LENSPEED

By James Wong

Drivers are increasingly feeling helpless within the shifting trends of the automotive world. We like our manual gearboxes. Yet, today almost all (if not all) new Ferraris on sale cannot be ordered with a stick shift. We like our comfortable cars. Yet, we have to contend with modern cars with large rims that worsen an already stiff ride. We also unreservedly love our big, naturally aspirated engines that make the best sounds on earth – and they are also going.

The 2012 E63 has done away with its M156 6.2-litre engine in favour of a bi-turbo 5.5-litre V8. While this could potentially be yet one of the many pleasures of motoring taken away from us, what I have discovered in my drive of this magnificent car is anything but. I am happy to report that in the E63, I have sampled one of the best applications of turbocharging in any engine I have tried before.

Codenamed the M157, the new 5.5-litre is good for 518bhp and 800Nm of torque. That is actually the same horsepower rating as the 6.2-litre, but torque has increased by 69Nm. On the road, the greater spread of torque is appreciable. I first sampled the M156 in the C63 – and in such a small car as the C-Class, the engine felt effortless. The M157 in the E63 gave the same sensation, although now things are a lot more urgent. The car has more grunt to shift its heft until it becomes apparent that it feels a lot lighter on its feet than the C63 that I drove. Allow the tachometer to spread wider and what is immediately apparent is that the engine does not feel turbocharged at all. I know this has been said many times about turbocharged engines but in this context, it is the most linear forced induced engine I have ever come across. In fact, its power delivery feels very, very similar to the M156 – except that it has a layer of additional torque that spreads nicely throughout the rev band. This is simply impressive.

Things get even better. The automatic gearbox with a wet clutch replacing a torque converter (called Multi Clutch Technology – MCT – by AMG) is a revelation. On the seat impressions are extremely positive – the gearbox is smoother than a dual-clutch transmission for the low-speed maneuvres, but as quick as those for exhilarating near-redline changes. It responds very well left on its own too – in fact I did not feel a need at all to take things into my own hands, as the gearbox intuitively selected the right gear going into corners with satisfying blips. Although the technology behind this gearbox is still relatively new to the automotive world, it could very well be offering the best of both worlds – smoothness of a torque converter and the finesse of a dual-clutch box.

It is also wonderful that Mercedes has somehow managed to keep the sound of the car as great as its naturally aspirated predecessor. There is not a hint of the turbochargers muting the exhaust note at all; this is as pure as turbocharged engines can get. All the big-bore V8 noises are still there alright, wonderful and cackling.

I had the privilege to bring the car onto a skidpad. Here is where throttle actuation is of utmost importance, as is steering feel. With virtually almost zero grip, the car had to ‘talk’ to the driver to maintain pace and avoid spinning out. With the E63, what I noticed is that while the steering is decently weighted and offered good feedback, the throttle was responding a little slower than I would like. With each jab of the throttle the engine responded a couple of milliseconds later – not a lot, but still noticeable for situations like this. Then again – I was in Manual mode – not Sport or Sport+, which in today’s world can alter the feeling of a car completely. That said, whatever mode the car was on, I just wished the throttle would be more sensitive. Perhaps it is tuned to be gentler so as to make low-speed driving more manageable.

On track, I got to push the car to its limits. I truly enjoyed the engine: what a marvel of engineering. With every straight, it was full throttle and getting the rear tyres to find purchase on the dry tarmac before blistering forward. Towards corners, the braking was impressive as well; more than enough to compensate for the weight of the car and easily bringing the car to a stop if needed. Neither did I experience any major brake fade in the 15-20 laps I did on the small circuit.

However, like most modern cars these days, weight is still an issue. While I appreciate that cars inevitably have to become heavier to meet safety regulations and to appeal to a wider market, I would really wish for manufacturers to aim not for power increases but for weight reduction. In the E63, which is to be fair a large luxury saloon, weight was crucial in driving the car quickly. Bringing the weight of the car forward while braking allowed grip to be heightened in the front tyres for a keener turn in. A tap of braking into a tight right-hander gave some weight transfer to the front, yet again for grip. However, mess the weight transfer and the car becomes a clumsy beast. It wallows when you upset its balance, it understeers when you braked too early and let the weight shift to the rear too quickly, and it eats the rotors like a cannibal when you apply braking power. In a sense, it was like a classic layout of a rear-wheel drive vehicle with a large engine up front. It can’t work wonders like the F10 M5 can, but still entertaining all the same.

All in, then, the E63 is in every way a better car than its predecessor. I thought that the turbocharged engine would corrupt its power delivery, its noise and theatre – the core things, in my mind, that makes an AMG special. However, it kept the values of the M156 close and added even more talents to its trophy cabinet. Nicely, steering feel and ride are also commendable, making the E63 a very complete car. With its new engine it might even be able to whisper about being efficient on the motorway. It is a mighty achievement, a car that can stand very tall amongst very stiff competition.

This article was first published here: http://www.autosavant.com/2012/04/18/quick-drive-2012-mercedes-benz-e63-amg/

By James Wong

On a whim, I decided that I would visit the Mini factory at Oxfordshire. I wanted to see how German engineering blends with British manufacturing, a very interesting mix indeed and I must say a very successful collaboration. I love the old classic Mini; but the new one is also a great drivers’ car and worth every look.

I drove the R53 first, a poverty spec manual 2004 Mini One and I just enjoyed how much the car felt so willing and eager. I have no terrier dog references here as I haven’t got one before, but I can liken it to a telepathic response to the driver’s inputs. It’s very impressive, especially for a base spec Mini. In fact, when I drove the R56 Cooper S I felt it was a bit too grown up, sitting a bit higher and feeling just that bit more like a normal hatchback and less Mini. The JCW R56 is surely one of the strongest expressions yet of Mini’s modernity – powerful, exhilarating but perhaps less of an enjoyment that I would like. Nevertheless, with the launch of the Coupe and Countryman the line-up is truly enlarging to a whole new Mini future. I’m excited but uncertain at the same time.

I don’t have many pictures of the factory visit which is unfortunate. The factory does not allow any photography as there are some manufacturer sensitive information inside. I’ll try to recount my experience here as much as I can with words.

Entering the factory, it wasn’t that surprising to see that nearly everything is automated. The building of the car looked pre-programmed and easy – not like the built-to-spec attention that you may be led to believe. Every car goes through the same line although if I remember correctly the Coupe goes on a different one. The individual specifications are recognised by the machines and the parts already pre-ordered before the car actually reaches the assembly point. Everything follows the just-in-time philosophy adopted from the Japanese. Parts are constantly replenished whenever they are close to running out. The cars are in constant motion (except when they go for lunch, which is an awkward time when the whole line suddenly stops!) learnt from the days of Fordism. In fact, with everything so automated I was starting to think that maybe the Mini isn’t so special any more!

It is pretty awesome that BMW has used local suppliers for most of the car, so they come from all over the Midlands, which is the industrial heart of the UK. They’re also investing a few hundred million into the plant, which is great news for the UK’s automotive industry that is, ironically, back on its foot again and leading the economy to recovery while the financial services sector is floundering.

All in, it is easy to see the German way of doing things in the factory – it definitely isn’t the inefficient British factory that eventually led to the demise of brands like Rover (which is eventually sold to Chinese buyers). However, the Britishness is also kept within the car’s soul with the local suppliers and the workers who are all from the area. Oxford is as reliant on BMW for employment as much as the plant is reliant on the talent of the workforce. It’s a real win-win situation – question is, how far is Mini going to go with its diversification? With a pick-up now also rumoured, things are getting a bit out of hand nowadays. While modern Mini is a carefully cultivated brand thus far, I’d hate to see it become something that I won’t recognise anymore.

Anyway, that’s about as much as I can remember from the tour. If you have any questions, just leave a comment and I’ll try to answer!

By James Wong

Time and again we hear complains about people being unreasonably defensive about their cars when they aren’t actually all that good.

This time, 400 miles into my road trip in Wales, I can say hand on heart that the SW20 is not an excellent drivers’ car.

There are a couple of things that I’ve confirmed through some seriously good B-roads, one is that the steering rack is too slow, two is the car could do with lower gearing for gears 1,2 and 3, and three that the ride is just a tad too stiff.

About the first point, I felt it the moment I drove it home. It became really apparent today when the car just had a lazier front end than I first anticipated. Turn in was hazy, if that’s a way to describe it, not darty and quick like what I would prefer. On the other hand, this was good for motorway cruising.

Two, the tall gearing was apparent especially when going on uphill hairpins. 2nd gear was weak, with the engine throbbing around 2,000rpm or less, way off the mark of its powerband, and even first gear didn’t allow the car enough grunt to break traction at the rear. At first I thought it’s just the lack of a LSD; now I know it’s both a lack of low-end power and a very tall gearing. Only after the corner does the car actually start to have its power kick in. This is slightly frustrating. It is mediated if the car had a good cruising ratio too, but 5th gear is too short for a 80mph cruise. A longer top gear is needed.

Three, I didn’t actually feel this was a problem even in London’s pockmarked roads. But coming here and getting on those B-roads – especially with the countless times I went in and out of the car – I realised that the car just rides a little too stiffly, being to jiggly around some surfaces and causing me to slow down more than to push on. I have to say though that the car has a great suspension travel, even at deep depressions it doesn’t bottom out, instead compressing nicely and allowing the car to sink in and steady itself again.

All in all, I’ve confirmed what the reviews have said in the 90s. This is more a GT than a true drivers’ car. That said, the sound of the engine at the back (and it’s a great one), the poise and balance (of which the car has plenty) and the way it flows down the road – makes it a great car to drive. It just lacks the last detail of grit that separates it from greatness.

By James Wong

Worringly, I’ve reached a point when I am feeling like I’ve learnt all of the car has got to teach me. Of course, that’s rubbish.

It’s just that I haven’t got the time to drive it.

On the times that I do though (and I specially plan for them so I’ll go explore some awesome B-roads), I start to discover a side of the MR2 that is cogent to the articles that have been written about this car.

Bringing the car to the limit, which is a lot more comfortable to do now that we’re reaching sizzling temperatures of up to 23 degrees Celsius with dry roads, I discover that the car has a huge reserve of understeer. Which is a bit of a surprise really, as I always had the impression (an unlearned one, I admit) that all rear-wheel drive vehicles have a tendency to oversteer. Well, apparently not.

After some physics recall sessions (nah I’m just kidding), I reasoned that the odd response of the car is probably due to the mid-engined layout. The thing about this configuration is that the car is inherently balanced. So getting a lot of speed into corners is something that the car does well – and does neutrally. That’s precisely what this car tells me it is doing. And of course, get really silly and it will understeer – now that’s a bit harder to explain. I reckon that when you accelerate, you shift the weight of the car to the rear. This weight bias, along with the weight of the engine adding to this, makes the front end very light. With this, the rubbers up front don’t find enough purchase and they don’t grip the road as much as they should. With of course the resulting understeer. I first realised and truly felt this weight balance thing in a go-kart. I had so much more grip in the front by just braking lightly and getting some weight into them.

The other theory is that the Rev 3 cars onwards are inherently made to understeer due to the complains of it being a dangerous car to drive on the limit. So tweaking the suspension geometry also has some part to play in this. Not to mention the slightly slow steering rack as well which makes quick steering inputs a little of a challenge. The car feels like it has a GT-focus and it really shows. This isn’t the darty fiesty number like the AW11.

Whatever it is, when you do get really, really silly – that is when you get on first gear and dump the clutch and get the steering wheel flipped really quickly – you will get your oversteer. Albeit coming in a very unwilling fashion. In a RWD car that isn’t powerful, like the MR2, it might just be the only method in getting the rear to kick out. There just isn’t enough torque to get the car to dance.

Well, what a learning experience so far. So not all RWD cars are created equal. Of course, I am not disappointed with the car because it can’t oversteer easily; in fact, my respect for it grows even further because of this character. I just love the mid-engined layout and the balance it affords. That said, two seats have been a struggle to accommodate so far!

Hopefully, sometime after my exams I hope to get the car on a track to do more learning. Till then, expect more notes as I visit some B-roads further north towards Cambridge!

By James Wong

The E60 M5 is one of the all-time greats of the BMW M Division – it is also, by empirical feel at least, one of the most polarising. Never was a set of contradictions placed all in one five-door saloon so controversial. A high-revving V10 engine capable in excess of 500bhp, a shuddering SMG gearbox, a luxury interior and four doors of a typical 5er. It just didn’t make much sense, especially when compared to the ultra-sensible super-saloon F10 M5, which ironically righted all the wrongs of its predecessor but in the process also removing some of the zenith qualities which made it so special.

However, we are not going to talk about the E60 vs. F10 here this time. Instead, what I’ll be writing about is the comical way of how we car enthusiasts spot a E60 M5 from a fakie wannabe. It is probably the most copied car in the entire BMW range, for some reason targeted by posers who just love their 520i’s to look like the real V10 monster. In fact, I reckon 60-70% of the ‘M5s’ you see in Singapore are actually fake. So what’s the procedure we usually take when one comes your way? Here’s mine…

1) Don’t bother with bodykit, that’s pretty replicable. Try wing mirrors. FAIL/PASS

2) Side vents just after the front wheelarch. FAIL/PASS

3) Rims are easily replicable so you can skip those (think Taiwan made). Brakes – get this right and you’re on to spotting a true M5. The real stuff are huge and will usually fill whatever available space there is on the standard M5 rims – FAIL/PASS

4) Rear exhausts – easily replicable but usually the V10s are pretty distinct at full chat. On low throttle they sound even less boomy than the four pots or I6s. Spot on! FAIL/PASS

5) If you’ve reached the interior (wow you peered so deeply eh?), look at the steering wheel, gear knob, instrumentation and seats – seats in particular, they’re expensive stuff to replicate. FAIL/PASS

There, with this no-nonsense layman 5-step guide, you can be a borderline psychopath car spotter too. Right on.

By James Wong

Driving impressions on the E63 with the new 5.5 bi-turbo V8 will be coming up. But as a taster, here’s a video of my ride in the equally endowed CLS63 AMG.

By Gerald Yuen

Which part of the specs sheet do you notice first whenever a new coupe rolls out of the showroom? Is it the instant magnetic appeal of the inflated horsepower output, how much volumetric weight those humongous cylinders can stuff to provide those jaw dropping torque figures, or maybe even justifying the purchase with your partner, by claiming that it can swallow shopping bags in empty compartments that only seem huge in your naïve eyes?

If I were to answer this question three years back, I would definitely be harping on the ongoing fascination about new and improved technology by manufacturers, being able to extract the most ridiculous numerical advantage over rivals, just by the inclusion of a couple of cylinders or force feeding superchargers into the already jammed-packed engine bay. Fast-forward 1000 days, and here I am being all grumpy about these additions, because they coincide with the first quantitative item that I look for in the specs sheet now – weight.

My answer might seem surprising to some, and I wouldn’t blame those seeking to disagree with me. Big engines and high torque output will certainly provide any driver that instant sensation when push turns to shove. Simply flex your lower right limb, let the engine rake up the horses, and there you are at illegal speeds before you know it, reeling in the horizon along the way. Maybe you can consider asking yourself this question: is power output the only vital statistic? If yes, is it due to the fact that high performance translates to the acquisition of a better driving machine?

In more ways than one, cars with towering performance figures supply the avenue for technological advancement and bragging rights. Why hold back when engineers know that they have powerplants capable of gathering digits in their favour? Performance numbers might not necessarily appeal to car enthusiasts (and by this, I mean those who actually like to drive). Toyota’s 86 might be down on brute strength, but the finesse when flogged hard through corners puts many plus-sized machines (with plus-sized outputs) to shame.

Physics allows us to believe that we can push objects further with less mass, and the same logic applies to vehicles. Imagine a sub-tonne Mazda Miata strutting her anorexic load on B roads. This makes hardly any sense to wedge a heavy duty V8 in coupes for switchbacks. The Miata has been hailed as one of the best handling mass production cars to ever grace public roads (although it has also polarised opinions), and rightly so, after having the privilege to try a couple of NA 1.6 on proper roads. Her divine talent to direct her path on switchbacks according to my demanding limbs transfers the limelight from “marvelous” technological modernity, to the good old days where flyweight is the key to wring driving enjoyment behind the wheel.

It would do no harm keeping the curb weight of your intended acquisition in mind. Focus on how the power delivery is being fed to the driver during the test drive. Does it gather speed fast due to the strength of its heartbeat, or because of the featherweight chassis-drivetrain-powertrain combo? I’ll select the latter in a jiffy.

By James Wong

I’m supposed to be starting on my law revision now, but in the interests of keeping my writing alive and peppy I’ll just slip in a post here now.

Yesterday, I did what most petrolheads would be familiar with: waking up early in the morning for a drive. Usually the starts are just before the break of dawn where everybody would still be thankfully in their beds and held on weekends (which takes out the working crowd and the hang-over zombies), so the roads were blissfully quiet all up till 8am. I was dreading the crawl through London (yes, even at 5am on a Sunday morning) but thankfully very few road diversions and crazy drivers were active that morning.

Reaching the meet-up point I was already greeted by a huge contingent of cars, every one of them the proper ‘PH cars’ that are frequently debated about on the forum. I’m not supposed to divulge too much details of the drive due to privacy reasons, but I can talk about my own car so let’s shift the focus on the MR2.

My group consisted of the Japanese cars which included the MX-5, MR2 Turbo, S13, Starlet and the Celica GT4. It was a nice warm introduction for me to meet some like-minded drivers. We headed off and the roads were – I cannot emphasise enough – fabulous. They were unmarked on the GPS and seemed to cross endless green fields to either side that was akin to a private road. Sometimes, we would cross a creek or a dense forest that is not unlike a scene driving through Germany. Then we would suddenly reach larger roads and onto those flowing A-roads that allowed a higher speed.The route was simply amazing.

I rounded up the rear of the convoy and found the power barely adequate to keep up. Every acceleration run required me to bring the engine to its redline in gears 1, 2 and 3. Can’t complain though – the good thing about underpowered cars is the opportunity to drive them hard at completely sane speeds. I enjoyed the shifting, so precise and measured. The steering also felt a tad better than what I reported before about it being slow, but still I’d prefer more deftness. Balance was perfect though; think that was what helped me through some of the corners where it was the balance and not the acceleration that allowed me to keep up.

Also – unintentionally – I hit the rev limiter once while overtaking (requiring second gear and then third halfway through the overtake) and the 16 year old engine felt as good as new. On the way back I garnered the confidence to try scrubbing a roundabout (if you catch my drift) and finally, for the first time since I got the car, the tail became mobile. One quick deft flick of the steering wheel was all it took to get the car back in line. So natural, I didn’t really feel like it was enough.

More photos and videos soon! Back to my full-time job of studying.

Photo credit: Rob Pepe of Shutter-Life

By James Wong

So in a rather hasty fashion, I’ve went ahead and bought the third MR2 I saw. That’s a better record than the Mk2 GTI, which was the first car I saw and then signed for. Already things are looking much rosier than what I had experienced with the patchy GTI. The car’s got a full service history, an excellent exterior and interior condition, new tyres, a re-fitted cambelt, a new water pump, a full service (oil and filter change) and a coolant flush. All that’s on top of a year’s MOT and tax. I am not at all disturbed by the 156,000 miles it has done, you can’t even tell from the car’s condition apart from the slightly wrinkled leather and breathless electric windows.

Just as well, I had planned a visit to the Mini factory in Oxford and the Bentley factory in Crewe so the MR2 would be making its first road trip just a day after I brought it home. A total of about 400 miles was done in the span of two days. A couple of impressions of the SW20 if you’d allow me after all those hours of driving:

1) The car is loud
Apparently I underestimated the noise that permeates the cabin from the engine just behind the cabin. It’s always present, slightly intrusive at 50mph and encouraging permanent ear damage at 70mph. It’s not an bad noise, but not a very pleasant one either. If the car had a 6th gear it would have improved its cruising capabilities considerably. For a  1996 car it’s rather surprising it hasn’t got one. At full throttle though, the car sounds rather good for a four pot, very Japanese in its delivery (read: tinny) and yet a perverse kind of pleasure much like how a boy racer would savour it.

2) GT or sports car?
The SW20 is often criticised for its increase in size and weight which blunted its handling. I can see how this is so. The car feels quite large, not helped by its slow steering rack which takes longer than I would like to respond to inputs. That’s compounded, I would imagine, when the car’s oversteering and corrective steering is needed. When I get the chance to do that I’ll report on how that feels here.

The engine is also very light on torque, like a smear on a very wide surface, and so it spreads thin. There is basically a lot more go at the top end, so going above 5,000rpm to get a move on is rather typical when driving this car. When it reaches that power band, it accelerates decently quick – not rapid by any standards – but enough to have fun. That means the car is rather tiresome in the city and also on the motorway.

The engine’s characteristics lead to the next question – the engine needs to be canned like a sports car. But the car actually rides very well on the motorway and, given a sixth gear, it would have been a great cruiser. It also feels better on flowing A-roads than switchbacks on B-roads and feels nicely balanced. So why is it that the car seems to be built as a GT but with an engine that doesn’t have the torque to do the GT work? You would quickly point out that the Turbo model solved the issue, but then that model was never officially sold in the UK. Another minor note too: the wind buffering is pretty serious on the car, so you’d have to watch the wheel pretty carefully.

3) Steering a landmark case of heftiness vs. feel
Most drivers cannot tell the difference between a heavy steering and a feelsome one. I have problems myself too. But the MR2′s one made it very clear. The steering is heavy, especially at low speed – requiring some muscle to maneuver around car parks.  At speed, it feels better but then it feels like there is slightly too much turning needed to get the car to turn (due to the slow steering rack as mentioned above). The car doesn’t follow your inputs fast enough and lacks feel. Well, that’s my take on it anyway.

4) Higher limits
The mid-engined layout is normally reserved for exotica, but Toyota went against the grain and built one for the mass market, an enduring move that lasted as the Mk3 came after the millennium. The balance on offer is exceptional. It’s nothing like I’ve ever driven – so little weight deficiencies at the wrong places. It really does feel I can push the car really hard and it will forgive. This Rev 3 model apparently also solved the snap oversteer issues – it seems to be true so far as I am finding great difficulty to break traction from the rear tyres. It would probably be a good idea to try it eventually though so I’d know where the limits are. But at this moment I haven’t found it.

5) Odd weight transfer on braking
On moderate braking, the rear is noticeably loose and twitchy while the front secure. I am finding this rather odd. The larger brakes are at the rear because, as my half scientific mind would tell me, that’s where most of the weight is. But it seems to be that there is a brake bias towards the front wheels. This warrants further investigation with hard braking. The dealer said the car doesn’t have ABS but I have a ABS light that’s on the dash that lights up – so I’ll try that too. Thankfully, the car doesn’t produce much brake dust in the process so the rims still look really clean.

6) Odds and ends
When getting a used car, you should probably always change the windscreen wipers if they haven’t been changed for a while. I was driving at night through stormy rain near Birmingham (much heavier than what I am used to in the UK) and the wipers were near useless. I then spent 30 minutes trying to fit in new ones but then gave up. I confess, I am a car enthusiast who doesn’t know how to change a windscreen wiper. The next morning, I went to a workshop which sorted me out in 30 seconds. The point is, the old wipers made what was a dangerous first drive in a mid-engined, RWD car in the rain at night an absolute death trap. Thankfully the car and I made it through!

Also, what a revelation to finally have a working radio. The speakers on the MR2 are also very, very good. Love the detailing of the rear window too – curved beautifully. Could do with more storage space in the interior but otherwise it’s very spacious for two. Boots are also very useful.

Alright, that’s the first report of the car. I did a video introduction of the car too but I think that might take a while as I mounted the GoPro at a slightly mental angle. So I’ll get that sorted.

By James Wong

Just a quick update here. The search for the replacement has finally made some progress and now we are down to two choices: The very special and individualistic 1997 Toyota MR2 N/A or the peppy 2009 Clio 200 Cup.

It’s a really tough choice. So tough, in fact, that it’s the main thing that I am thinking about these days (or, to the detriment of school, weeks). It wasn’t difficult to eliminate the other two choices. The RX7 is by all measure a fabulous car, but as a ownership prospect it proved too daunting for a short 1.5 year period, especially for a student like me with limited time for fettling about. The Peugeot, while lovely in all of its handling glory, has two of the Must-Nots of being French and Old. It is OK to be one of those, but not both.

So that leaves the two – Toyota and Renault. Odd choices you might say at first, but give it deeper thought and then it becomes clear that these two cars are the antithesis of each other, the contradictions so great that it is very clear that both has to be considered very seriously. Furthermore, it is because of their complete difference to each other that it is so very difficult to accept just one. There is just so much to learn from either car.

It is even hard to place my priorities nowadays, but given a push I’d merit fun to drive as the most important factor, followed by reliability and then practicality. Both cars are fun to drive, but out of the box – the Clio is likely to satisfy more. The Clio would probably be more reliable (coming with some warranty too). And of course, the Clio wins on the practicality front. Easy choice?

Not really. The Clio costs 11,000 pounds – which is just about 8 times more expensive than a good condition MR2. Is it really worth the extra money?

There’s also the “problem” of it being FF. I know I have been unfairly discriminating against front-wheel drive cars, but then the situation here is that I’ve owned two FF cars in the last few years. Some part of me says it is time for a change to a different layout. I’ve always liked to own a RWD – but is the MR2 a RWD worth owning? The N/A model is just about the mid-range of the pack of those sold in the UK – the basic being the lower model and the Turbo the most powerful of the range. The Clio, however, is probably one of the best front-drivers in the modern day. So, excellent FWD or, according to reviews anyway, a mediocre RWD mid-engined car? I’d say that excellence matters more, because ‘I’ll have nothing but the best’ is what I always like to say. I mean, there’ll be another time in my future where I can own a RWD worth owning, I reckon. But will I be able to pick up a Mk2 MR2 then (which has always been something I’d like to own)?

All’s said and done, it’s not an easy choice at all. Despite the price gulf. Despite how different they are. Despite everything.

Time’s helping though. By next weekend I should have something new parked downstairs. Whichever I choose, it won’t be a mistake.