only off-putting thing the Tucson has in terms of design. Nevertheless, that’s just me as the design seems to the be cup of tea to many out there, and I can understand why.

As for Nissan X-Trail, I find this one a bit too utilitarian, a little too boxy. It looks as though it has a lot of design elements that doesn’t seem to fit well together. At times, I feel that some design elements on the X-Trail are afterthoughts. The Honda CR-V seems like a decent looking offering, with the right proportions and not overcooked. However, I think the Tucson comes up ahead of the X-Trail and the CR-V in the design department.

Among all the SUVs we have here, I consider the Mitsubishi ASX as the SUV with the right balance in the looks category. I like the fact that it has Mitsubishi’s trademark jet fighter grille. The aggressiveness is a nice touch and it doesn’t breach the “too much” point in the scale. The ASX looks very good from almost every angle, and is the only SUV here that really looks like a car.

Overall, the Hyundai Tucson and the Mitsubishi ASX are my choices in terms of design. Comparing both, I find that the Tucson is a bit too flashy for me, probably like a model who has a little too much make up, while the ASX feels about right.

Anthony says

The assembled bunch looked every bit the motley crew, what with the box-like X-Trail mixing it up with the flowing Tucson, and the ASX and 3008 looking more crossover than SUV. An interesting mix of shapes, to say the least.

From an aesthetics point of view, the X-Trail isn’t going to win any contests for being the curviest creature, or indeed the sexiest thing on four donuts. With a shape that feels like slabs chunked together, this is very much a box on wheels. The utilitarian shape, however, hints at the volumetric scope within, and you just know this one – which is larger than the first-generation model – is going to offer loads of it. Function over form, indeed.

The Tucson takes its place at the other end of the swing, and showboats all those curves and swoops like it’s going out of fashion. Certainly, there’s nothing reserved about how it parades its wares, though I have reservations as to how the lines will hold up as time progresses. I love the rear though, viewed straight on from behind; of the five, it’s the derriere with the most flair and appeal.

As for the CR-V, the third-generation model is heading towards its end of duty tour, but retains a balanced appeal about it. Not the most exciting, the RE, but plying the safe route means the exterior has held up well enough over the four years plus of its life cycle so far. For sure, the buying public has found – and continues to find – its quiet elegance to be more than agreeable, and this includes my other half; the CR-V here happens to be her vehicle.

Meanwhile, the Peugeot rolls into the fray here looking a bit of an oddity, like it doesn’t quite belong. It’s the smallest looking vehicle of the bunch, and the shape drew mixed opinions from the team. I quite like the front from certain angles, but for sure it’s not the type of vehicle you’d gawk at the whole day. The European influence in its lines is unmistakable though, and it does look very solidly hewn compared to the Asian opposition.

Finally, the ASX. It’s the one with the leanest, most athletic stance, essentially looking very much the prowler. The wedge front works for me and the overall lines offer good proportionate scale, despite its lack of overall mass.

Indeed, it’s my pick of the five from the exterior point of view, the ASX. I’ve always preferred my cars lean and on the smaller side, and while the 3008 may also be so, its disposition is a bit too soft and too rounded for my taste. I’ve gotten so used to the CR-V it’s become a familiar shoe, so it doesn’t have quite the charm it once had. You can probably tell the X-Trail doesn’t work at all for me, and it never did even with the first incarnation. The Tucson’s flash is striking though, so it’s a close second in my books.

INTERIOR

Danny says

Throughout our test period, I spent the most time in the Nissan and Peugeot, collecting the former and returning the latter to their owners. I love the X-Trail’s cabin for its excellent view out (lots of glass, square corners) and comfort. The fabric seats are big and cushy, typically Nissan, and there’s nothing to learn or get used to – you just step in and drive.

However, the spartan look and feel may be a disadvantage in the showroom, making Nissan look stingy. But that’s not entirely true either.

While the X-Trail lacks some basic kit such as climate control, leather and buttons for the steering, as well as flashy toys such as the Hyundai’s push start button/panoramic roof, Mitsu’s 2-DIN head unit or Honda’s cool instrument panel, it’s the only car here to come with electric adjustment for the driver’s seat as well bi-xenons, kit that even the “fully-loaded” Euro-spec Peugeot doesn’t have. And if given a choice, I’d have those over auto air con and auto cruise.

It’s a car that that the family will love as well. Tall seating position, high roof, large windows and the useful boot trays with compartments are good for road trips or ronda-ronda sessions.

The Peugeot is a good family car as well, if you have a small family with young kids, that is. The expansive panoramic glass roof is spectacular, but rear legroom is very tight. Passable if someone my height is seated in front, but if they are tall, rear knee-room can go down to almost nothing. The 3008 must be tried for size, because it’s not for all.

It’s for those who want some sports car feel from their SUV. The Pug’s driving quarters is very cozy and enclosed, with a sloping centre stack and a tall centre console that divides the front section into two distinct areas.

It’s very cockpit like, and the driver is boss, which matches the driving character of the 3008. He/she is faced with plenty of toggle switches and twin pod dials. There’s also the much boasted head-up display (HUD), although I personally find this to be rather gimmicky.

Unlike BMW’s version, the image here is shot on a separate screen that can be erected by a toggle switch, and although the image (only digital km/h) can be adjusted for height, I still had to lower eye focus to view it, defeating the very purpose of HUD. The operation of the screen in our test car was also very noisy.

That aside, I wasn’t very comfortable with the angle of the left foot rest, and my idle foot became quite restless as a result. This is an unusual observation, since I’m usually immune to many ergonomic challenges pointed out by Paul and Harve.

Step into the Honda CR-V and it becomes clear why this is THE SUV to have for many upper middle-class households. It doesn’t have as many toys as some other cars in this test, or even as much soft touch plastics, but feels the most premium from behind the wheel. This isn’t easy to explain, but the lighting, that nice MID between the dials, the brushed trim, the tactile quality of the knobs and buttons, and the full house centre stack gives off a full-function, technical and expensive feel.

I also like the abundance of storage spaces and cubbies in the Honda, derived from locating the gear lever on the centre stack. Rear passengers are also in for a treat – legroom is superb in this company, although it could feel even more spacious with a lighter coloured cabin, as opposed to black.

The Mitsubishi ASX, which also has a dark room cabin, is much less spacious than the CR-V inside, something the spec sheets won’t tell you – the ASX’s 2,670 mm wheelbase is actually 50 mm longer than the Honda’s.

The good stuff surrounds the driver – nice sporty steering wheel, long magnesium shift paddles, clear (almost VW/Audi like) dials – but MMC has improved perceived quality over that in the Lancer.

The dash areas closest to occupants are now padded with soft touch plastics, as are the door caps. The multi-info display is colourful and high res, a big improvement over the jagged figures in the Lancer. Also, the instantaneous FC bar also has a “bookmark” for the average done so far, so there’s extra motivation to be light-footed, if that’s your direction.

The head unit is the usual locally-fitted (by MMM) Kenwood system, which isn’t the most user friendly, but it’s feature-packed (reverse camera, DVD player, large full colour touch-screen, etc) and looks impressive, so no complaints.

Last but not least, the Hyundai Tucson. Just like the bold shell, Hyundai has gone for showcar dashboard design that matches the exterior bravado. Lots of sweeping curves and elements means your eyes are in for a workout. There’s this theme of two opposing kinks in the overall dash mould, the centre stack as well as the steering wheel. As with modern Hyundais, the theme is blue. I can understand the modern, techy appeal of the Tucson’s dash, but personally I prefer something more subtle and refined.

Plenty of adjustment available in the Tucson, so driving positions for various sizes shouldn’t be a problem. Outward visibility is not great in this group, a high waistline and shallow windows see to that. Off the shoulder rear view is also poor, but with such a design, you can’t win it all. The showroom appeal and many toys (keyless entry, push button start, integrated stereo with USB, iPod and AUX input) might delay the dreaded knuckle rap, which reveals hard plastics. They don’t feel super nasty or cheap though, and is not an issue to many.

It’s also good that our 2.0 High Spec test car comes with a panoramic glass roof (split into two, like the W211 Merc E-Class, Sonata YF), since the cabin feels rather enveloping and dark in this company.

In terms of design, in and out, the Tucson is everything the X-Trail isn’t, vice versa. One is unapologetically utilitarian and functional, the other designed to wow and impress. I want some from both ends, and like the CR-V’s blend of good comfort and space, plus premium feel dashboard.

Harvinder says

The cabin is one of the most important things one should consider when buying a car, and unfortunately many potential buyers or owners out there spend less time thinking about a car’s interior before making the decision. It is a place where the driver and his passengers will spend most of the time throughout the ownership experience.

Before I continue with my bit on the interior, I must point out that out of all the SUVs we have here, three are Japanese, one is Korean while another is French. Now, I don’t think I need to emphasize that when it comes interior, the European guys have been doing it well and the Asian rivals, although some are pretty good, are still playing catch up in this department.

To me, I feel that is is true in this case at least. The Peugeot 3008 to me, has the best interior when it comes to tactility and comfort for the driver. As soon as you get into the driver’s seat, you’ll instantly tell yourself that “this is not a driver’s seat, this is a cockpit”. The driver’s section is truly like a jet-fighter’s cockpit with the centre dash somewhat focused towards the driver.

Even the switches and knobs make you imagine you are in a car with wings. The tactility of the interior is pretty good as well, with soft-touch materials in the right places. Personally, I take seat comfort seriously and it is important to have something that is able to support your back properly. It pays when you have those long distance drives and to me, the seat also plays a role to making you feel that you are in a premium vehicle.

The French have got it right with the 3008. The front seats are very comfortable and they offer the best support among all SUVs we have here. I particularly like the headrest design, which reminds me of the ones used in the W211 Mercedes-Benz E-Class. You can tilt it forward to better support your lower neck.

Other features like the glass roof, the rear two-piece tail gate, dual zone air-conditioning and electric parking brake is a nice touch too, but I do agree with Danny on the part HUD portion which is a bit tricky to use. The major downside of the 3008’s interior is that the rear legroom is a little on the tighter side of things. It’s not a very comfortable place for large-sized occupants. Also, it would be great to have a fully-electric front seat, at least for the driver.

The Nissan X-Trail is not a bad place to be in either. It does look a bit utilitarian on the inside, with a rather simple feel to things, but it is quite comfortable and the space, including the rear cabin, is pretty good too.

If you’re okay with the simplistic approach, the X-Trail’s interior can be a nice place for you to be in. There are plenty of compartments, including a double luggage floor system, as well as a 6-way adjustable power seat for the driver, which interestingly is not offered with rest of the SUVs we have here.

The Honda CR-V also has a decent interior and for some reason, it does feel a little premium despite not having many soft-touch surfaces. Honda seems to be good in doing this, even with less expensive cars like the entry level City.

To me, the most striking thing about the CR-V’s interior is its rear legroom, which is very good. You’d be a very happy rear passenger; it’s reminiscent of the Civic, which also offers good legroom space. Just like the X-Trail, storage compartments are very much adequate in the Honda. There are also features like dual zone air-conditioning and cruise control, similar to the 3008.

Just like the exterior, the interior of the Hyundai Tucson also has carries over the flowing design. It looks pretty good if you ask me, but there is a let down though. The interior does not feel premium and it is even outperformed by the X-Trail, if you ask me. There are hard plastics everywhere and even for a car that has done over 30,000 kilometers, the interior felt worn a little, which isn’t a good thing.

Don’t get me wrong, the design is nice, but you have to wonder if it’ll last the distance. Things like the start-stop button are nice to have, but it does little to overshadow the flaws. The ASX has a decent interior which doesn’t look cluttered and at the same time, it doesn’t look cheap as well.

The seating position for the driver is just about right, making it a better option for those who like a sporty feel behind the wheel. I find that the full colour high-resolution LCD multi-information display nestled in between the instrument gauges quite a cool feature to have, thanks to a fuel consumption monitor that incorporates both instantaneous as well as average readings. The rear cabin could have used a little more legroom though.

Overall, I find that the Peugeot 3008 has the best interior; I can make do with the smaller rear cabin, although I really feel that an electric driver’s seat should have been included.

Anthony says

From an interior perspective, the differences in character continue to show. With practically most of the time being spent in the driver’s seat during the comparo, there was little time to delve in detail the sub-practicalities of things such as boot space and rear seat comfort levels, save for the CR-V, which I’m, erm, rather intimate with.

First up, the Tucson, which lends its allure through more sweeping contours on the inside, as well as with a host of tech bling – there’s stop-start button ignition and an auto dimming rear view central mirror, for starters. These mask the lack of items such as cruise control and going the manual air-conditioning route.

If there’s a gripe with the Tucson’s interior, it’s with the presentation – no complaints about how the layout is presented, but the design elan notwithstanding, the hard-looking plastics cheapen the visual appeal considerably. There are also questions about material durability. The interior of the evaluator, with more than 30k on the clock, looked a bit worse for wear. For example, the engine stop-start button’s wording was already looking quite worn, hence the questions.

Still, there’s much more fanfare in it than on the likes of the X-Trail and ASX, which both feature rather austere cabins. The ASX, with its blackened interior, feels the more spartan of the two, and is reminiscent of the Lancer sedan’s bare approach. It’s more premium in feel though than the Lancer material-wise, so points for this.

The ASX also doesn’t feel as small as you think it would be. The cabin is intimate, but not claustrophobic, even if larger-sized drivers in the Mitsubishi look like they’re driving a Hyundai Getz (not my words). The driving enthusiast will find much to like in this one, with everything presented in line with the vehicle’s sporty pretensions, as will those who like their porridge plain.

Meanwhile, the X-Trail offers very much the same path, presenting a cabin that looks plain bare upon first glance. The plastics are typically Nissan, serviceable but not the final word in premium. This plainness is offset by plenty of practical features – cubby holes and storage space are to be found galore, and items such as rear air-con vents, for example, add to the list. And that volume suggested from the outside is translated when you’re in the vehicle. It feels downright spacious, the X-Trail does.

A note too about its seat comfort, which is the softest in terms of comfort of all the five vehicles; it is a little bit too soft for my liking, especially over long distances, but many will no doubt value its plushness. The Peugeot’s front seat, however, is the standout for me.

The Peugeot’s cabin also features the best material and trim, clean and unfettered, but all hewn together in solid fashion and very elegant in its presentation. Cabin space, however, feels pinched, and if you have tall occupants in front, it’s bad news for those in the rear, where legroom is concerned.

And the 3008 still feels lacking in open and accessible storage space, as previously noted when I drove it during its original media test drive a good while back – attempts to house wallet, phone, keys and cigarettes without having to call in the large storage box were as challenging as before. I still think there’s a photon torpedo launcher housed underneath that huge-assed centre console tunnel, but the firing button is proving rather elusive to find.

So, of the lot, my pick is with the CR-V’s interior. It’s easy to forget how well Honda gets it right where it matters – aside from the excellent rear legroom, the cabin presentation has a premium feel to it, even if there’s not much bling and fanfare in terms of tech and features.

The plastics may be hard, but they don’t look cheap, and the centre console layout, along with the instrument cluster – especially lit up at night – is fetching. It’s not quite Pug territory, but it’s well ahead of the rest of the group. Storage in the CR-V’s front is more than adequate, though there are quirks elsewhere, like where the 12V socket is placed, which is set too low and difficult to access, especially in the dark.

Still, throw in items such as cruise control and auto climate control as well as the small, almost imperceptible tactile bits (the feel of the switchgear operation is a perfect example) and you can see exactly how the Honda scores where it counts.

PERFORMANCE

Danny says

Although it’s no sports car, the Peugeot is the sports car of the group. It’s the only Continental on call here, and preaches Europe’s downsizing philosophy – direct injection, smaller capacity, forced induction. The 156 hp it makes is no big deal in our 2.0L SUV party, but it’s the turbo engine’s 240 Nm from a mere 1,400 rpm that makes all the difference here.

This gives the 3008 useful punch away from standstill, and good flexibility. Although the pace is subdued a little from the 308 Turbo, which it shares its drivetrain with, possibly due to the extra weight, it should be more than enough go for those shopping in this segment. The official 0-100 km/h time is 9.5 seconds – it practice, the 3008 feels faster than that. As usual, it’s smooth revving and quite linear in delivery.

We must also mention the six-speed automatic gearbox, which is a quantum leap over the “Porsche Tiptronic” four-speeder of old. It’s still not the fastest or snappiest torque converter auto around, but it no longer has a mind of its own, and is competent enough to not annoy.

The “sports car of the group” rep isn’t just from the pace, though. The 3008 feels quite agile and pointy in the bends, and the way the car resists body roll is impressive. This flat stance encourages one to push harder, since there’s no clumsy weight transfer to put you off. No, it doesn’t claw into corners like a hot hatch, but one can at least make the most of what he has in the Peugeot with ease. Sacrifices? Ride comfort is not the best, others soak up bumps better.

If there’s an element from the other SUVs I would want in the Peugeot’s drive, it’s the ASX’s steering. Direct and blessed with good feel, the Mitsu’s helm is as “sporty” as the wheel itself looks. The ASX is also good to drive, but one downside is the lack of cruising refinement. There’s a good deal of road/tyre roar seeping into the cabin. I wonder if a tyre swap would help…

The ASX carries over the Lancer’s 4B11 engine and CVT gearbox. I’m not a fan of CVT, but the transmission works well, and there’s always the manual mode when the mood arises, although it still doesn’t feel 100% natural in those six virtual ratios.

For non-fans, the company in the best position to persuade is Nissan. Their Xtronic CVT works like a charm in the Sylphy and the X-Trail we have here. It’s the CVT, as advertised. Mostly smooth and cohesive like the best torque converter autos (except pedal to metal from rest, perhaps), I never once used the manual mode because I couldn’t have done it better. There’s real connection between the speedo and tacho needle, and the drivetrain feels almost resistance-free as you pull away.

Stats that read 139 PS and 198 Nm look below par on paper, but the X-Trail’s smooth flowing style meant that I didn’t crave for more go. The only time it felt lacking was when we were searching for top speed way above the speed limit – a lot of effort was needed to get past the 130-140 km/h zone.

That easygoing drivetrain is part of a similarly likeable package. The X-Trail’s ride comfort is best of the lot for me, soaking up bumps like they were never there and staying rock steady on the highway. We get our supply from Indonesia, so perhaps it’s the local tuning to suit the harsh roads there at work? Whatever it is, our roads aren’t great either, so it’s all good.

All these fit well with a tall ride height with cushy seats and good all round visibility, making the X-Trail a great urban machine and a soothing long distance one.

The Honda CR-V would have also been a good highway cruiser, if not for its hyper sensitive steering. It’s good for the most part, but I found myself feeding constant small inputs to keep it on course during highway drives. It’s not a major or safety issue, but it meant that I wasn’t fully relaxed, and my hands got tired after awhile.

Other than that, the popular segment leader is typically Honda. The engine revs happily with a familiar mechanical buzz, and is quite nice to work on, although more grunt would have been very welcome here. The five-speed auto is as precise and quick as ever. The CR-V’s well judged ride is firm, but never crashy or noisy.

Which leaves the Tucson. I truly admire Hyundai’s brave new direction with its latest products, which has dramatically increased desirabilty. Their cars are now technically on par with class leaders, if not better, and there are plenty of toys to maximise showroom appeal. For me though, the most effective weapon in their new arsenal is design, capturing the imagination of many who previously overlooked Korean wheels. Perfect cars then?

Not yet. Technically, all’s good, but the Tucson (and Sonata) aren’t class leaders in subjective matters. For instance, while the 2.0 Theta II engine’s 166 PS and 197 Nm sound impressive and provide decent go, the engine isn’t the smoothest revving four-pot around, and is quite resonant in the third half of the rev range. The six-speed gearbox, while competent, isn’t as intuitive as the Honda’s, for instance.

There’s not a lot of mechanical grip either – I’ve seen the ESP light come on in corners where I didn’t expect any help. And steering, a very subjective thing, is something that Hyundai-Kia has yet to master.

But these finer points are invisible to the majority of buyers, so we don’t blame Hyundai for not putting “driving pleasure” and “finesse” as top priority. If I were them, my resources would have went into the exact same areas: on paper spec, equipment to wow and bold design.

Strangely, I ended up preferring the X-Trail in this segment, although the Peugeot’s pace and Mitsu’s steering are on the wish list. For me, SUVs are family cars, and the Nissan’s ride comfort, ease of use and silky drivetrain is the best combo here. Looking in the rear view mirror, my family agrees too!

Harvinder says

Now to the part I love the most. Let us start off with the CR-V. It comes with a 2.0 litre i-VTEC that makes 148 hp and 190 Nm of torque from 4,200 rpm. The numbers are anything but impressive, and unfortunately with 1,540 kg to haul it feels as if the CR-V can do with a more powerful engine.

Acceleration does feel heavy but once you’ve reached a set cruising speed, the power issues fades away, until you slam the accelerator to overtake the car in front of you, that is. The shifting of its five-speed automatic is decent enough and the electric power steering feels a little heavy at times, but it’s not really an issue to me.

Its ride comfort is good, with no irritating bumpiness whatsoever. In terms of handling, I find the CR-V performance at an average level. The X-Trail’s MR20DE twin-cam engine has less power than the CR-V, at 137 hp, though torque is slightly higher, 198 Nm to be exact, from 4,400 rpm. It does pull away slightly better than the CR-V, and it uses Nissan’s Xtronic CVT transmission, with a six-speed manual mode.

To be honest. I am not a fan of the CVTs – I find the sound that the engine makes because of it being rather irritating. However, the Xtronic isn’t that bad and it works smoothly, or fluidly, to use another term. Acceleration is effortless; however, it does take a while for it to achieve higher speed. In terms of ride comfort, the X-Trail does well in absorbing bumps and irregularities. At the same time it is also firm enough for high speed travel. The Nissan boys have got it right with this one.

The Hyundai Tucson’s Theta II 2.0 litre engine is quite powerful on paper, with 164 hp and 197 Nm of torque at 4,600 rpm, and carries over the power into actual driving. It does however tend to sound a little rough when you rev it hard. The power unit is paired with a six-speed slush box, which does its job well enough, although it could use a little more refinement.

This applies to the drivability of the Tucson as well. It handles good enough for normal day-to-day driving and its un-refinement is easily hidden if you don’t push the car hard. Even so, you can actually toss the Tucson around corners, though it would definitely benefit from a more refined handling and a steering with a better feel. In terms of ride quality, this Korean seems to be a bit stiff, a little bumpier on the rough roads.

The Mitsubishi ASX is one car that seems to excel in the handling department. This is one SUV or crossover or what ever you fancy that handles like a car. Agile and nimble would be the right word to describe the ASX. It is no Megane RS, but among its rivals in this shootout, it is right at the top.

You can practically chuck it around bends and it won’t bite back, as long as you don’t go overboard. The chassis seems to communicate with you well through the steering wheel, which also offers a good feel. In terms of power, it is decent with its 2.0 litre DOHC MIVEC putting out 148 hp , identical to the CR-V, and 197 Nm of torque at 2,400 rpm.

Although quite similar in terms of power figures, you do feel more punch in the ASX. This also joins the X- Trail in offering a CVT unit with six-speed manual mode.

Finally we have the Peugeot 3008, which doesn’t really give us an apple to apple comparison in terms of engine type when put against the other four SUVs we have here. There are two major differences. First up is the fact that the engine is a 1.6 litre, instead of a 2.0 litre with the rest. Secondly, it is force-inducted. It is basically the same engine as the MINI, the rather famous 1.6 litre Prince unit.

It makes 156 hp and most importantly, 240 Nm of torque from as low as 1,400 rpm. The higher torque at lower revs proves to be very instrumental in zipping around traffic. Overall, you can safely say that 3008 is the most powerful of the lot, all thanks to the turbo, so no issues at all with acceleration and getting fast quickly. The Pug uses a good old six-speed transmission, which works without a fuss.

The ride comfort is pretty good, with high levels of comfort too. In terms of handling, you can take some pretty serious corners with it, but I still prefer the ASX. Something about the latter’s character makes the whole driving experience sportier. Overall, my pick would be the ASX in regards to overall performance from the SUVs we have here.

Anthony says

Ambling along the highway isn’t how one should define which of the lot to be the best, but the time spent plying the route did reveal a fair bit about each vehicle’s character; there was some hard driving done briefly on each later, which revealed yet more, but given that 99% of these SUVs owners aren’t likely to subject their rides to such, most of the basis – for me at least – was from that gleaned waltzing along.

The Tucson was my first ride out, and as before, when I drove it at point of launch, the 2.0 litre Theta II mill proved willing to get things moving. It feels perky from the get-go, buoyant in its character; conversely, it feels that bit less refined when pushed, and can be a bit zingy at the top end. As a cruiser the Tucson does well enough, though there is a fair amount of road noise, and the steering needs a bit of corrective input in terms of straight-line retention, but the light, easy feel of the rack makes it simple on the shoulders.

The plastics notwithstanding, the itemisation of the layout and switchgear operation in the Hyundai is pretty much fuss-free. One minus is the lack of reach adjustment for the steering, something that is also an oversight on the X-Trail and ASX. Seat comfort is decent, though not group-leading.

As a driver’s car, or crossover, if you prefer, the ASX is by far the leader of the assembled five-pack. The level of steering feel and communication is by far the highest of the lot, as is the vehicle’s response to dramatic changing load/direction. Agile, in a flamboyant manner, the main reason why you’d want one is because you love to drive, with everything else secondary.

Meanwhile, the 3008 drove well, and the turbocharged Prince 1.6 mill chugged along with the least amount of strain of all the engines throughout the drive. It felt like it was consuming the most fuel, based on the onboard readout, but this proved to be deceptive (see fuel consumption section below). In-cabin comfort is high, and the plushness of the interior, despite that pinched feeling, makes doing the miles all that bit easier.

Still, its size means that it is at a slight disadvantage compared to the rest of the crowd here, the ASX notwithstanding. I still don’t think it’s a SUV, which it was tagged when it was launched. A good compact-ish crossover for the young urban family, yes. Super utility people mover, er, no. Drives well though, so it gets brownie points here.

From an interior perspective, the Nissan simply overwhelms the rest. The rather-too-soft driver seat aside, everything about the X-Trail screams functionality. It isn’t the fastest, nor the most agile, nor does it have the sense of presence or grandeur. But there’s acres of space in that cavernous cabin, and something about it works, at least to me – I found myself liking it more with every passing mile.

Easy to drive, there’s nothing imposing in its character; it’s vanilla, really – you get in, turn the key and get to your intended destination without fuss, fanfare or any sort of emotion, for that matter. All that functionality, dished out in a completely neutral manner. It isn’t as bad as it sounds, actually.

Finally, we come to the CR-V. I spent the least amount of time in it during the test session, but driving it regularly keeps reminding me why so many view it as the de facto choice in this market when it comes to putting their money on the table for a mid-price, mid-size SUV.

Yes, the 2.0 litre block can feel slightly underpowered at the lower end pushing that mass (it felt the laziest of the lot in start-offs). The steering is also on the heavier side of things, and needs quite a bit of corrective input during highway driving.

But in every other sense, the Honda gets it right. From the tactility of the switchgear operation (which makes all the others, save the 3008, feel cheap) to the interior presentation levels, the CR-V feels good to the touch and sight. It is agile enough when asked, and balanced would best describe its overall level of driving engagement. In all, it feels well thought out, the type of product that you know a copious amount of time has been spent refining all the key points. In this regard, it’s an absolute toss-up between the neutral functionality of the X-Trail and the refined, cultured presentation of the CR-V.

FUEL CONSUMPTION

During the group test drive, we travelled 412 km from the Klang Valley to Ipoh, and back. It included stop and go traffic, town driving and, of course, highway cruising along the PLUS Expressway.

The route we selected allowed us to test the cars in various road conditions where we spent quite a bit of our time on the highway. During the test drive we also carried out a fuel test for all the SUVs involved, with measures employed to ensure accuracy such as adhering to the 110 km/h national speed limit, keeping a safe distance between the cars, ensuring that all cars are driven by all test drivers (to make sure all SUVs get a consistent driving pattern overall) and so on.

Here are the final results:

Peugeot 3008 (1.6 litre Turbo) – 7.37 litres / 100 km
Mitsubishi ASX (2.0 litre NA) – 7.5 litres / 100 km
Honda CR-V (2.0 litre NA) – 8.3 litres / 100 km
Nissan X-Trail (2.0 litre NA) – 8.6 litres / 100 km
Hyundai Tucson (2.0 litre NA) – 8.7 litres / 100 km

The 3008 took the top honours, with the ASX following closely behind. These were the only two which breached the 8.0 litre per 100 km mark following the test, and the 3008’s lower displacement (and turbocharger) 1.6 liter engine likely has contributed to its number one spot here.

It’s also interesting to note that the ASX, which uses a normally-aspirated 2.0 litre engine, achieved 7.5 litres per 100 km, just 0.13 litres behind the 3008, which makes it the most fuel efficient vehicle among its 2.0 litre competitors and it is also very comparable to the Pug.

We reckon that the ASX achieved almost similar numbers due to its engine tune, its MIVEC (or Mitsubishi Innovative Valve timing Electronic Control system) calibration and of course its transmission tune. The engine also utilises a lightweight aluminium block which helps the ASX achieve positive such results. We must also take the vehicle kerb weight into account. It appears that the ASX is lighter than the 3008, with a kerb weight of 1,375 kg. Its French rival is 1,450 kg in comparison.

CONCLUSION

Danny says

Big or small, boxy or curvy, there’s an SUV for every one. No lemons here, just entries that excel in various areas. At the end of the day, it depends on what you want out of an SUV, whether as a great family wagon (Nissan fits the bill, Peugeot is out), a personal urban mobile (Peugeot and Mitsu are compact enough and drive well) or great value and bold design (Hyundai).

I love to drive, but I also view the SUV as a family car, which means that practicality and comfort are high in the list. The Honda CR-V is a good all-rounder, but I like the honest, self-confident X-Trail. The Nissan is comfortable in its own skin, and will make you feel as comfortable, too. As for those itchy moments, I’ll buy a cheap fun car.

Harvinder says

Overall, there’s no obvious winner here – all the SUVs here definitely pass the minimum requirement, so it’s a matter of personal choice. You should also look at other factors such as safety features and pricing. The 3008 comes with a 5-star Euro NCAP rating which is made up by 6-airbags, ESP and ISOFIX points, among others. It retails for RM146,888 (all prices here are OTR including insurance).

The Tucson on the other hand has two airbags and ESP and it retails at RM139,888 for the 2.0 litre High Spec. The ASX is also fitted with dual airbags and ESP (or ASC, as Mitsubishi calls it). Also in the list is Hill Start Assist. The ASX goes for RM139,980, which is similar to the Tucson. The CR-V comes with four airbags and ESP (or VSA) and it goes for RM149,980.

Finally, the X-Trail, which goes for RM149,500; it comes with, yes, you guessed it right, dual airbags but without ESP, which is interesting to note. It only has ABS with EBD and BA. That’s a bit of a downside, given a price tag that’s a shade off being the most expensive of the lot. To me, the fight would go down between the Mitsubishi ASX and the Peugeot 3008, if I were shopping for an SUV.

Anthony says

There wasn’t a runaway pick of the heap, not where I’m concerned; it’s nice to see how close things have gotten in the segment that there wasn’t one dominant player. The ASX is my weapon of choice from a driving perspective – the CVT aside, it is engaging, to say the least. But that’s never the only reason why one buys a vehicle in this segment. and its size means that those shopping for a full-fledged SUV may find this crossover too small for their needs.

The same goes for the 3008. Pluses are a highly refined interior and tractable, crowd-pleasing mill, but its lack of heft may preclude it as a straight choice to most. Its appeal lies with those who find the allure of a Continental offering winsome, and provides those seeking an alternative to the predominantly Japanese/Korean crowd a perfect option. A small family (quite literally, for rear occupants!) is also a prerequisite.

The Tucson shows how much the Koreans have closed the gap, but still, haven’t quite gotten the cigar – there are key areas in which its lack of absolute refinement shows it up (it’d have been very interesting pitting the plusher Sportage cousin into the mix against the Japanese competition). Still, the external shape is light years ahead of the previous one, and its main point is that it now offers a serious contender as an alternative if you don’t want to go with a Jap offering, and think a Pug is too much work.

In the end, from the assembled crew, I’d take my pick from the X-Trail and CR-V. I didn’t expect the X-Trail to figure as highly as it did – looks truly can be deceiving. I liked its honesty; it doesn’t paint anything more into the picture than it should, and it goes about everything in such clean, unfettered fashion there is much to like about it and its character.

As for the CR-V, well, its strength is in its overall presentation and coherency – here, it never led in any particular aspect, but scored high and kept pace with its overall level of refinement and, most importantly, its consistency in delivery across the board. A large number of buyers have likely found that very essence – and composition – appealing, given the numbers shifted through the years. With this household being one of these, I’m not inclined to disagree with the collective, that plying the safe, consistent route is not such a bad thing. The tick goes in this box for me then in this particular five-way.

Look after the jump for mega photo galleries of all 5 contenders.
[Read more...]

104 Comments      

DRIVEN: Lamborghini Aventador LP700-4 in Sepang

December 15, 2011 at 12:24 am By Danny Tan Filed Under Cars, Feature Stories, Lamborghini, Test Drive Reviews

You’re looking at a future classic, the latest generation of a legendary lineage that counts the Countach, Diablo and Murcielago as ancestors. The latest V12 powered big Lamborghini with epic noise and scissor doors. Meet the Lamborghini Aventador LP700-4.

Sant’Agata’s latest flagship made its debut at this year’s Geneva show, and they have already collected over 1,500 orders, with a waiting list of 18 months!

Those with the ability to write a RM2.9 million cheque (that’s the estimated price of the Aventador in Malaysia) are not accustomed to waiting, but for this hot one, they will have to. We’ve also heard that Lambo won’t be making many of these…

Continue reading after the jump.
[Read more...]

51 Comments      

Thai Motor Expo: Subaru XV unveiled, and we sample it!

December 11, 2011 at 3:36 pm By Danny Tan Filed Under Cars, Local News, Subaru, Test Drive Reviews

We have returned from the Thailand International Motor Expo 2011, where Motor Image (MI), the Subaru distributor for our region and beyond, unveiled the Subaru XV at its stand.

This XV in question is made in Japan and will go to MI marktes such as Singapore, Taiwan and Hong Kong. Malaysia? We have a locally assembled XV to look forward to, scheduled for an October 2012 release.

If you remember, back in July this website broke the news of Subaru’s CKD plans for ASEAN, with Malaysia as the hub. We followed up by revealing the XV as the model to be locally assembled at Tan Chong Motor Assemblies in Segambut, KL. Extra details came in our exclusive interview with Motor Image boss Glenn Tan, where he revealed more about the ASEAN bound XV as well as MI’s big plans for Malaysia. Click here to read the interview.

The XV is powered by a 2.0-litre four-cylinder horizontally-opposed Boxer engine, which is Subaru’s trademark layout. This engine, tuned for good low to mid end torque, is a new unit featuring Dual Active Valve Control System (DAVCS), 150 PS and 196 Nm.

Another USP of the brand is Symmetrical AWD, and the XV feeds drive permanently to all four wheels. The sole transmission choice is a Lineartronic CVT with manual selection. Brakes are discs all round, with the fronts ventilated. The XV’s suspension consists of front MacPherson struts and rear double wishbones.

While the XV’s shape looks similar to the Impreza hatchback’s at a glance, its front and rear styling is unique. It measures 4,450 mm long and had a 2,635 mm wheelbase, figures that are 35 mm and 15 mm longer than the Impreza hatch, respectively. The concept of the XV is not new, but this time, Subaru has dropped the “Impreza” name from the model, like how the Outback doesn’t wear the Legacy name.

We were given a preview of the XV at Motor Image Thailand’s modern Khlongkum hub, modeled after the all-in-one Toa Payoh Subaru hub in Singapore.

The drive wasn’t much to write home about, consisting of only a straight and a slalom run in the centre’s compound, but it did reveal good response and pick up, while exhibiting less body roll and weight shift than I imagined, considering the raised stance. The driver’s seat feels right for me – it goes low enough and the steering adjusts for rake, too.

The XV should prove to be a pleasant drive, but one will first need to remove any image, idea and expectation of a loud turbo Subaru. Yes, those blue monsters wearing gold shoes that roam our streets :)

The pics I took are a good preview of our CKD model, but some details are to be ignored. The point of local assembly is to lower the price, so it makes sense to stay away from the unnecessary luxuries. The sunroof you see here won’t be present, as with the full colour display above the centre stack and HIDs.

The factory stereo is likely to be replaced by a 2-DIN touch screen unit (with possible options for reverse camera/GPS) linked to the original steering audio switches. The shift paddles for the CVT will be present.


Fancy display won’t be in CKD car, but a touch screen 2-DIN HU with GPS/reverse cam might

Exterior wise, this is pretty much it, including the 225/55 R17 wheel size and the distinctive design of the alloys. The XV’s identity hinges on the tough off-roader looks, so the black body cladding and roof rails are highlights of this C-segment crossover. Tangerine Orange Pearl, as seen here, is the car’s signature colour, but less flashy hues will of course be available. I’m sure there will be requests for WR Blue!

Price wise, MI isn’t committing a figure yet, but promised that the XV will be priced competitively with C-segment SUV rivals. A lot depends on the exchange rate, and the Ringgit isn’t exactly faring very well against the Yen, unfortunately.

47 Comments      

Megane RS 250 shines at exclusive Renault Sport trackday

November 17, 2011 at 4:53 pm By Danny Tan Filed Under Cars, Local News, Renault, Test Drive Reviews

Track days are a luxury for the car enthusiast, especially since there are no smaller (and cheaper) circuits around the Klang Valley, and our only hope is a Formula 1 circuit. A lucky bunch of people recently got to enjoy a track day – these folks are the owners of Renault Sport cars. The event was arranged and sponsored by distributor TC Euro Cars, a subsidiary of Tan Chong Motors.

“People who buy a RM230,000 car with a manual transmission mated to a 250 hp engine are definitely driving enthusiasts; it is with our customers in mind that we felt that what better place to enjoy the full capability of Renault Sport cars than on a Formula 1 track,” said TCEC’s GM, Reza Mutalib.

From what we heard, TCEC is also planning to have a number of exclusive track days in 2012 to further accommodate the growing RS family. We heard about this trackday from a contact who owns a Renault Sport, so we called up TCEC to see whether we could come along for the ride.

Over 60 people showed up at Sepang, the bulk of them owners of the Megane R26, Clio RS and Megane RS250. There were also some who had booked the hot Megane and waiting (im)patiently for their cars to arrive. These soon to be owners had a taste of what their future ride can do on track as they were given demo laps, and from their smiles and expression, not one regretted his decision!

I asked, and apparently the car has been sold out for months. New stocks that are expected to arrive by the end of the month are mostly booked, too. Not that I have the bank balance…

If you haven’t already gathered from our test drive report, we adore the Megane RS 250 for its superb performance (not just speed, but handling and flow) and comfort as a daily driver (unlike say, a Civic Type R). It also amazed me that Renault Sport managed to better the Megane R26 in about every aspect, and the old timer is a cracker, mind you.

Back to the track. Before I drove, I strapped myself in the passenger seat with Denis Lian, who is of course the pro who set the Sepang lap record for the Megane RS 250 at 2 mins 43 secs last year. Denis not only used every ounce of the car’s grip and brakes, but every inch of the track as well – and this is what separates racers from the regular enthusiast. After that we swapped seats for a chance for him to laugh at my skills.

He didn’t (because he’s nice, not because I’m good), but instead gave me pointers as we took on full laps of Sepang. My first full throttle of the day was at the exit of Turn 2 on to the right sweeper and straight before standing (literally) on the brakes for T4. Unlike the R26 and Golf GTI, the Megane RS doesn’t feel as fast as it really is, probably due to the much improved refinement.

But make no mistake, this car is very quick even if it doesn’t kick. We also recently found out that it actually makes much more than the stated 250 hp – click here to read.

Traction out of corners is superb in this LSD equipped car, as I discovered in T4, and one can confidently lean into the following S bends without the fear of Megane throwing you off the road. It will lose traction eventually, but the process is progressive, and you’re likely not to be caught unawares, unless one’s fully drowned in adrenalin, or just plain foolhardy.

Next up was a dab of the brakes before aiming for two apexes in a U. The Megane RS does allow for some degree of roll, which is not a bad thing, as long as it doesn’t get in the way of “work”. The way the suspension “breathes” on the road (as opposed to hopping around) was evident here as I clipped the raised kerbs, without my head hitting the roof or bum shifting in the Recaro.

The final corner before the back straight really brought out the reactive nature of the chassis. This is one FWD car that can dance and flow along, and not just rely solely on grip from the nose. The straights saw me reach about 190 km/h before starting to brake at the 100m mark.

Those four-pot Brembos with 340 mm slotted discs are incredible, to say the least, marrying strong bite and a nice easy to modulate natural feel. 100m isn’t much when one’s hitting 200 km/h, and I’m happy to report that I made the corner with room to spare.

By the way, the Megane RS 250 comes standard with the R.S. Monitor, which displays real-time data (stopwatch with memory function, acceleration timer, g-force meter, turbo pressure, oil temp, torque/power figures) plus the option of five throttle map settings.

Didn’t really have time to play with all that, but I left the g-force meter on, and as you can see, we pulled about 1.2g of lateral acceleration. We achieved the same on the road in our earlier test drive.

Amazing performance on track for a car that’s so usable on the road. With the car and now the track days, these Renault Sport owners have double happiness. As for me, I left the track one part happy, two parts envy!

24 Comments      

Chevrolet Colorado Test Drive Report from Chiang Rai

November 12, 2011 at 6:25 pm By Danny Tan Filed Under Cars, Chevrolet, Test Drive Reviews

There’s a new pick-up truck coming to town, and it’s the Chevrolet Colorado. The new Colorado was first previewed at the Bangkok Motor Show earlier this year in “Show Truck” guise, and had its world debut in September, appearing largely unchanged from the show car.

This will be General Motors’ first jab at the Malaysian pick-up truck market, but the previous gen Colorado has been selling for some time in Thailand now, where it’s made at the US company’s Rayong plant for local consumption and export.

We told you earlier that the Colorado will be launched by local distributor Naza Quest in December, but that’s been delayed due to the major floods that hit Thailand. The car hub of Rayong is dry, as are GM’s plant and adjacent new diesel engine facility, but various vendors haven’t been so lucky. No parts, no trucks!


Colorado Show Truck at the 2011 Bangkok Motor Show. Looks have been largely maintained

So it should be coming here next year, although no one knows exactly when in 2012. GM ASEAN boss Martin Apfel gives us examples of vendors with their entire factories submerged – some have send divers to retrieve GM moulds while others have had tools flown out by balloon! It’s clearly too early to tell when production be back running.

And bear in mind that this is for a company that’s relatively lightly hit by the disaster – when we were there late October to be the first international media group to test the Colorado in Chiang Rai, GM was one of only two companies still churning out cars in Thailand (the other is Mercedes) according to Apfel.

Continue reading the report after the jump.
[Read more...]

53 Comments      

Volkswagen Jetta 1.4 TSI – first drive impressions

November 4, 2011 at 5:28 pm By Anthony Lim Filed Under Cars, Test Drive Reviews, Volkswagen

Showing all your cards at one go is a bit of a double-edged sword. It’s undoubtedly great for effect, where the blanket covers significant acreage in one swipe, and it also allows one to understand the philosophy and underlying values at work in much more complete fashion.

It can also prove to be a distraction, not so much for the person sampling the wares, but rather in how each is perceived – there’s a distinct difference in taking each on an individual basis, as opposed to when they’re all lumped together. The danger, of course, is that it ends up showing each other up in some areas, even if the products in question don’t ply their wares in the same category and class.

Such was the case with the three vehicle spread that Volkswagen Group Malaysia launched a couple of weeks ago. The Passat 1.8 TSI, Jetta 1.4 TSI and Cross Touran 1.4 TSI are markedly dissimilar in tone, even if they do share common family traits in behaviour and characteristics. By the end of a two-day drive, however, there was much to be gleaned subjectively as there was objectively.

To improve clarity, we’ve decided to separate the first impressions of the trio into three individual pieces. Granted, there’ll still be observations on each vis-a-vis, especially with regards to the Jetta and Passat, but let’s see if we can dissect and take each on their own strengths and make it easier reading than together as a collective whole.

Full report after the jump.
[Read more...]

194 Comments      

Volkswagen Passat 1.8 TSI – first drive impressions

November 4, 2011 at 5:27 pm By Anthony Lim Filed Under Cars, Test Drive Reviews, Volkswagen

Next up in the three vehicle VW spread is the Passat, the changeover from the Jetta taking place in Ipoh. Jumping in from the latter, the shift in presentation with the seventh-generation B7, as its designated, was distinct.

The interior, as befits the car’s D-segment executive sedan status, is naturally the most polished of the three. The material and trim ups the luxury level a fair bit, with brushed aluminium inserts for the centre console and Iridium deco inserts on the dash and doors helping things along, but there’s no denying that it’s all accomplished in VW fashion, presented more matter of fact – and very cleanly so – than with flair and elan. Indeed, there’s nothing ostentatious about all that familiarity, which is undoubtedly in line with how the suits, which are the target market, like it.

Full story after the jump.
[Read more...]

68 Comments