Articles by Philip King

To that, add the local carmaker burning hard-to-get engineering dollars on projects that go nowhere. It's hard to believe now, but you don't have to rewind far to find Ford Australia in a very different place. Go back just eight years, to the start of 2004, and the company had a lot to look forward to. It's BA Falcon, after a year in the market, had turned around dismal demand for the ugly AU model and ended 2003 selling more than 73,000. It was taking share from the Holden Commodore and was even the best-selling car one month. That figure doesn't include all the different Falcons available then. As well as a ute, there were Fairlane and LTD long-wheelbase luxury models and a station wagon. And there was the new Territory SUV. Years before, the company decided it needed a second model to keep its factory busy and it made the right choice. The Territory arrived just as the SUV boom was taking off and the large car slide looked inevitable. In the first six months it sold more than 13,000 -- almost double the rate of today. Ford Australia finished 2004 delivering nearly 103,000 locally built cars -- more than three times what it expects to produce under the cuts announced yesterday. Profit reached $186m on record revenue of $4.1 billion. Unhappily, the Territory decision was the exception rather than the rule. Previously Ford had signed off on the design disaster that was AU and made a nightmare move into retailing that put its dealership network offside. And before long, it was stuffing up again. Short of development resources and subject to constraints from Detroit, it burnt its engineering dollars on programs that went nowhere. With emissions regulations looming, it decided to kill its ageing locally built six-cylinder engine and replace it with a modern V6. Two years later, after a lot of wasted effort, the decision was reversed. At the same time, it decided to add the Focus small car to its Melbourne factory. But it changed its mind about that, too. Every reversal had a cost. The Territory was allowed to get too long in the tooth before an overhaul while a diesel engine plan that would have kept it going when fuel costs soared was on, then off, then on again. Instead, it fitted a turbo petrol engine at just the wrong time. As Broadmeadows fiddled, the Falcon burned. There was no money left to keep its variants going and as they got older, demand fell away. The luxury models were canned; so was the wagon. A new LPG engine took too long to develop, robbing Falcon of 30 per cent of its sales for 18 months. The V8 was deleted and not replaced. At every turn, the taxpayer has helped foot the bill. The latest injection towards a $103 million facelift of the Falcon in two years keeps the car on life support until it and the Territory are due to depart in 2016. It stops Ford pulling out before that, as commonsense and good management would suggest it should. But 2016 now looks a very long way off. Even further than 2004.  

Whenever I see a Porsche 911 Cabriolet, it's like visiting a stunning house and finding the carpet is purple shag pile. You can't help thinking, “Why did you do that? You were making all the right moves then veered off into weirdness.'' Perhaps it's about communing with nature, wind in your hair?VALUEPorsche's new 911 Carrera Coupes and Cabriolets have been on sale since late last year, although the cars available to sample so far have all been Carrera S Coupes with a 294kW 3.8-litre engine. The Cabriolet starts at $255,100 for the manual version and $294,250 for the S automatic plus on-road costs. The price premium is considerable too, at $25,000.Strange, that convertible makers go to so much trouble, with wind-deflectors and other devices, to keep the flurries out. Most convertibles have heated seats, for a price, and some even offer neck-level warm-air blowers. Without them, you couldn't drive with the roof down in cold weather, and so you wouldn't do it all, because it's impossible when the Australian sun's shining.TECHNOLOGYThis time the entire range was lined up, including a Coupe and Cabriolet with the new 3.4-litre entry-level engine. This is a version of the previous 3.6-litre unit with a shorter stroke. Like the 3.8, it adopts a suite of fuel-saving strategies, such as clever thermal management and an idle-stop system. As a result, fuel consumption is down by at least 12 per cent, with every car in the range below 10 litres per 100km.As with the 3.8, maximum outputs in the 3.4 are reached higher in the rev range compared with the engine it replaces. Peak power arrives 900rpm higher, at 7400rpm, while peak torque is achieved with an extra 1200rpm, at 5600rpm. However, neither engine has lost its driveability, with the same low-rev torque available from just off idle. In the 3.4, that means around 300Nm from get-go. It's a flexible as ever.The Coupe and Cabriolet share engineering, with the same transmission options of Porsche's seven-speed manual or dual-clutch automatic, increased wheelbase and focus on shedding weight through greater use of aluminium.DESIGNThe Cabriolet is on average more than 50kg lighter than its predecessor and 18 per cent more rigid, with a redesigned rollover protection system behind the cabin helping to add stiffness to the body. Nevertheless, the Cabriolet is unavoidably heavier than the equivalent Coupe by a substantial 85kg.Its key advance this time is a redesigned folding roof. It uses magnesium panels to smooth its contours and the result is a cabin silhouette that can match the coupe to the millimetre, Porsche says. The flush-fitting glass window helps to make it impressively smooth, without the obvious framework that usually spoils the outline of a fabric roof. Invaluably, it can be operated on the move up to 50km/h, opening or closing in just 13 seconds.The Cabrio also feels tightly put together and very solid for an open-roof car. The roof stashes neatly behind the cabin and over the rear axle, and there's no sense of panels shifting slightly that you get with some solid folding tops. So if you are going to buy a convertible, here's one that sits at the top of the class.But there's no avoiding the compromises. The Cabrio cannot be as rigid as the Coupe and the extra weight cannot be wished away. The killer compromise for me, though, is that despite its cleverness the roof needs a raised “hump'' behind the cabin to fold into. This spoils the shape. Your bum really does look big in this.DRIVINGThe convertible is two-tenths slower than the hard-top for any given engine-transmission combination. All of which makes the Coupe a no-brainer for two-thirds of Australian buyers, while the rest will find the lure of the Cabriolet harder to resist than ever. As usual, Porsche has tried to minimise the disadvantages of the Cabrio and make it as close to the Coupe as possible.The 3.4 isn't as quick as the 3.8, but you don't feel short-changed. The slowest Cabriolet 3.4 manual can reach 100km/h in 5.0 seconds and the quickest, the Cabriolet S automatic with launch control, in 4.3s. Sounds terrific, too.From the inside, roof up, the magnesium shell makes it seem almost as solid as a normal roof. It represents an effective compromise between traditional fabric and the folding hardtops favoured by some premium makers. It works with a single button-press and an adjacent switch raises the new wind deflector. On the track, roof down, it proved remarkably effective at keeping the wind out even on the straight, with speeds well in excess of 200km/h.Why get the convertible when there's a perfectly good version with a roof? The coupe is quicker, handles better and has the classic shape. The Cabriolet spoils everything. It's heavier, shakier and needs a humpback to pack the roof, spoiling the coupe's beautiful lines. So if it was my garage, there's no way I'd be tempted from the hardtop. But some will. They've already measured up the den for 1970s retro rugs.VERDICTIt's a classy convertible, but a puzzling choice if you're after a 911.

Remember when Hoover meant vacuum cleaner and Kodak meant camera? They became synonymous with the product and it must have been hell if you were Acme Vacuums or Click-me Cameras.It's a bit like that with cars. Some epitomise their segment. Perhaps they were first, or best, or just most popular. Either way, they define the envelope that everyone else tries to push.Before the Range Rover came along, no one thought a living room could go bush. Now, luxury off-roaders are everywhere. Some are faster; some handle better. But the Rangie is ground zero for posh SUVs.The Porsche 911 wasn't the first sports car and there are certainly more rational designs. But it's endured a half century and has become the reference point for anything new. The same goes for Mercedes's full-size luxury sedan, the S-Class.When it comes to the single most popular type of luxury car, the junior executive sedan, it's BMW that wrote the rules. Since the 3 Series started in 1975, its combination of badge, practicality and handling has been the first rung on the premium ladder for millions of buyers. More than 12.5 million, in fact, and in many markets it has become a cliche of upward mobility.With an eye on that showroom revenue, almost every premium brand has produced a wannabe to arm-wrestle the 3 into submission. Then, when the critics are harsh and the sales don't come, there's a bruising retreat: ``No, we weren't really trying to out-3 the 3. We're happy with our (tiny) piece of the pie.'' Put your hands up, Jaguar, Alfa, Volvo and more.The only ones with half a chance are the other Germans. Audi, with the A4, has been getting closer and Mercedes, in this market at least, has been winning with the C-Class. Since the last model arrived almost five years ago with sharper prices and a younger mindset, it has outsold the 3 sedan.More surprising still, for five months last year the C outsold every mid-size car at any price, except the Toyota Camry. It finished the year third, behind the Ford Mondeo but ahead of the Mazda 6, Honda Accord Euro and Hyundai i45: cars that start $25k below. In seventh was the 3 Series and the A4 was 10th.It's not just that the traditional mid-size volume sellers are doing it tough. It was a similar result in 2010. Premium isn't exclusive any more. It's mainstream. Seven years after the E90, a new sixth-generation 3 Series, coded F30, has unbolted the kitchen sink to reclaim its title and give shoppers fewer reasons to go sub-premium.With the mainstream buyer in mind, the lack of rear seat space in the previous car has been addressed with a decisive move up in scale. The new 3 is more than 9cm longer than before as well as being wider and taller. There's more leg room in the rear, more headspace all round and the boot is bigger. The most affordable BMW that could unequivocally fit a family used to be a 5 Series, and that meant at least another $20k. Not any more.The range is better value, too. Premium brands would rather compete on equipment than headline prices, so the 3 begins at $56,400 with the 318d, which is pretty close to where it was before. That remains something of a budget model, with synthetic leather and 16-inch wheels. But the list of standard fittings is longer and includes split-fold rear seats, a large control screen and rear parking sensors.Step up $1200 to the 320i and there are power seats and gearshift paddles. Real leather begins at $66,900 in the 328i. The result is a more compressed range, with more standard kit in the lower models but less in the top spec 335i, which drops $16k.BMW has bundled together many of the cosmetic options into three style lines that change interior and exterior trim in harmony. There are some surprises here, such as a textured wood finish and coloured dials available in the modern line. Very un-Germanic, almost Scandinavian.As usual there's a new attention grabbing feature, too. In this case, a motion sensor beneath the rear bumper responds to a wave of the foot by opening the boot. Parents with babes in arms, pay attention.The higher dollar is one reason luxury brands have more scope to add features. Another is that many of their cars now fall below the luxury tax threshold thanks to more efficient engines. If economy is 7.0 litres per 100km or better, then the tax kicks in at $75,375 instead of $57,466. That can liberate thousands.The 318d and 320d diesels, with economy of 4.5l/100km, match the efficiency of many small cars including BMW's own 1 Series. And a Toyota Prius owner is saving less than a dollar every 100km. Emission rules are also responsible for BMW's decision to drop its naturally aspirated straight six-cylinder engine, which was a brand signature, in favour of a turbocharged four-cylinder. This 2.0-litre petrol unit achieves 6.0l/100km in the 320i and 6.3 in the 328i.The only six is the turbo in the 335i, a carry-over engine. But even here there's improvement, to 7.2l/100km from 8.7, thanks to the eight-speed automatic that is now standard across the range.Other fuel-saving strategies, such as idle-stop and brake energy regeneration, have been part of the luxury furniture for some time. Mainstream makers are still catching up.So there's more to the 3 in this generation in a full-throttle attempt to push this car to the head of the pack, in line with its reputation. It has a year or two of clear air before there's a completely new C-Class or A4. This car presses the reset button.Sooner or later, though, every Kodak has a smartphone to contend with. The 3 Series still accounts for one-third of all BMWs sold, but its share of the action is falling. And it's not really about the C-Class or the A4. The luxury segment is no more immune to the SUV trend than any other. In 2001, they were a blip on the luxury buyer's radar. Last year, they were 35 per cent of all luxury sales. Mr Hoover, your Dyson is ready.BMW 3 SERIES HISTORYE21 (1975-82): Debuts as a two door with four cylinders, ranging from a 73kW 1.6-litre in the 316 to a 93kW 2.0-litre in the 320i. Six cylinders appear in 1977. Production: 1.36mE30 (1982-90): Slightly bigger but weighing less, the E30 is the first to come with four doors (in 1983) and then as a wagon and convertible. M3 debuts in 1985 as a 149kW, 2.3-litre four cylinder. Production: 2.22mE36 (1990-98): Third generation appears first as a four-door and grows again. A compact adds to variants-eventually 31 of them-while engines gain variable timing on inlet valves. Production: 2.75mE46 1998-2005: Sedan is now 12cm longer than original two door. Range begins with a 88kW, 318i four-cylinder, while six-cylinders now have variable exhaust and inlet timing. Production: 3.14mE90 2005-11: Again bigger but no heavier, thanks to aluminium panels. Rear suspension is now a five-link design and all gearboxes are six speeds. Eight airbags and run-flat tyres standard. Production: c3.04mF30 2011: Grows again to be longer than original 5 Series. Four-cylinders replace all previous sixes (except in 335i), with turbocharging and an eight-speed gearbox on every model.

You’ve heard about car names with unfortunate meanings in other languages, and it's still amusing to recall that Holden sold a Nova, which means "Doesn't go'' in Spanish, and that Mitsubishi went in for self-abuse with the most notorious example of all: the Pajero.It's delightful to come across an outfit that has stared the double entendre in the face and refused to blink. Meet Polestar, a Swedish workshop that turns Volvos into race cars. Recently it has applied its spanners to production cars, and the first one available is the S60 Polestar.VALUEI was surprised by the price. The S60 T6 starts at $64,990 and with R-Design trim previously topped out at $72,990. Effectively, the Polestar is a chipped engine and fancy wheels for another 10 grand. Once you're up at that level, German six-cylinders are almost within reach.TECHNOLOGYThe S60 Polestar is based on the S60 T6 junior exec, sedan or wagon, kitted out with Volvo's R-Design racy treatment. Polestar's main contribution is engine management software that turns up the turbocharger on the straight six.The outcome is 18kW more power, for 242kW, and 40Nm more torque, for 480Nm. That slices 0.3 seconds off its sprint to 100km/h to make it a sub six-second car. In other words, respectably rapid. There are quad exhausts at the rear, alongside a special diffuser and diamond cut 19-inch alloys, which will look terrific until they get kerbed.DESIGNIn a lot of respects, the car is identical to the R-Design version, with the same lowered and stiffened suspension. You also get sports seats in a grippy synthetic, coloured dials, shiny pedals and an attractive, if still a bit large, steering wheel.So the go-fast trim is restrained, and the result is a cabin as sensible as it usually is from Volvo, with a few reservations. The rear headrests and wide C-pillars, for example, get in the way of rear vision. The cabin is a metaphor for the car. If you buy this expecting precision performance, you'll be disappointed. It's a Volvo with more performance, but still a Volvo.Dynamically, it can't escape the handicap of an engine layout that is all wrong for quick cornering. The six-cylinder is slung out in front of the front axle and oriented east-west. So when you tip it into a bend, the suspension is trying to control a big lump of metal that straddles the centre-line of the car. The result is that you're never entirely sure where and when it's going to settle.DRIVINGVolvo has worked hard to overcome this problem, and surprisingly the Polestar doesn't understeer wildly, as physics suggests it should. It's benign, but uninspiring.The steering doesn't help. It has never been a Volvo strong point, but here it feels out of character with the ability of the driveline. It's doughy and slow, with a tendency to weight up oddly, and with this rubber, follow the road surface. It would have benefited from a little of Polestar's racing expertise.The engine itself delivers strong performance and the throttle is very direct. Despite this, if you are at the wrong place on the rev range, power delivery can fall in a hole. Sometimes this is no more than momentary turbo lag, as the air pump catches up with the engine speed. But I wondered whether the transmission had been retuned for the extra power because on a few occasions the two were singing from different hymn sheets.VERDICTOne omission here is paddle-shifters. If you want to self-shift, it's by the gear lever. Some of the changes make things worse. Those thin tyres mean a nobbly ride and the wheels thump down hard into potholes. Over many surfaces, there's too much road roar. The tuned S60 is respectably rapid, but the price seems hefty.Volvo S60 PolestarPrice: From $82,990Engine: 3.0-litre 6-cyl turbocharged 242kW/480NmTransmission: 6-speed automatic, all-wheel driveThirst: 10.2L/100km; 243g Co2 per km

I've never driven an F1, the landmark McLaren supercar of the 1990s, so this is my first experience of the brand.However I have driven its Ferrari rival, the 458 Italia, and that is a very exciting car. Stunning to look at and with a glorious sound, it's a four-alarm fire for your hair follicles. British reviews of the McLaren MP4-12C find claims for the MP4-12C borne out by their own tests. It is quicker than the Ferrari. But many came away without goosebumps.Clarkson said if the 12C was a pair of tights, the Ferrari 458 Italia was a pair of stockings. That's a powerful metaphor and there's truth in it. The 458 has more dramatic design and greater musical range. It's more of a luxury statement inside.Even the name is more sonorous. MP4-12C is difficult to say. Driving out of the McLaren showroom in Sydney this week, I caught sight of a Lotus Evora and mistook it for another 12C. It's impossible to imagine confusing a 458 with anything else.It's true but it's not the whole story. I'm going to wander into the dangerous territory of national stereotypes here. You have been warned. The 458 is flamboyant and it's loud.If it had arms, it would be gesticulating wildly. It's Italian and it's an affair to remember. If the Brits did something like that, we'd wonder what they'd been ingesting.The 12C is as restrained as the 458 is extravagant. Its virtues are less in-your-face. It invites polite curiosity rather than shrill attention. And there's something, well, British, about its knack for understatement. This isn't stockings and tights; it's Keira Knightly versus Sophia Loren.The exterior doesn't shout, but up close it's special. Those restrained curves offer plenty to dwell on. The doors open, thanks to a proximity sensor, with a caress of your hand.The interior is a beautiful mix of leather and alcantara and fascinating in its unfamiliarity. Controls are logically placed but not necessarily where or how you've come to expect them; the aircon switches are in the arm rests and the control screen is a vertical touchscreen panel.There's judicious use of carbon fibre and an absence of adornment. Although less sumptuous and more functional than the Ferrari, its details -- right down to the spokes of the air vents -- are impressive nevertheless.There's a small steering wheel that disdains the recent fashion for buttons. The seats are great, instruments clear and pedals solid.McLaren set out to avoid the supercar bugbear of poor vision and to a large extent it has succeeded because forward vision is excellent. When the airbrake deploys it fills the rear window, momentarily at least. But how quickly does it stop!The 12C sits lower to the ground than you expect although the way its nose and tail are chamfered makes this less of an issue than with some.The engine fires up without a contrived "explosion into life'' and there are push-buttons for gear selection -- D, N and R -- that can be found by touch alone. The engine sounds like a V8 -- a busy baritone rumble with turbocharger accompaniment. It's incredibly flexible, holding high gears up hill and quiet with the driveline selector in N for normal.Everything that's been said about the comfortable ride is true. Compliant and civilised, it could put to shame some luxury sedans. It feels solid and tight too, without the creaks and groans that are usually part of the supercar deal. As an everyday proposition, the 12C makes more sense than any of its rivals.Its spectrum of abilities is remarkable. Move the driveline and handling selectors into S (for Sport) and everything gets louder and quicker. The front doesn't lift under acceleration and the body stays flat through bends. The 12C turns in so quickly it surprises you the first time, and the steering has the delicacy of the best.The chassis responds to a corner by finding the right attitude and staying there. It's unflappable. It simply tracks around corners at phenomenal speeds and on public roads you cannot even approaching its dymanic limits.Everything goes up another notch when you select T for Track. And on a track, I would run out of ability long before the car. On outright performance there are few cars that could stay with the 12C. Zero to 100km/h is quick at 3.3 seconds, but it takes only a further 5.8 seconds to reach 200km/h as the engine gets into the meat of its mid-range. It sounds best here. Even though its lacks the spine-tingling aural qualities of a naturally aspirated V8, unless your other car really is a Ferrari you're unlikely to notice the difference.Yes the 12C does seem business-like next to a 458. But virtues are no less great for being less obvious. And qualities that reveal themselves over time can be so much more satisfying.

The first time Formula One outfit McLaren designed and built a road car it set a high-water mark for performance that went unchallenged for years.
 The $US1 million F1 was the fastest production car you could buy and a must-have for any serious celebrity revhead from Jay Leno to Rowan Atkinson. Just 106 were made, ending in the late 1990s, well below the production target of 300. But it won Le Mans at its first attempt and many of its records stood until they were blitzed by the Bugatti Veyron. 
McLaren boss Ron Dennis says the F1 is unique among recent supercars because they now change hands for huge sums, with one example going for $US5.5m ($5.35m).
 "It's the only car that's been made in the last 30 years that's appreciated,'' he says on a recent visit to Australia. "I was very tempted to think, I've got all the old tooling, why don't I just knock out a few.''
But he didn't. Instead, McLaren decided to become a full-time carmaker competing with the Italian thoroughbreds and has spent almost pound stg. 800m ($1.26 billion) since 2005 setting itself up. Eventually it will offer three models, all high-performance cars built in Britain at a shiny pound stg. 40m production facility. The goal is to make 4000 cars a year by 2015 -- Ferrari makes about 7000 -- for sale globally. McLaren has set up distribution in 18 countries and the first car, the MP4-12C, was launched almost a year ago in Britain.
 Australian distributor Trivett has just begun delivering the 12C and already has names against its allocation this year of 30.
The MP4-12C is the middle car of the three planned. On price and performance it takes aim at the Ferrari 458 Italia, a $500,000, two-seat, mid-engined V8 supercar launched two years ago to critical acclaim.
 Planning for the 12C began before the 458 was unveiled but Dennis believes the McLaren is more than its equal.
 "Our ability to predict what the competition was going to be proved relatively correct,'' he says. "We comfortably matched and exceeded it in every area. ''
They make an interesting comparison. The 12C is powered by a 3.8-litre turbocharged V8 that develops 441kW, against 425kW for the Ferrari's naturally aspirated 4.5-litre V8. The McLaren has more torque, 600Nm against 540Nm, and it arrives lower in the rev range. Despite turbocharging, the 12C engine revs to within 500rpm of the 458, to 8500rpm. They both send drive to the rear wheels via a seven-speed double-clutch transmission.
The McLaren is marginally smaller and made mostly from carbon fibre where the Ferrari is aluminium. The result is a 50kg weight advantage to the 12C. 
All that translates into a performance edge for the 12C that's borne out in all its vital statistics. It accelerates to 100km/h one-tenth of a second faster, in 3.3 seconds.
 Keep going to 200km/h and the 12C increases its lead, reaching the mark in 9.1 seconds -- 1.3 seconds quicker. It has a higher top speed and can lap the Nurburgring, the benchmark German testing track used by all performance cars worth the name, in 7 minutes 28 seconds, or about as fast as any production car and 10 seconds quicker than the Italian.
 It even decelerates more effectively with an active air brake that automatically deploys above 95km/h. From 100km/h it can stop in 30.5m compared with 32.5m for the Ferrari. The air brake doubles as a wing to increase downforce at the rear. McLaren also set out to make its car as efficient as possible. It claims the 12C has the lowest CO2 emissions per horsepower of any car in the world, including hybrids (with the single exception of a Mercedes fitted with idle-stop).
 Those are a lot numbers to take in, but they translate into sensational performance (see First Drive opposite) and also something of a moral victory for the British outfit over its perennial Formula One rival. Both say their road cars employ racing technology and on-track competition has been intense. 
McLaren has achieved 176 wins since 1966, taking the chequered flag in one in every four GPs in which it has competed. Ferrari has 217 wins since 1950.
But it's about more than just track performance, Dennis says. The 12C had to "absolutely excel in the area in which its most used'' -- daily driving at legal speeds. It avoids the drawbacks of many supercars because it's quiet and comfortable when it needs to be. "Its active suspension is switchable between three modes with dramatic differences in the settings. This is the best handling sportscar in the world. In ride and comfort there's nothing that surpasses it. If you're on a track, it's an out-and-out race car. If you drive it on the road it's smooth like a Rolls-Royce.''
The 12C has visual echoes of the original F1 and many engineering similarities, such as its carbon fibre construction and mid-engined layout.
 But the aim was never to replicate the F1, with its unorthodox central driving position with two passenger seats behind.
And buyer expectations have moved on.
"No one would buy that car (the F1) today and be happy with it, apart from pure performance,'' he says. "It's too raw, too aggressive, too firm.'' 

McLAREN MP4-12C
 Vehicle: Supercar 
Engine: 3.8-litre turbocharged V8 petrol
 Outputs: 441kW at 7000rpm and 600Nm at 3000rpm
 Transmission: Seven-speed double-clutch automatic, rear-wheel-drive 
Price: $493,100 plus on-road costs
 On Sale: Now  

The very phrase “four-cylinder Falcon” seems to contain its own condemnation. For more than 50 years, buyers have never settled for less than a six.If you want a rear-drive large sedan with an excellent four-cylinder you would normally have to spend BMW or Mercedes money.The Falcon is big, and small engines in big cars can be a false economy. It's also rear-wheel drive, so it's a “proper” driver's car. Why would you want a four?There are many reasons for not buying a Falcon. It's not exactly the freshest metal around and the compromises -- fixed rear headrests, an uneven boot floor, dreadful residual values -- can be avoided elsewhere.The imported Mondeo is almost as big and much more modern, albeit with front-wheel drive. It's a shiny raincheater while the Falcon is the musty overcoat you left at the back of the cupboard.Yes, there are many reasons not to buy a Falcon. But its new engine isn't one of them. Of course, it isn't as powerful as the venerable straight six you can get for the same money. It's half the capacity, after all. But a turbocharger is today's replacement for displacement, and with 179kW compared to 195kW, it gets remarkably close.On torque there's more of gap -- 353Nm to 391Nm -- but in the Ecoboost Falcon it arrives much lower in the rev range.That makes it responsive and driveable from the off. So much so, that on the run through Hobart for the first few kilometres I was chatting to my co-driver before I thought to focus on the engine.Around town, it does everything you expect without fuss. It just delivers. Out of town, it's much more fun than its modest capacity would suggest.The mapping between the engine and six-speed automatic transmission seems spot-on. It doesn't get frenetic and it doesn't hunt. It's a confident combination and when you floor it, you don't feel short-changed. It even sounds good.Much of the time, though, it's an unobtrusive driveline and Ford worked hard to remove the annoying whooshes and whistles that turbos can generate. There's extra sound deadening and the refinement is first rate. It's at a level that would not disgrace a prestigious European badge, where there's a long history of putting fours into large sedans.There's more. Despite the extra cabin padding, the whole car is a lot lighter, especially at the front. It feels as though there was somebody sitting on the bonnet who's now got off.The effect on the dynamics is very noticeable, especially after a short comparison run in the six. The four is better balanced and turns in more eagerly.It has litheness and agility that the six cannot have. It isn't as powerful, but it doesn't need to be. In outright terms, of course, it isn't as quick. But in a timed run to 100km/h I managed 6.6 seconds and someone did 6.5. So it isn't slow either.Ford says this is the first rear-drive car with this engine and it's unlikely to be the last. In the US, it's going in the 2WD Explorer SUV and the next Mustang might even have it.

The independent London start-up brand spotted the opportunity for an elite "super SUV'' two years ago. So, with an eye firmly on Asia, Eterniti logically chose Beijing to reveal the Artemis. With production beginning mid-year, Eterniti is taking orders through offices in Hong Kong and Taipei and, although output will be tiny (just 30 cars in the first year), it has the jump on similar thinking from Lamborghini, Bentley and Maserati. Artemis starts life as a Porsche Cayenne Turbo and borrows its 441kW 4.8-litre V8 to deliver a sprint time to 100km/h of just 4.5 seconds and 290km/h top speed. Drive goes to four 23-inch wheels via an eight-speed automatic gearbox and carbon fibre panels keep weight down. Eterniti knows many Chinese customers will want to be chauffeured and has gone to town on the interior. Twin rear seats recline and offer lots of room to stretch out over lambswool carpets and customer-specified leathers and veneers. There's a drinks chiller and individual iPad holders. The Artemis costs the equivalent of pound stg. 210,000 ($328,000) plus tax everywhere but China, where "its complicated car taxation regime'' requires a unique strategy. There are no dealers as such yet, so warranty and servicing issues will be by "flying doctor''.  

Porsche's prime number divides a little, but conquers much more. Fourteen years after Porsche adopted water cooling for its engines, there are still people who value the last air-cooled model, the 993, as the best 911.It's entirely possible a similar thing will happen this time with the steering. Perhaps the outgoing series, the 997, will be revered as the last without electrical systems interpreting the road for the driver and the driver's steering inputs for the wheels.TECHNOLOGYThe 911 in even basic form is a good drive, even though the cars on the test drive in California were all S models with every conceivable dynamic gizmo fitted.The next generation of buyers won't know what they're missing and I doubt they'll stop buying. I will know the difference, but everybody's benchmark is different. I've never driven a 993 so I don't mourn the loss of air-cooling, and everything that went with that.DRIVINGCertainly, it would be crazy to deny there's a difference. I can remember the first time I drove a 911 (a 996) and suddenly realising why its steering feel was so lauded.Jolts and other static thrown up by tarmac are absent now, filtered out. But is the steering rubbish? No, it's brilliant. Incredibly precise and direct, and still engaging. Just different.If it wasn't, it would be out of sync with the rest of the car. The 911 is quieter now and more refined, with a better ride. There's less of the stuff you don't want, such as tyre roar, and more of the stuff you do, such as the sound of six-cylinders whipping up kilowatts.What you hear from behind isn't the result of chance. Special plumbing has been developed with the sole purpose of channelling engine sound into the cabin. With the bad stuff filtered out, of course.The 911 still has its trademark handling, brought on by a layout that slings the engine behind the rear axle. Here there's screening too, with software riding shotgun on every aspect of dynamics, from brakes to the amount of grip.This isn't new, although the possibilities, if you tick the options list, are growing all the time.Truth is, purity is a lost cause to the modern carmaker and steering is simply the last thing to succumb. Computers have been gradually tightening their grip on the driving experience and there's no way back.The exceptions -- you can still buy a Lotus Elise without power steering -- are rare. They have diminishingly small appeal and in this era seem too raw and focused for general acceptance.Porsche bit the bullet on steering because fuel economy is today's over-riding imperative. But, in any case, it was probably only a matter of time. It sits sweetly with the precision and sensitivity of the throttle and brakes, and the way car adjusts to inputs. The 911 is still a great drive.VERDICTMaybe I'd love a 993 if I drove one. In which case I'd start scanning the web because 80 per cent of Porsches built are still on the road. It might go in my ideal garage alongside a 997. And this one, too.

The fast new Coupe won't be loved by everyone and doesn't care.German car-lovers have a strange affliction that contradicts national stereotypes: they like old British cars. I was in Germany for the Frankfurt motor show recently and confirmed the diagnosis.On the autobahn the only cars travelling under 120km/h were 1960s Triumphs. In fact, aside from an old Porsche 911 here or there, British cars were the only ones that didn't seem new.It's the fifth model in the Mini range since the hatch was reborn a decade ago, but it looks unlike any other. The flat roof has gone in favour of a skullcap which, thanks to a winglet on the trailing edge, could be a baseball cap on backwards. It's unusual and doesn't immediately inspire affection.Of course, the original spawned a bewildering variety of body styles, including a ute, the Moke and sedans. That has been the route map for the reborn car. The modern Clubman, for example, is based on the old Mini Traveller.However, there's no prior model for Coupe and the executives needed to employ some fancy historical footwork. They say it was inspired by British sports cars from the 1960s and 70s because it is the first Mini with only two seats and there's also a convertible version.But it couldn't look less like an old MG or Triumph. One of the biggest downsides to any Mini, including this one, is the lacklustre interior. Use of soft plastics is miserly; most are unyieldingly hard and unpleasant.The seats are good, but you'll lose fingers trying to find the adjusters. Aircon and radio controls are set too low and the absurd central speedo needs to be consigned to history. It's pointless.Headroom is respectable thanks to recesses in the roof and the car connects to the internet via an iPhone, making web radio possible. The boot -- it opens like a hatchback, despite the profile -- has a bit more cargo space than usual and there's some storage behind the seats.His design comes with engineering tweaks. The starting point is the Cabriolet, so it already has a reinforced body, but the Coupe is another 10-15 per cent stiffer on top. This, and an active rear spoiler that deploys from the boot at 80km/h, delighted the chassis engineers, who say it helped deliver better ride and handling than the standard car.Spec for spec, engines carry over and Australia will see the John Cooper Works driven at the event plus the 135kW Cooper S. Although the Coupe is 25kg heavier than other Minis, thanks to improved aerodynamics the JCW gets to 100km/h in 6.4 seconds: one-tenth better than the equivalent hatch. It's also fairly efficient, with a stop-at-idle system and electric power steering, among other features, helping it achieve 7.1 litres per 100km.On the road, the Coupe will feel familiar to Mini drivers, but sharper and tauter. It steers well, with good turn-in and only a hint of torque steer -- the tendency for power to twist the wheel in your hands -- despite putting 155kW through the front rubber. On autobahns its high-speed stability is good for something only 3.7m long.This engine sounds great on-song and responds with enthusiasm. It has the driver-pleasing trait of echoing throttle inputs in little movements of the chassis, so the engine and suspension feel as if they're working in harmony.There's a bit more roll through corners than expected but the Coupe isn't lacking body discipline. The ride is firm to crashy, and just on the right side of acceptable, although that was on smooth German bitumen.The drawbacks include engine drone at constant highway speeds, when the turbocharged unit sounds monotone and industrial. The tiny rear window means vision is restricted to a tiny portion of the road immediately behind or even less when the spoiler deploys. That means cars can seem to suddenly appear from nowhere.