Thursday 24 January 2019

Skoda Kodiaq vRS: ultimate test on track and ice (video)

– Can’t see the video? Click here

IT’S FASCINATING that the first of Skoda’s SUVs to carry its sporty vRS badge is the Kodiaq, the largest in the range. Even more so that the vRS only comes with seven seats, whereas you can get the standard model with five.

That should give you an idea of who this car is aimed at, and what sort of duties it will be performing; we’re talking blasts to Cornwall or the Alps with the family more than track days.

Also of note is that all Kodiaq vRSs come with Skoda’s latest four-wheel drive system as standard. That means when the going gets slippy, this car should find grip. With each wheel able to take up to 85% of the power independently, even drivers who wouldn’t consider themselves terrifically adroit behind the wheel should be able to keep the thing pointing in the right direction, whatever the conditions.

2019 Skoda Kodiaq vRS: Silverstone challenge on track and ice driving ultimate test (video) with Will Dron for Driving.co.uk

Which is possibly why Skoda thought nothing of flying a group of journalists out to northern Sweden to try out the car on sheet ice. And to ram home the versatility of the car, we also got to play with it for 45 minutes at the Silverstone circuit, one of the fastest on the F1 calendar.

Not the shortened National or International circuits, either — the full fat Grand Prix track, allowing us to tackle the mighty Copse corner and legendary high speed left and right sweeps of Maggotts and Becketts like proper Lewis Hamilton wannabes.

If you’ve already read reviews of this car then you might have been told that the vRS badge writes cheques that the 237bhp engine can’t match, and compared with SUVs in the Mercedes-AMG, Audi RS and BMW M stable, that’s true, but then you’ll need to fork out a lot more than the Skoda Kodiaq vRS’s £43,000 pricetag.

Comparable cars for power are the likes of the BMW X5 xDrive30d M Sport or Mercedes-AMG GLE 300 d, which also comes with seven seats. But although the Skoda’s interior can’t quite match the luxury of either, those models are also dearer, costing upwards of £14,000 more than the Skoda.

What’s more, as it turns out, the Skoda’s 2-litre, four-cylinder diesel engine — the most powerful diesel to ever grace a Skoda, in fact — is more than capable of hustling the best part of two tonnes around one of F1’s fastest circuits.

OK, our time on track revealed that a wedge more welly wouldn’t have gone amiss when blasting out onto the long Hangar Straight, but there’s ample power to fire the big Kodiaq from corner to corner through almost every other part of the circuit. That’s largely thanks to 369lb-ft of torque available from the diesel unit; more than that available from Skoda’s most powerful petrol engine, the 268bhp motor available for the Superb. Torque is all about that initial punch when you put your foot down, and this has plenty at almost any speed.

The vRS’s steering is surprisingly accurate, too, with the damp conditions on the morning of our test helping highlight the advantage of four-wheel drive. With the car in Sport mode (there are five other settings, including Eco, Comfort and Normal), the front end grapples for traction initially — understeer should be expected on a car as heavy as this — but that torque finds the right wheel within milliseconds and the car begins to rotate as requested, allowing you to hit your mark with impressive precision.

There’s some body roll, of course, but this is no pudding — Sport mode keeps the chassis relatively flat through the turns.

Skoda says a bit of drifting is even possible, but it’s not easy on a race circuit: you can unsettle the car by braking much too hard, transferring the weight to the front, and yanking the wheel (I was told to try this, and duly obliged), but a “drift” on Tarmac? Not really.

Having got a feel for the car over a few laps with an instructor issuing instructions like “OK, turn now… power, power, power” from the passenger seat, we brought out a stopwatch for a timed run. For the record, we lapped the 3.6-mile circuit in 3 minutes 11 seconds, but of course, without a point of comparison a lap time is about as useful as a chocolate teapot.

2019 Skoda Kodiaq vRS: ultimate test on track and ice (video) with Will Dron for Driving.co.uk

Which brings us to the second part of our trip: the Lapland Ice Driving facility, about 160km south of the Arctic Circle in Sweden. In this part of the world, temperatures dip well below freezing for up to seven months of the year, and in January the light is so fleeting that driving at 4pm might as well be midnight; it’s an eery, disorienting sensation.

But what fabulous scenery. Our venue was a vast frozen lake — an area large enough to accommodate seven Monacos, we were told — which freezes to a depth of up to a metre around October, with driving on the surface possible right through until April, when in the space of a week, the whole place returns to water.

Reassuringly, sonic devices are used to monitor the ice depth at regular intervals. Also reassuring was the temperature on the lake during our morning’s activities: -25C, which makes it extremely unlikely we’d end up taking a swim.

Carved into the huge facility are a number of tracks, including replicas of well known circuits at 1:1 scale. Paul Ricard, the Nürburgring and Yas Marina are represented, along with our setting for the day, Silverstone.

The idea: to set a second lap time, at this Silverstone on Ice. Or “Slitherstone”, if you like.

This was not a perfect comparison for a number of reasons. For one, what were rumble strips at the UK track were instead piles of thick snow in Sweden. Also, the track carved out on ice was the old Silverstone, including the Farm, Abbey and Bridge corners, rather than the new layout GP track we had driven back home.

And anyway, what sensible conclusion could we glean form comparing the times? That the car is slower on ice than on asphalt? Wow, what a insightful conclusion that would be.

These points aside, it was a fascinating exercise in getting to know the Kodiaq vRS’s handling characteristics. As most rally drivers will tell you, you can learn more about car control in five minutes on ice than you can in five years on dry road. By extension, you can also learn a huge amount about a car’s on-limit handling traits in five minutes, too.

For example, flicking between the vRS’s Normal, Sport and Snow modes highlighted nuances that would be barely detectable back in the UK.

Our cars in Sweden were fitted with studded tyres but even so, sheet ice is slipperier than an oiled eel. Getting sideways is possible in any mode but it was immediately clear that Sport mode made the back end much looser, and with a bit of guidance from an expert at ice driving, this was the mode for the fastest progress, while Snow mode made the car much easier to control in these treacherous conditions.

The difference was mainly in the weight and responsiveness of the steering and throttle. Snow mode weighted up the steering to encourage less erratic movements, while a duller throttle and much-reduced wheelspin helped improve traction.

Sport mode was more fun, with plenty of wheelspin making for more dramatic slides, but too much power too early and the car simply slid to the outside of the corner (and beached in the deep snow, as a few of my colleagues discovered). Smooth inputs from the driver are even more key in the big, high-sided Kodiaq than in a low, rear-drive sports car, and patience proved a virtue.… brake, flick, feather the throttle until the back end slides round, then wait… wait… wait, until the car has rotated enough, then nail the throttle to hold that angle for the exit.

Normal mode? That had a lighter feel to the wheel, while providing a balanced throttle somewhere between Snow and Sport.

The most impressive part was the braking. We hit 106mph down the icy version of Hangar straight before slamming on the brakes into the 90-degree right-hander of Stowe. Gone are the days when cars would simply lock the wheels and keep sliding, or worse, send you into a high-speed spin. With anti-lock braking and its electronic stability control, the Kodiaq kept dead straight and, with much help from the studded tyres, of course, scrubbed off speed amazingly quickly. Down to around 30mph, a quick flick of the wheel and we were sideways through Stowe, all under control.

The main takeaway was that the Kodiaq vRS remained eminently controllable on even the loosest of surfaces. Even more impressive is that not once did I end up facing the wrong way, even when pushing hard. Nor did I see any other reporter doing a 180 or 360 spin.

The Skoda works incredibly hard at keeping you on the road and pointing in the right direction, which is great news for anyone who dreads long motorway trips in pouring rain, or those few weeks each year when snow brings what tabloids call “chaos to the UK”.

Skoda Kodiaq vRS ice driving

Bad things? Well, the twin exhausts aren’t twin at all — there is no right-hand pipe so the chrome trim on that side is purely there to make it look more sporty and bring symmetry to the rear of the car. This was a point made all the more apparent in Sweden, where the non-exhaust filled with snow and ice while the real one remained frost-free, due to the heat.

And there was a slight delay in power delivery at low speeds when power sliding on ice in Sport mode; the car clearly wanted me to take it a bit easier in those conditions.

Also, in both the UK and Sweden I managed to accidentally trip the voice control button on the steering wheel while turning the wheel in anger, with the inside of my left hand. Maybe the button is awkwardly placed or maybe I have weirdly fat hands; the jury is out.

There may also be differing opinions on Dynamic Sound Boost, a synthetic engine sound that’s pumped into the cabin (and outside the car) to make it sound more V8-ish. It’s not gone down well with the press but I have a feeling some customers may quite like it.

And as mentioned earlier, one other sticking point might be the price: £42,870. But again, sports-focused seven-seaters aren’t exactly prolific and true competition for this kind of vehicle is more expensive right now.

What’s more, Skoda tells us most Kodiaq buyers opt for higher spec versions, with average prices around £35,000, when options are factored in. That’s why a new luxury L&K model is being introduced. From there, it’s not a huge leap to the vRS’s £43k, especially when you consider it comes fully loaded with tech like a digital dashboard and adaptive suspension, smart sports trim and a well-appointed interior.

2019 Skoda Kodiaq vRS: ultimate test on track and ice (video) with Will Dron for Driving.co.uk

At the end of the day, the Kodiaq vRS proves to be one of the most versatile vehicles currently on sale in the UK — fun when you want it to be, safe when it’s needed, and with a cavernous interior.

Its amazing versatility was highlighted during a short excursion to the edge of the Arctic Circle itself. While waiting for a photoshoot involving another car to take place, in the pitch black of 4.30pm and a temperature of -21C, my driving partner and I were cocooned in the car, with heated seats and a cabin set to a comfortable +21C, while the best of David Bowie was streamed from a smartphone via the Kodiaq’s excellent sound system. Given the extreme environment around us, it really was quite a surreal moment.

And if you wanted to know what my lap time was on snow: 4 minutes 17 seconds. So, cars really are slower on ice … you heard it here first, folks.

The post Skoda Kodiaq vRS: ultimate test on track and ice (video) appeared first on Sunday Times Driving.



source https://www.driving.co.uk/news/features/skoda-kodiaq-vrs-test-track-ice/

Friday 4 January 2019

2018 Renault Mégane R.S. 280 review

BACK IN the 1980s, buying a hot hatch was simple. There was the VW Golf GTI or the Peugeot 205 GTi. Today, if you’re in the market for a fast hatchback the options are overwhelming; without trying very hard at all we can think of 10 that deserve your hard-earned cash, including the Ford Focus RS, Honda Civic Type R and Mercedes-AMG A45. Hyundai made things harder last year by introducing the excellent i30 N.

Renault’s latest Mégane R.S. has its work cut out, then, but fortunately it manages to stand out from the crowd.

Let’s start with the heart of the car. The growling turbocharged 1.8-litre engine develops 276bhp (280hp, hence the “280” moniker), which isn’t a headline-grabber in the power stakes — the Focus RS produces 345bhp — but it turns out to be plenty for the Mégane R.S. as the front wheels scrabble for grip when the powerplant is worked hard. Renault recently launched a Trophy version of the car, which adds an extra 20hp, which is like giving a toddler with ADHD a bar of chocolate.

Whatever R.S. you go for, it can be mated to a six-speed manual or EDC dual-clutch auto transmission; we had the former and found the ‘box to have a much more satisfyingly-sporty feel than a standard Mégane’s, with a deceptively short throw.

Changes of direction can be made so quickly you’ll wonder if neck braces should be sold as an option

Spinning driven wheels mean understeer will be no stranger to an R.S. 280 driver, if they aren’t careful with throttle input. It suggests the Renault’s traction control system is a little more laid-back than some rivals’ systems (unsurprisingly, the BHP war is forcing many models to switch to four-wheel drive). Bof.

Making the driving experience all the more “exciting” is that, while some other companies have managed to eliminate torque steer from their hot hatch offerings, it comes in spades with the Mégane R.S.. This was evident during a hairy moment coming out of a right-hand dip on a B-road; as the suspension rebounded, the front wheels wanted to dart left-right-left under acceleration.

Renault will tell you that new hydraulic compression stops on all four shock absorbers (effectively dampers within the dampers) help avoid any rebound and pendulum effects, but that doesn’t stop it being somewhat… lively.

2018 Renault Mégane RS 280 review - hydraulic dampers

Some drivers may find it a bit too lively — the automotive equivalent of a rabid bloodhound on the scent. But by keeping you on your toes, you feel like you’re being tested in a way that some rivals don’t, and when you find its groove, the smiles come thick and fast.

That’s because in the dry and level, the Mégane R.S. has astounding levels of grip through corners. Two versions of the chassis are available — standard and Cup — both of which come with four-wheel steering and torque vectoring, whereby the front brakes can act independently on the inside wheel to help improve cornering. These allow the car to pivot around a tight turn with startling ferocity.

The Cup chassis adds even stiffer suspension, an anti-roll bar and a Torsen limited slip differential, enabling flatter cornering with extra lateral load and punch out of turns. Changes of direction can be made so quickly you’ll wonder if neck braces should be sold as an option.

The stopping forces are immense, too, thanks to Brembo front brakes that have grown 15mm over the previous generation R.S.

Car Power Torque Kerb weight
Renault Mégane R.S. 280 276bhp 288lb-ft 1,407kg
Ford Focus RS 345bhp 347lb-ft 1,547kg
Honda Civic Type R 316bhp 295lb-ft 1,380kg

Fortunately the front sports seats hold you in tightly. Our car was kitted out with the Alcantara pack (£1,200), which adds heating to the seats as well as R.S. embroidered upholstery.  If you want an Alcantara steering wheel, though, that’ll cost you an extra £250 on top, so the standard Nappa leather set-up may be more sensible.

Other standard kit includes aluminium pedals, front and rear door ambient lighting (which changes colour depending on driving mode: Comfort, Neutral, Sport, Race or Personal), a 7” touchscreen with sat nav, hands free phone connectivity and DAB radio, rear parking sensors and dual-zone climate control.  The part-digital instrumentation is rather attractive, too.

The Volvo/Tesla-style portrait touchscreen is a vast improvement on the systems in outgoing Renault range models. Our car came with an 8.7” upgraded screen and was packed full of features, and the sound quality from the optional Bose stereo (£800) was excellent. But the systems as a whole is not quite a match for the top rivals’ offerings in terms of slickness and intuitiveness. For example, while it ran Android Auto, it does so within a small landscape window, which looks distinctly unimpressive on a landscape tablet.

Placing the cupholders directly behind the gearlever suggests a “that’ll do” approach to the design

Certain interior material choices also disappoint, including some soft-touch fake carbon fibre-effect trim, while other frustrations include limited rear visibility with a high, narrow rear hatch opening.

Renault’s favourite trick of hiding the cruise control buttons between the front seats is another quirk, and placing the cupholders directly behind a manual gearlever so that tall cups get in the way suggests Renault employed a not-atypical “that’ll do” approach to the design.

On the plus side, the Mégane R.S. seats four without too much fuss and the boot is a decent size, while the 60:40 split rear seats allowed the car to swallow a 5ft Christmas tree (if they weren’t seasonal, this would be a standard test, for sure).

This means the 2018 Renault Mégane R.S. 280 is a bonkers but a fairly practical car that could be used every day.

Ultimately, a Honda Civic Type R and Ford Focus RS would probably enable quicker progress around a track and offer slightly more rewarding experiences on the road, while the likes of the VW Golf R, Mercedes-AMG A45 and BMW M140i are undeniably more grown up. But if you don’t mind a less polished interior and pine for an unhinged, back-to-the-80s driving experience, get behind the wheel of a Mégane R.S. 280. It’s a hoot.

2018 Renault Mégane RS 280 - dimensions

Head to head

Renault Mégane R.S. 280 vs Honda Civic Type R

Mégane R.S. 280 Civic Type R
Power 276bhp 316bhp
Torque 288lb-ft 295lb-ft
Weight 1,407kg 1,380kg
0-62mph 5.8sec 5.8sec
Top speed 158mph 169mph
CO2 181g/km 178g/km

 

Hot hatch battle: Focus RS vs Civic Type R vs M140i vs RS 3 vs Golf R vs AMG A 45

The Clarkson Review: 2016 Ford Focus RS

Girl racers take on the Ford Focus RS, VW Golf R and BMW M2

Hot hatch drag race: Audi RS 3, Mercedes-AMG A45, VW Golf R, Honda Civic Type R and Ford Focus RS

The post 2018 Renault Mégane R.S. 280 review appeared first on Sunday Times Driving.



source https://www.driving.co.uk/car-reviews/2018-renault-megane-r-s-280-review/

2019 Audi e-tron review

GET READY for the year of the electric car: 2019 will see the arrival of a series of battery-powered models such as the Mercedes EQC, Porsche Taycan and Audi e-tron that could spark a revolution in the way we drive.

They promise comfort and reliability on a par with their fossil-fuel counterparts. No longer will rechargeable cars be seen as glorified milk floats, manufacturers claim, but sleek, high-performance machines that are more tax- and environment-friendly than their petrol and diesel-powered equivalents.

A big welcome, then, to the first Teutonic Tesla: the Audi e-tron, due on sale next month. So convinced is Audi that this is the car of the future that it declares: “Fossil fuel really is ancient history for this car — today marks the start of a new era for Audi.”

It says the e-tron can “cover more than 248 miles on a single charge”, according to the WLTP cycle, the new measurement for all passenger cars, while “the battery can be replenished at a fast-charging station (150kW) in about half an hour”.

But are electric cars really about to displace hydrocarbon-powered models? On the face of it, the e-tron’s figures look impressive — enough to give Tesla’s Model S and Model X a run for their money, and at a price to match (£71,490). But for most buyers the choice will not be between the e-tron and a Tesla, but the e-tron and a conventionally powered Audi. On this basis, it starts to look distinctly ho-hum.

A five-minute refuel of a diesel Audi Q7 will deliver a range at least twice that of the e-tron. And of course it’s far easier to find a filling station than it is to find a fast charger — important when you’re nearing empty on a winter evening. Audi is gently pressing home the point that this car is for everyday, predictable journeys, rather than driving, say, to a ski lodge in the Alps or a holiday home in Spain.

“There is generally no need to stop at charging stations during everyday driving,” the company says. In other words, it’s intended for medium-distance commutes, school runs and weekend outings to shopping centres, cinemas and the like, where there’s no need to stop mid-journey and plug in.

The battery is most easily replenished plugged into a home wallbox overnight. This works well enough if you have off-road parking; not so good if you have to rely on street parking.

Assuming you’re happy with those limitations, should you buy one? There’s no doubt this is a clever piece of engineering, and a lot of car for the money. Audi is keen to encourage electric take-up, so the e-tron is priced to sell rather than recover its huge development costs.

Sensibly, it has installed the electrics — motors mounted on front and rear axles — into the type of vehicle that everybody wants these days: an SUV. The one I drove got maximum points for cool.

Devilishly good-looking — with Audi’s distinctive LED headlights and octagonal grille — it sported a ruggedised body kit that while a tad excessive for a Surrey driveway was just the ticket on the edge of the Kalahari desert where I drove it. Audi’s excuse for flying journalists thousands of miles to Africa was to show off what it regards as the vehicle’s main point of difference from the Tesla — its trademarked quattro four-wheel-drive system.

The Audi e-tron has excellent handling, possibly the best of any electric car I’ve driven

In Namibia there are giant salt pans that are like driving on summer snow. You can turn off the traction control and drift until you reach the friction limit of the tyres and the car breaks away. It’s great fun but surely a bit pointless unless you come across a gritting lorry that’s accidentally dumped a load of winter salt on the motorway. No, no, say Audi’s engineers. The demonstration proves just how good the e-tron is in wet and cold weather as well as off-road. True enough, it delivered excellent handling, possibly the best of any electric car I’ve driven.

There’s a built-in off-road mode that raises the air suspension by 2in to avoid the low-slung battery compartment snagging, and sets up the transmission and throttle for rocky or sandy terrain. That said, the e-tron is no hardcore mud-plugger and would flounder on a challenging route such as the Rubicon Trail in California. But I managed to extricate it from axle-deep orange sand on the dunes and trails around the Bitterwasser safari lodge, while curious springbok and giraffes looked on.

It comfortably seats four adults with ample leg and headroom, and the 660-litre boot (1,725 litres with seats down) is enough for a trip to a garden centre or a flat-pack furniture store, provided you don’t buy a full-length sofa.

It has taken Audi about five years to get the e-tron into production. Like most other manufacturers, it spent a year dismissing the Tesla Model S as no threat when it emerged in 2012. Then, realising it was, it got on with stripping down Elon Musk’s electric game-changer before assembling its own version in secret.

The battery, mounted low down between the axles, is a 700kg monster that accounts for a significant proportion of the car’s 2,490kg weight. Heavy or not, the e-tron is incredibly quick for a big SUV, the electric drivetrain delivering all the power as soon as you press the throttle. It reaches 62mph in 6.6 seconds, or 5.7 seconds in overboost mode, though that can be used only in eight-second bursts.

The 660-litre boot is enough for a trip to the flat-pack furniture store, provided you don’t buy a full-length sofa

Though Audi is keen to parade the e-tron’s advanced technical abilities, many customers may be drawn to it by exactly the opposite — its relative ordinariness. You expect it to drive like a computer, but, in fact, it drives like a normal SUV. The driving position and controls are in the places you’d expect, and the virtual cockpit display is borrowed from other top-of-the-line models.

Audi offers cameras in place of side mirrors as an optional extra, which it says reduce drag. However, it’s hard to see that this justifies the £1,250 cost, and the screens integrated into the door panels seem less clear than old-fashioned mirrors — especially in the glare of the midday African sun.

The e-tron is good, very good. But it’s still a technology that’s on its way, rather than fully here. For people who don’t have a wallbox charger at home, it’s a non-starter. Charging it from a 13-amp socket is like trying to fill a swimming pool with an eye-dropper. No doubt at some point when we all have electric cars we’ll laugh at the idea of driving anything else, but at the moment there are parallels with early mobile phones: expensive, bulky and served by a sparse network — of phone masts, in that case.

Round the corner are add-ons that will make all the difference. Electric charging mats allow you to charge your car similarly to a toothbrush — by driving it over the mat and leaving it overnight. The mats are being built into some expensive houses so you can park in your garage and let the car do the rest.

For now, though, many ordinary customers will regard this — as did the giraffes — mainly as something to keep a careful eye on.

Head to head

Audi e-tron vs Jaguar I-Pace

Audi e-tron Jaguar I-Pace
Price £71,490 £63,495
Power 355bhp 394bhp
0-62mph 5.7sec 4.8sec
Top speed 124mph 124mph
Range (WLTP) “More than” 248 miles “Up to” 292 miles

Which is the best electric car in 2018? Audi e-tron vs Jaguar I-Pace vs Porsche Taycan vs Tesla Model X

The best cars launching in 2019

The post 2019 Audi e-tron review appeared first on Sunday Times Driving.



source https://www.driving.co.uk/car-reviews/first-drive/2019-audi-e-tron-review/