2015 Mini Cooper S Hardtop Four-Door Road Test

Quick Summary
With a revised Mini Clubman still in the concept stage, this 2015 Mini Cooper Hardtop Four-Door fills the somewhat confusing gap between the traditional two-door Cooper and the larger Countryman and Paceman crossovers. The four-door retains the Mini's lively spirit and improves on the formula with much more convenience.

What Is It?
Visually, the four-door Mini Hardtop is very similar to its two-door sibling. Bumper-to-bumper, the four-door is 6 inches longer, with 2.8 inches of that length added between the front and rear wheels. A longer rear overhang makes up the rest. While these measurements may not seem all that significant on paper, the advantages gained on the inside certainly are.

With more rear legroom, the four-door Mini can now easily accommodate child passengers and small adults. Cargo space increases a full 50 percent compared to the two-door hardtop. For those drawn to the Mini brand, the four-door may be more attractive than the ungainly Clubman. As importantly, it is just as fun to drive as the two-door model. When it comes to price, the four-door continues to score points, as there's only a $1,000 premium to get the two extra doors.

Prices start at $22,550 for the base model four-door hardtop that is powered by an adequate 134-horsepower 1.5-liter three-cylinder turbocharged engine. The $25,950 Cooper S version gets a 2.0-liter turbo four-cylinder that boosts output to 189 hp, along with a torque-vectoring limited-slip differential that allows it to corner with more aggression. Our Cooper S test vehicle came with almost every option available, including the six-speed automatic transmission and the aptly named Fully Loaded package, sending the price soaring to $35,900.

How Does It Drive?
With a flip of a flat toggle switch glowing red in the center stack, the engine rumbles to life with a pleasing low hum. At start-up, the Mini defaults to its Normal driving mode. A rotating collar switch around the gear selector activates the Sport and Green modes with a quick flick. Sport mode sharpens throttle response, holds gears at higher revs before shifting and increases steering effort. Green mode goes the opposite direction by dulling responses and upshifting earlier to maximize fuel efficiency. Had our test vehicle been equipped with the $500 Dynamic Damper Control option, the drive setting would also adjust the ride stiffness.

Not surprisingly, the Normal mode is a happy medium for daily driving. Green Mode makes the Mini feel as though it's trudging through a thick pool of molasses, but in heavy traffic it's not a problem. What is bothersome, however, is the automatic stop-start function that is engaged in Green mode. When the car is stopped, the engine automatically shuts off. When brake pressure is reduced, the engine restarts. The system is nothing new, but Mini's execution is significant because start-up sends a strong shudder through the vehicle. Fortunately, it can be disabled while retaining Green mode's other attributes.

Sport mode is likely of greater importance to drivers willing to step up to the Cooper S model, of course. In this setting there's more immediacy in the controls, bringing out the playful Mini personality and allowing drivers to extract the maximum performance from the drivetrain.

In Edmunds' testing, the Cooper S four-door reached 60 mph in 6.3 seconds, which is close to most competitors. There's good torque right off the line, and gearchanges are quick and smooth. There's also no sign of the torque steer that used to plague performance-focused hatchbacks. Selecting Sport mode further livens up things with quicker and more noticeable shifts. Steering-wheel-mounted shift paddles allow the driver to take full control of the transmission, and the reactions to inputs are immediate. Rev-matched downshifts are perfectly executed. Of course, you can do it yourself with the six-speed manual, which comes standard.

The brakes are also up to hot hatchback standards when you need to slow down in a hurry. From 60 mph, the four-door required 116 feet to come to a stop, which is a few feet longer than rivals, but still very acceptable. Even with a full stomp on the brake pedal, the Mini remains solidly composed, with very little nosedive and no squirm. After repeated panic stops, the pedal softened, but stopping power remained strong.

Is It Fun?
Despite the larger footprint, the four-door Mini Cooper S is just as fun to unleash on twisting mountain switchbacks as its smaller siblings. When driven with enthusiasm, the car responds with very predictable actions and even dares you to push harder. It instills trust very early on and in some ways it feels a bit more settled than the shorter-wheelbase two-door model. You won't be chasing down dedicated sports cars in a Mini, but it will deliver plenty of thrills and smiles.

If driven just past the handling limit, the stability control system does an excellent job of keeping you on your intended path. A subtle brake application on the appropriate wheel can be felt, and that's just enough to keep the car from pushing toward the outside of a turn. The fun is never interrupted by an overly intrusive system. Four doors, it seems, come with no downside.

Is It Comfortable?
The Mini Cooper S represents the middle ground of performance between the standard Cooper and the top-of-the-line John Cooper Works model. For the added handling ability, the Cooper S does sacrifice some compliance, but ride quality isn't objectionably stiff. Shoppers seeking a softer ride may want to forgo the larger wheel options.

Our test vehicle came equipped with the optional sport seats, which provide excellent lateral support when cornering and just enough adjustments to accommodate a variety of body types. Even so, the aggressive side bolstering may be constricting for wider passengers. Plush seat cushioning remained comfortable after several hundred miles of road tripping, but the thin armrest padding did create some elbow discomfort.

The rear seats are positively spacious compared to the two-door Cooper, but there are still some limitations. There's enough headroom in the rear seat for the average adult, but legroom is tight. The front seatbacks are scooped out enough to accommodate rear passenger legs, but there's no room to stretch out. Smaller passengers will fit fine.

How Is the Interior?
Thanks to the additional two doors, rear passengers no longer have to tunnel between the front seats and roof support. The doors are rather narrow, but access is significantly easier. Otherwise, the interior is just like other Mini models, with all the personality we've come to expect.

Outward visibility is as good as it gets for any vehicle. So good, in fact, that it renders the optional rearview camera unnecessary. Likewise, the gauges and infotainment screen are placed well within the driver's sight lines. With the optional head-up display, speed and navigation prompts are even easier to read.

Throughout the cabin, heavy toggle switches and unique trim elements add a lot of visual interest that is absent in other hatchbacks. Materials quality isn't much better than rivals, but the texturing and styling go a long way toward improving the overall feeling of quality. Surrounding the round infotainment panel in the middle of the dash is an array of accent lights that react to driving conditions as well as system commands. There's a certain cool factor to these lights at first, but at night they can be distracting. Once the novelty had worn off, we disabled them.

One of our main gripes with the current Mini interior is the placement of the infotainment controller. It's mounted too low in the center console to reach and operate comfortably and is further obstructed by the optional center armrest. And that's really a shame because the system, which is nearly identical to BMW's praiseworthy iDrive, is otherwise very easy to use and benefits from a wealth of features.

Interior storage also leaves a bit to be desired, as door pockets, cupholders and even the dual gloveboxes are on the small side. Cargo space does reap the rewards of the four-door's bigger profile, providing 13.1 cubic feet behind the rear seats compared to the two-door's meager 8.7 cubic feet. Folding the split rear seats increases capacity to 40.7 cubes. Underneath the raised trunk floor is an additional space for smaller items, and the panel can be lowered quickly to provide a flat load floor. Despite the cargo capacity increase over the two-door Cooper, the four-door still comes up short of both the VW GTI and Ford Focus ST.

What Kind of Fuel Economy Does It Get?
The EPA estimates fuel economy at 29 mpg combined (26 city/33 highway), which is slightly better than competing sporty hatchbacks. These estimates were confirmed by our overall average of 28.2 mpg, which included many miles of exuberant driving.

What Safety Features Are Available?
On top of the typical standard safety features found in all current vehicles, the 2015 Mini Cooper S Four-Door also includes front knee airbags and full-length side curtain airbags. Rear parking sensors and a rearview camera are optional.

What Are Its Closest Competitors?
Ford Focus ST: In terms of performance numbers, the similarly priced Focus ST outpaces the Mini Cooper S by a slim margin. Behind the wheel, however, the Focus feels more capable and even exhibits some tail-happy antics that are rare among front-wheel-drive cars. With a cargo capacity of 23.8 cubic feet behind the rear seats, the Focus handily defeats the Mini when it comes to utility. Of the few downsides, the MyFord Touch infotainment system can be frustrating to use and there is no option for an automatic transmission.

Volkswagen Golf R: Currently the top-dog hatchback, the 292-hp, all-wheel-drive Golf R takes GTI performance to all-new levels. All that power and handling comes at a cost, though, as it rings in about $11,000 more than the Focus, Mini and GTI.

Volkswagen GTI: As the originator of the sporty hatchback segment, the GTI is a solidly built performer with a more serious approach and design. It's not quite as engaging to drive hard as the Mini or Focus but it still posts performance numbers that keep it competitive. The VW's 22.8-cubic-foot cargo capacity also beats the Mini and it's available with a six-speed automated manual transmission.

Why Should You Consider This Car?
Charm has been one of Mini's strongest selling points, and the Cooper S has it in spades. With the addition of the four-door model, many of the space and cargo drawbacks are reduced without any appreciable influence on performance and entertainment. As an added incentive, Mini offers free scheduled maintenance for the first three years or 36,000 miles of ownership. VW offers one year of maintenance, but with Ford you're on your own.

Why Should You Think Twice About This Car?
Despite being larger than its two-door sibling, this Mini may still pose challenges to shoppers with an eye on practicality. If space, whether it's rear passenger or cargo-related, is a priority, the Mini Cooper S four-door trails its main rivals by a sizable margin.

The manufacturer provided Edmunds this vehicle for the purposes of evaluation.

Renault Twingo vs VW Up twin-test review (2015)

► Renault's rear-engined Twingo
► Meets VW's conventional Up
► Which makes the better city car? 

What’s interesting about this little tête-à-tête is that it pitches a small car for which a rear-engine, rear-wheel drive platform was rejected by the world’s second largest car maker on grounds of cost, against a small car only armed with precisely that platform because a third party – the world’s third largest car maker – needs it for sundry Smart purposes.

Having already seen off Fiat’s Panda, Volkswagen’s somewhat delicious Up needs no introduction. This isn’t our first thrape in a Twingo either, so let’s cut to the chase, and that which purports to give the latter’s pricey little platform the edge; advantageous packaging.

Well, mounting engine and drive astern certainly hasn’t made the Twingo any more compact overall.
It’s actually over two inches longer and two and a half inches taller than the Up. However, with a wheelbase getting on for three inches more generous than that of the VW, you’d expect the Renault at the very least to take the honours in the accommodation stakes.

From the driver’s perspective there is, ostensibly, little to choose between the two. Front seats are comfortable enough, though a lack of steering-wheel reach adjustment in either car does dictate a somewhat upright approach to the helm. But then the Twingo lobs a queen wasp in the ergonomic Pimms by leaving the driver precisely nowhere to rest his (or, more probably, her) clutch foot.

Worse, the angular, all-too-readily-demountable storage bin in front of the gear lever will keep savaging an already displaced left leg, adding further discomfort, and possible bruising. With the other side of the shin bin annoyance neatly chamfered to fit a passenger footwell which widens out along the transmission tunnel, the words ‘rat’ and ‘smell’ leap to mind in the context of Renault’s conversion to right-hand drive…

Sitting behind myself in the Twingo is tight; lolling, legs akimbo like a bloke on a banquette who’s had one too many is right out. Despite having inherited my mother’s short, fat, hairy legs, my knees are in constant contact with the front seatback. Moreover (and this may be down to the presence of a full-length canvas sunroof) my head is rammed so firmly into the roof lining I might, for all the world, be wearing a giant hat. 

The rear seat itself is decidedly firm and, in the interests of increasing rear loadspace, may be rake adjusted between the Victorian and the positively vertical.

So how come, despite the shorter wheelbase, the Up gives me perceptibly more legroom astern, enough headroom to make my own choice of hat, and a more comfortable seat to boot? Hmmm. Must all come down to luggage capacity, then.

Nope. Rear seats in place, the VW boasts a loadspace 63 litres larger than the 188 litres offered by the Renault. And don’t go thinking that, 911-style, there’s bonnet space up for grabs…

Clearly armed with the collective IQ of a packet of Jaffa Cakes, it took two of us 20 minutes and an ecstasy of fumbling to fathom Twingo bonnet opening. It’s hinge-free and doesn’t so much ‘open’ as flop clumsily forwards a few inches. Indeed it’s only prevented from clattering headlong into impromptu toboggan status by a pair of nylon straps. 

Aspirant luggage space already occupied by a radiator inaccessible even with the bonnet open, then, this two-man tussle reveals nought but a row of fluid top-up caps, suggesting screenwash reservoir refilling to be the work of but an eon. 

So, having clearly established that the Twingo’s alternative platform singularly fails to steal packaging honours from the Up, we must presume that it will prove more competitive in, perhaps, the 4 performance or driving dynamics departments.

Both machines sport 999cc, three-cylinder, naturally-aspirated petrol powerplants. Volkswagen has bullied 5bhp and 3lb ft of torque more from its unit, but the Up is a stout 64kg heavier than the Twingo. Despite this considerable weight disparity, however, the Volkswagen is over a second quicker to 62mph and has a 14mph higher top speed.

In truth, the Up feels consistently livelier throughout the gears than this modest on-paper advantage would suggest. And this has much to do with the fact that it responds far more sharply to the throttle; the Twingo requiring a surprising degree of pedal pressure to elicit any oomph at all.

It’s the same story with the brakes; whilst the Up’s make their presence felt with the first brush of the pedal and are nicely modulated thereafter, too much unrewarded pedal travel followed by a sudden burst of over-enthusiasm makes the Twingo’s brakes particularly tricky to deploy smoothly around town.

The Renault does boast markedly superior claimed average fuel consumption and CO2 figures, but given the wholehearted throttle thrashing which must be administered to get both machines moving with any alacrity, I suspect real-world consumption figures will bear little similarity in either case.

And thrash ’em you surely will because, with less to choose between them than the variation in platform design might suggest, a surprising degree of derring-do may be extracted from either. 

Though the undercarriage of both demonstrates admirable pliancy, the Twingo boasts a fractionally more comfortable ride. We are talking a very small margin, however, and a nagging suspicion lingers that this may have more to do with better cabin insulation from road noise than any true mechanical advantage.

Both offer similar, pleasingly tenacious degrees of mechanical grip allied to respectable body control, before succumbing to understeer which is tidily tempered by ABS-sponsored electronic nannies, neither of whom may be switched off.

Ultimately, however, the Twingo is a less pleasing drive, not only because its somewhat woolly gearchange fails to match the Up’s cleaner, more accurate shift, but also because its steering feels decidedly vague at top dead centre and is perceptibly less crisp and linear in its response to inputs. Lob in the fact that the Renault is all too readily socked about by crosswinds, and the whole elicits a suspicion that the absence of engine weight adhering the bows to the road is actually almost a disadvantage. 

Lest we forget, the second most significant benefit cited of the Twingo’s rear-orientated platform is a turning circle on a par with an ordinary Northumberland spoke-shaver’s coracle. True, but that usefulness is somewhat outweighed by a steering rack ratio requiring at least 90 degrees more twirling than that demanded by the Up to simply negotiate a right-angled bend. And that means constantly having to move your hands on the wheel. Which is inappropriate to a city car.

When it comes to styling, I favour the Up not because I particularly prefer a giant milk carton to a giant jelly bean, but because I find the VW’s straightforward interior design considerably classier than a Twingo dashboard boasting more curves than a children’s water park. The former’s instrumentation is clearer, switchgear more pleasurable to use and the finish is of a higher quality throughout.

Connectivity honours are even, but where the Twingo provides a console switchgear-obscuring cradle in which you must mount your own smartphone for use – via a free app – as a navigation screen, the Up wins out through the simple but welcome provision of a dash-mounted Garmin.

Finally, then, price. Predictably, at £12,500, this Groove Up 1.0 75ps will set you back £1505 more than the £10,995 Twingo Dynamique SCe 70 Stop and Start. But whilst the Up we drove sported just £485 worth of optional kit, the Renault’s options hiked its price tag by £1940 (including £850 for that headroom-stealing sunroof), bringing it to within just £50 of price parity.

What we have, then, despite the most diverse possible approach to powertrain installation, is two extremely closely matched machines. For all that technical trickery, though, the Renault cannot pip the VW for packaging, performance or driving dynamics.

And that leaves the rear-engined Twingo with just two advantages; both front window switches on the driver’s door card, and the turning circle of a startled owl.

2015 Subaru Liberty review

Subaru's Liberty has now been around for 25 years, but for a variety of reasons in recent times has fallen off the radar of many buyers. One of those reasons is the success of Toyota Camry and the local duo of Ford Falcon and Holden Commodore.

Subaru's intention is to take up some of the slack left by the looming loss of the popular Australian six-cylinder cars with the just launched the sixth-generation Liberty.

The new Liberty is a refined, high-tech offering. It offers two engines and two automatic transmissions, one for four-cylinder variants and one for the six-cylinder.

Subaru has gone for the sales jugular, cutting prices on Liberty by up to $14,000. After three hours behind the wheel of a 2.5i petrol Premium and a six-cylinder 3.6R at the car's launch in East Gippsland, we came away impressed.

Liberty now starts at $29,990 for the entry level 2.5i auto and finishes at $47,990 for the Liberty 3.6R. The 3.6R is the contender for the six cylinder gap in family cars. The 2.5i and 3.6R only come with Subaru's latest incarnation of their upgraded CVT auto, there are no manuals.

The new Liberty has a lot going for it: all-wheel-drive; five-star ANCAP safety rating; thelatest generation of EyeSight, a crash avoidance/reduction system; and an all-new multimedia system that puts Liberty back in the technology race.

Liberty has always been recognised for its engineering, but in the fifth generation was let down by its interior. That too has been addressed in what Subaru describe as "fixing the weaknesses."

Subaru Australia managing director, Nick Senior, said buyers should also consider two small, but significant things, it comes with a full-size alloy spare wheel and metallic paint is a no cost option. Liberty, he said, also has a larger boot space (493 litres) than Commodore.

At present Liberty averages 75 sales a month and Subaru expects this to double to 150 a month. He said the added features over the current model represent $3000 in the 2.5i that was $39,490 and is now $35,490 in the new model.

Like the Outback that was launched at the same time, the new Liberty has a refined version of the CVT transmission that now includes 'steps'. These take away some efficiency as they act like conventional gears to suit drivers who have had difficulty adapting to CVTs. The steps only come into play when pushing the car hard. In normal driving the CVT accelerates seamlessly.

DRIVING

From the driver's seat the new Liberty hits the mark immediately with forward vision significantly improved over the outgoing model. The A-pillar has been moved forward by 50 mm placing more distance between driver and windscreen which also gives Liberty a much improved airy cabin feel.

The side mirrors are now mounted on the door which again reduces the blind spot around the slim A-pillar.

In our road testing we drove the 2.5i Premium first and came away feeling the four cylinder engine would probably satisfy most drivers and their driving needs. It's quick off the mark and quiet. With improvements to the engine, CVT and body aerodynamics it now has a combined fuel consumption of 7.3L/100km. This is down 7.6 per cent on the current model.

Subaru has done an excellent job in reducing NVH (noise, vibration, harshness) in Liberty with little drivetrain/road/wind noise entering the whisper-quiet cabin. The 2.5i features an active grille shutter in the lower grille which closes when driving to reduce resistance and also when cold to warm the engine faster.

Rivals for Liberty 2.5i sedan include Mazda6, Ford Mondeo, Hyundai i40 sedan, Nissan Altima and Skoda Octavia.

The 3.6R is even quieter and more refined than the 2.5i. This six-cylinder boxer engine has the same 3.6-litre capacity as the outgoing engine, but in reality has been rebuilt from the block up with the intention of the making it more compatible with the revised CVT transmission. 

This is where the more refined acceleration comes from, and no doubt the lack of engine noise intrusion into the cabin.

Liberty 3.6R has a braked towing capacity of 1800kg, 100kg more than the four cylinder variants. The 3.6R uses a high torque capacity variant of the CVT for efficiency and power delivery.

VERDICT 

Both variants cling to the road beautifully and, unlike Outback that exhibits some body roll and tyre squeal on tight corners, Liberty simply points into corners nicely and powers out in a no-fuss manner. Like Outback, Liberty now also has torque vectoring to reduce understeer when cornering. It works and works well.

Subaru Liberty - four stars
Warranty: 3 years/unlimited km
Capped price servicing: Yes (lifetime)
Service intervals: 6 months/12,500km
Engines: 2.5-litre 4-cyl boxer, 129kW/235Nm; 3.6-litre 6-cyl boxer, 191kW/350Nm
Transmissions: CVT; AWD
Thirst: 7.3L-9.9L/100km

Specifications

Price:	From $29,990

2015 Ford Falcon EcoLPi XR6 review

Regular readers will be aware that one of our constant gripes is that Australian governments of all persuasions are making little or no attempt to encourage us to switch to low-emission vehicles. So the cancellation, in mid-2014, of the previous $2000 federal government grant on private-use LPG vehicles – including this week's test car, the Ford Falcon EcoLPi – while disappointing, should come as no surprise.

The change means that buyers must now pay the full $2500 surcharge if they opt for the cleaner burning LPG fuel over the equivalent petrol-fuelled Falcon. Based on previous calculations by Ford Australia it will take about two and a half years to recoup this amount. In the unlikely event of the current low petrol prices continuing for any length of time then it will take even longer.

Unless Ford changes its mind and follows the lead of Holden, who have decided to retain the Commodore name post-local production, then this will be the final generation of the Ford Falcon. And a sad day it will be with more than 3.5 million Falcons being sold since its debut in 1960.

The EcoLPi is now available in the entry level Falcon and XR6 models with both sedan, cab-chassis and Styleside ute bodies. Our test was in the XR6 sedan.

The most obvious exterior change is the new global Ford signature trapezoidal grille, which to my eyes doesn't work anywhere near as well in the big Falcon as it does in the smaller Fords. There's also a new chiselled headlight treatment and smoother, wraparound tail-lamps with LED technology on high-end models. The EcoLPi XR6 gets daytime running lights where the standard Falcon doesn't.

There's little to distinguish it from the petrol XR6

The first thing that you'll notice when you get into the EcoLPi Falcon is a delay of a second or so between pressing the start button and the engine firing up. Indeed, apart from the screw-in fuel cap and a slightly smaller boot (down 71 litres to 464 litres) there's little to distinguish it from the petrol XR6. That boot space is helped by the absence of any sort of spare tyre. A repair kit is supplied.

ENGINE

The EcoLPi six-cylinder engine generates 198kW and 409Nm at 3250 rpm, marginally higher (by 3kW and 18Nm) than the same engine when operating on 95RON unleaded petrol. EcoLPi's power peaks at 5000 rpm, 1000 revs lower than the petrol, and so can run out of steam a bit early.

Fuel consumption from the Ford Falcon EcoLPi is about 25 per cent higher than that for the equivalent six-cylinder petrol model. The 120-litre gas cylinder can only be filled to about 93 litres as space must be left for expansion of the liquid into gas form. In country running the fuel range can be over 700 kilometres, around town this will drop to about 400-500km.

The EcoLPi shares a five-star ANCAP safety rating with the whole FG X Falcon range.

Official ADR 81/02 testing with EcoLPi on the combined urban/highway cycle produced figures of 12.6L/100km on the EcoLPi XR6. On a 400km round trip to the NSW South Coast we averaged an acceptable 13.6L/100 km.

Similarly, CO2 emissions from the EcoLPi are 204g/km compared with 225g/km from the petrol XR6.

SAFETY

In addition to the standard safety features both Falcon EcoLPi models get a driver fatigue warning system; reversing camera; front and rear parking sensors; front seat side-thorax airbags; and with its dynamic stability control recalibrated to match the Ford EcoLPi engine, transmission and suspension.

The EcoLPi shares a five-star ANCAP safety rating with the whole FG X Falcon range.

FEATURES

We found Bluetooth pairing to be frustratingly complex to such an extent that we almost went to the last resort and consulted the owner's handbook!

While such things are an annoyance to motoring journos who change cars every week they will easily become second nature to 'real' buyers and Ford's Microsoft-based Sync2 system certainly offers plenty of leading edge technology including emergency assistance and voice commands to control telephone, music, radio, air conditioning and satellite navigation (package option in XR6).

The system is accessed through a high-resolution 8-inch colour touch screen with four large colour-coded quadrants. It's easy to use with minimum distraction time.

The driving dynamics so much better than any of the SUVs

There's also digital radio, that is if you live in a city.

DRIVING

Coming off a succession of SUV road tests we found Falcon slightly more cramped on entry with the steering wheel needing to be set high and the seat low to avoid knee-scraping. Once underway all that was forgotten with the driving dynamics so much better than any of the SUVs. But that's the practicality vs performance trade-off battle that SUVs are clearly winning and contributing to the Falcon's demise.

Out on the open road Falcon EcoLPi XR6 is indistinguishable from its petrol-fuelled partner. Its quiet and comfortable when cruising and with excellent turn-in, plenty of rear grip and minimal body roll even under hard cornering.

Unlike other alternative fuels, LPG is readily available right across Australia

VERDICT 

The EcoLPI Falcon offers power, torque and engine performance coupled with the space, comfort and towing capability of a family sedan. Best of all, it brings down fuel costs and emissions levels to those normally only seen in a much smaller car.

Unlike other alternative fuels, LPG is readily available right across Australia and with the Ford EcoLPi system offers significant savings in vehicle running costs and immediate advantages in treatment of the environment. Both are becoming increasingly important factors when it comes to buying a family car.

The myFord Capped Price Servicing program now runs to seven years and 135,000km, whichever comes first and includes brake pad replacements albeit up to a maximum amount.

Specifications

Price:	From $40,290
Safety:	5-star ANCAP
Engine:	4.0-litre 6-cyl LPG, 198kW/409Nm
Transmission:	6-spd automatic; RWD
Spare:	tyre repair kit
Thirst:	11.7L/100km, 204g/km CO2 Tank 120L

Honda Jazz used review | 2002-2014

Jazz is the smallest Honda model sold in Australia. Launched here in October 2002, the latest edition Jazz was introduced in 2014. It has caused quite a few of the older models to be traded in, so there may be some bargains as dealers work to shift the trade-ins from their yards.

To keep the price down the Jazz is built in Thailand. We have visited Honda's Thai plant and can attest to Honda's emphasis on quality control.

Honda Jazz has a high roofline to maximise interior space in what is a relatively small body

Handling of the little Honda is good if roads are reasonably smooth, but it can be bounced about on bumps. On surfaces that suit it, the Jazz turns in easily, is happy to change direction in corners and is generally well set up for everyday driving. Enthusiastic drivers may find it a little lacking in steering precision.

Honda Jazz has a high roofline to maximise interior space in what is a relatively small body. It can seat four adults without too much compromising on legroom. In Australia it's more likely to carry one or two people, but we've spoken to families with young children, who say their Jazz meets their needs and are more than impressed with the car.

The Jazz has one of the best folding rear seat designs of them all

There's reasonably easy entry to the back seat, but some may find the rear door opening is a little tight in the original 2002 model. Those sold from the new model of August 2008 are much better.

The Jazz, indeed many Hondas, has one of the best folding rear seat designs of them all. The seat slides backwards and forwards to let you juggle between people and/or luggage. Even better, it can be folded in a few seconds to create a very large luggage area. The front passenger seat backrest can be reclined all the way down to let you carry long loads extending from the dashboard to the rear window.

August 2008 saw the introduction of the second generation Jazz. It kept the same general styling theme as the gen-one, but is larger overall and sits on a longer wheelbase. The result is significantly more room inside, particularly in the rear area of the cabin. Boot space increased and the 60/40 split rear seats can be folded flat without having to slide the front seats a few notches forward as in the original model.

At the same time the body was more rigid to improve NVH (Noise, Vibration and Harshness) entry into the cabin.

Honda Jazz comes with a 1.3- or 1.5-litre four-cylinder engine. Though the engine sizes remained in the second-generation Jazz, they were an all-new design. Power and torque were increased, yet fuel consumption and exhaust emissions came down. The torque graph was stretched to give more grunt at the bottom end of the rev range.

The gen-one Jazz has a continuously variable transmission (CVT). The 1.5 CVT comes with a sports mode offering seven preset gear ratios, it's controlled though steering wheel paddles. The 1.3-litre engine runs purely as an automatic.

Controversially, Honda decided to go back to a conventional torque-converter automatic transmission in the gen-two Jazz, saying some drivers didn't like the characteristics of the CVT.

While the Jazz is reasonably easy for the amateur mechanic to work on, there is some under-bonnet crowding that's inevitable on a car of this size. Keep a workshop manual at your side and don't attempt any safety related work unless you're qualified to do so.

If you want a Honda Jazz with a larger boot you can choose the Honda City

The Honda Australia dealer network is widespread in the heavily populated areas, but isn't all that established in remote areas. We seldom hear of any real hassles with getting hold of spare parts, but if you are concerned about this it may be smart to make local enquiries before falling too deeply in love with one of these cute little models. Spare parts prices for Hondas are more reasonable now than they have been in the past.

Insurance costs for Honda Jazz generally sit in the mid-range of the field. There doesn't appear to be any real differentiation between companies on premium charges. It's always wise to spend some time shopping around for the best deal, though.

If you want a Honda Jazz with a larger boot you can choose the Honda City, a Jazz with a four-door sedan rear end.

WHAT TO LOOK FOR

Check that the engine starts easily and responds quickly and positively to the throttle, even when it's completely cold.

A continuously variable transmission should react quickly to changes in throttle position and road conditions. As a CVT sounds and feels different to conventional automatics, have an expert drive it if you are not confident it's working correctly.

Make sure the brakes stop the car without any pulling to one side and that no one wheel locks while the others are still turning.

It makes a lot of sense to get a professional inspection after carrying out initial checks

Look over the interior to make sure it hasn't suffered at the hands of uncaring owners, especially bored young kids.

Bodywork should be undamaged and free from rust. Corrosion is not common unless the car has been poorly repaired after a smash.

As always, it makes a lot of sense to get a professional inspection after carrying out initial checks to the best of your ability.

VERDICT 

HOW MUCH?

Budget on spending from:
$2000 to $4000 for a 2003 Honda Jazz GLi
$4000 to $7000 for a 2006 VTi-S
$6000 to $10,000 for a 2008 VTi
$8000 to $12,000 for a 2010 VTi-S
$10,000 to $15,000 for a 2013 GLi
$12,000 to $18,000 for a 2014 VTi-S.

CAR BUYING TIP

Small city cars often suffer from more bumps and grinds than their country cousins. Too many scars may be a good reason to pass up on one car and look for another.

2015 Mercedes-Benz C63 S AMG review | first drive

I know what you're thinking. Why does the world need a Toyota Camry-size sedan with the brutally-quick performance of a Porsche? Believe it or not, Australians can't get enough of cars like this.

Perhaps it's because, for generations, we've been brought up on V8-powered rear-drive Holden and Ford sedans priced for the masses. Those masses have reached a stage in life when they can afford to treat themselves to the European cars our homegrown heroes always aspired to beat.

Perhaps it's a way of rebelling. After all, there's no limit on how quickly you can get to the speed limit.

Australia is the biggest destination in the world – per capita – for Mercedes-Benz's latest weapon against boredom.

The new generation Mercedes-Benz C63 AMG, to give its full name – or simply "the C63" among those in the know – is about to tempt the well heeled even more. Mercedes-Benz has wound back the clock on price. With an RRP of $154,900 plus on-road costs it is the same price as the 1995 C-Class AMG sedan.

The original car had just 206kW of power (from a comparatively no frills six-cylinder engine) whereas the new model due in Australian showrooms in August has almost twice that.

Talk about progress: Mercedes-Benz's epic mid-size sedan now has a thumping 375kW of grunt from a twin-turbo 4.0-litre V8.

For the record, while the price marginally undercuts its nemesis, the BMW M3 sedan, it is not the cheapest C63 AMG ever sold locally. The previous C63 dipped to $144,365 in 2008 before climbing to $153,900 last year. But Mercedes-Benz promises to deliver more bang for your bucks.

For starters, Mercedes-Benz Australia has opted to take only the high output C63 S rather than the standard C63. (For the tech heads, the difference is an engine output of 350kW and 650Nm versus 375kW and 700Nm).

The result is a blistering 0 to 100km/h time of 4.0 seconds. Care for some perspective?That's faster than a Porsche 911. And yet this is a four-door, five-seat sedan with a big boot. Peel off the badges and you're pretty much travelling incognito.

Standard fare includes creature comforts such as a digital TV tuner, heads-up display in the windscreen, 13-speaker premium audio, a panoramic glass sunroof, heated front seats, LED headlights, the list goes on.

A wagon is also available, for $157,400 plus on-road costs, in case you need to justify this car somehow as family transport.

BEHIND THE WHEEL

The new Mercedes-Benz C63 AMG is a car with a split personality. Fast and quiet, or fast and loud. Think Celine Dion versus Parkway Drive (Google them).

There is a button on the gloss-black centre console with a symbol that looks like the end of a double-barrel shotgun. Turns out it's supposed to symbolise the exhaust tips. The image is entirely appropriate.

The button switches the exhaust note from "better not wake the neighbours" to "I'm driving a V8 Supercar, dammit". Unlike a growing number of performance brands, the Mercedes exhaust sound is real. There are no hidden pipes or speakers pumping artificial noise into the cabin from behind the dashboard or via the boot.

But there are five driving modes to help suit your mood at the flick of another switch. They change such elements as suspension stiffness, the abruptness of the gear-changes and the throttle response.

The choices: 'comfort', 'sport', 'sport-plus', 'race' (where you must select gears manually via the tap shifters for the seven-speed auto) and 'individual' if you want to combine the best bits from all of the above.

Translated: the driver can choose between cruise mode and then work their way up to gradual insanity. (For what it's worth, I reckon 'sport' or 'sport-plus' are the answer: they make the car feel more agile and alert without being uncomfortable over bumps or making the gear-changes too highly strung).

In any mode, however, the acceleration is almost too fast for the senses, especially when the exhaust is in quiet mode. Parts of your brain can't fathom why it's so fast without the aural fury.

The grip out of corners is astounding, you can feel the limited-slip differential work with the super soft Michelin Pilot tyres to grab every available piece of pavement and turn it into traction and, then, instantaneous forward motion.

The feedback through the steering wheel and the base of the seat are so acute it's as though you can feel every corner of the car, and every ripple and groove in the road you're travelling over.

You may find this a fanciful comment and possibly insane, but I'm going to come right out and say it. The last time I felt a car so connected to the road, so brutally quick, and yet so sure footed, it was a $690,000 Ferrari F12 Berlinetta.

If you feel I now need to make a negative comment to someone balance this outrageous claim, then reluctantly I will. The steering is good, but perhaps not quite as linear in feel as, say, a BMW M3. But it's not a flaw, more an observation. In reality, you're holding on so damn tight and having too much fun to notice any way.

VERDICT 

Mercedes-Benz sought to create a better sports-car than the Porsche 911 by building the soon-to-be-released AMG GT coupe. But it may have just done so with a mid-size sedan.

2015 Mercedes-Benz C63 S AMG
Price: $154,900 plus on-road costs
On sale: August 2015
Engine: Twin turbo 4.0-litre V8
Power: 375kW/700Nm
Consumption: 8.6L/100km
Transmission: Seven-speed automatic
0 to 100km/h: 4.0 seconds

Specifications

Price:	From $154,900