A new vehicle concept, 30 years ago.

Written for AROnline




I'd like to talk about Audis and BMWs in this blog. There, I've said it. Those who may be outraged by such talk on this site, please feel free to keep quiet. But I have a very good reason for doing so, and it involves possibly my very favourite of all BL's products.

Audi have recently launched their A5 Sportback, and BMW the competing 5-Series GT. These cars are both, as far as I can see, pointless. The Audi A4 and BMW 5-series are already available as a saloon, or for those who want a tailgate, as estates. So naturally, we need hatchback versions of both to plug the gap in the middle. Of course, I may be missing the plot spectacularly here - after all, German execs are not my thing. They might be aimed at someone wanting something more exclusive than an A4 or 5-Series, in which case they will achieve their aim. For about ten minutes, until everyone has them.

Alright, I'm being overly cynical. But this is because both companies, as far as I can see, cater for the markets these cars are aimed at already. The idea of a large and upmarket hatchback is one that appeals to me greatly. Which brings me nicely into the BL themed bit of the blog.

The point I'm making is this. Audi's press release states that the Sportback is "a new vehicle concept" and "setting new trends in vehicle design". BMW haven't been quite so fatuous as to assume that they originated the concept of an executive hatch - their press release bangs on about a cross between a classically styled GT and a saloon car. But in either case, it is implied that the concept is new. In 1976, Rover replaced the P6 range with the SD1 range. This was an executive hatchback; and unlike the Audi or BMW, it can rightly claim to be a first. And it was a hit - it was upmarket, and made by a company with a history of producing good executive cars (albeit under the umbrella of BL, so quality wasn't always quite right). It spawned many imitators, but the Rover is the one everyone remembers. It was replaced in 1986 by the 800 - available as a fastback by 1988. The 800 was a cop-out in my opinion; offered in saloon form for those who didn't see the appeal of a hatch, and thought was even given to market the hatch as an inferior model under the name of 600. With the exception of Vauxhall's Signum, executive hatchbacks pretty much died with the 800 in 1999. They didn't even bother by the time the 75 came along. Since then, the genre has more or less ceased to exist. And everyone else who tried seemed to fail in this sector. How many Renault Safranes, Fiat Cromas, Ford Granada MK3s, and Citroen XMs have you seen recently?

But the press will love the A5 Sportback and 5-series GT, stating that a large executive hatchback is a great idea. The reason? Because the 2 companies doing it are the darlings of the popular motoring press; Audi and BMW. Yet I doubt the idea will take off again, because they've done it the wrong way. Going back to the top of the blog for a second, both cars already have an equivalent saloon and an equivalent estate. And I am yet to work out quite why we need more choice than that. I mean, if neither an A4 or A4 Avant suits you, there are several other perfectly good executive saloons for similar money. If you want a medium sized Audi, what's wrong with the normal A4 or Avant?

Rover got it so right it was untrue in 1976 by launching their new executive car with this one body style. No choice, you took it or left it. And they cleaned up. And I'd even go so far as to say that had they continued with the theme of the large executive well-appointed hatchback - preferably V8 and RWD but it needn't even be that - Rover may well still be here.

New directions for Royce and Bentley

Written for AROnline





I’ve always been a bit of a Bentley man. Since Quentin Willson outlined just how inexpensive a Turbo R can be on Top Gear when I was seven , I have made it my ambition to one day own one of these cars. No mere Royce would do, it would have to be a Turbo R or RT. The immense power of these cars coupled to their girth and their splendour is, to me, an utterly irresistable package. Things are much the same when it comes to the Spirit/Turbo replacement, the Seraph and Arnage. I’ve always seen the Spirit of Ecstasy as a little nouveau riche when compared to the flying B. And yet the tables seem now to be turning - the bewinged lady seems to have become the beacon of good taste, and the B on the bonnet of a Bentley could now be taken to mean ‘brash’.

The Bentley Continental range just seems to lack the grandeur that a Bentley SHOULD have; the je ne sais quoi that appeals so in the older Bentleys such as the Arnage and the Continental R. And you see far too many Continental GTs, GTCs, and Flying Spurs pimped up to look like homages to bad taste and excessive wealth. The Mulsanne I wrote about some weeks ago seems to come pre-pimped, with wide chrome window surrounds, a tacky grille, and chrome dinner plates masquerading as wheels

I didn’t like the Phantom when it was launched some six years ago. I thought it was far too overt, too expensive, too tasteless for the true connoisseur. But, in a dark colour and on the right alloy wheels, it has matured into quite an attractive and restrained car. And Rolls-Royce seem to have pulled off the same trick with their new car; the Ghost. Set to retail at about £200000, the car is pitched at Bentley Mulsanne customers and at those seeking to downsize from a Phantom to a car which measures only 17′8″ in length.

The Ghost is based upon a BMW 7-series floorpan, and a 6.6 litre twin turbo version of BMW’s V12 is it’s powerplant of choice. This results in over 560bhp and 575 lb ft of torque - more than you get in the Phantom and about the same as the Mulsanne is predicted to have. Using an eight speed - three or four too many for my liking if I’m honest - automatic gearbox, the car should accelerate to 60 in 4.7 seconds, the same as a Bentley Continental. Cosmetically inside and out it’s basically a shrunken and slightly more sporting copy of the Phantom - not only more subtle than it’s larger sibling, but more subtle also than the new Mulsanne. Kit-wise, it’s unlikely potential owners will be left wanting - the electronic toys on offer include a 330-yard night vision camera and automatically dipping headlamps. The sound system has more speakers than my house, and a 12.5GB hard drive for your mp3s. No doubt it will also be iPod compatible.

Convertible and Coupe variants should be announced following the car’s appearance at next week’s Frankfurt Motor Show, and the saloon will go on sale in the not too-far-distant future. Pimps and rap artists need not apply.

The new Bentley; post-launch

Written for AROnline





What you see above is a genuine image of the new Bentley. I was wrong on some matters, yet not far off on others. The name, for instance, I got wrong. I suggested in this blog, twelve days ago, that the new car would be called the Eight. I was wrong; another moniker from Bentley's past is to be resurrected; Mulsanne. However, I was right about the technical aspects; it will use the Bentley V8 and sit on a currently bespoke platform; which, it is speculated, will be shared with a future four door Bugatti. I was also wrong about the rear of the car. I had assumed that Bentley would be conservative and stick to the same basic lines as all Bentleys since the T-series; those of a sensible, three box saloon of straight lines - my artist's impression is, for any interested parties, visible in my blog. No, I was barking up the wrong tree. They've gone further back, trying to update the lines of the S Series and Rolls Royce Silver Cloud. I'm not complaining, it works. Except that it doesn't.

You see, Bentley have designed this car, seemingly, after looking at what the kings and queens of bling do to their Continentals. So we have shiny chromed mesh grilles, chromed 21" alloys, and spangly lights. No no no no no, terribly non-U. What we SHOULD have recieved was a grille with chromed slats, smaller, less obvious wheels, and less of the fairy lighting at the front. I accept, daytime running lights are to become mandatory on new cars, which is probably the excuse for the lights. But where are the excuses for the grille and wheels? Bentley had the chance to produce something of breathtaking elegance and restraint, but they've fouled up in the details.

I am not saying I dislike this car. I am not saying I should refuse to buy one. I am saying that the concept is right but the execution has been slightly flawed. But it will grow on me, I'm sure - so long as Bentley offer some more conservative choices of wheel. After all, I saw a pic of a new XJ today in a dark colour which resolved every single criticism I made of it weeks ago. It's just that I expected Bentley to produce a universally and instantaneously likeable car, not something so, I don't know... overt.

Maybe I'm being too harsh. I do like the car; it's certainly the most attractive new shape I've seen in months. But then, it's hardly a new shape, is it?

I'll come back to this car, in two weeks or so, when I'm more used to the shape. Til then I'm not entirely satisfied with what I see.

The new grand Bentley - my thoughts

The new big Bentley is due to be unveiled next week, at the Pebble Beach Concours d'Elegance in California. Above is my less-than-perfect artist's impression of how I believe the car will look. Speculation is growing as to the new car's name - but Eight seems the most likely given current evidence. Mechanically I can't see it differing too far from the Arnage, and it shares it's platform with a new Bugatti saloon due in the next few years. The interior should be similar to the Continental and the Arnage ranges; offering a more contemporary look than it's predecessor, yet I feel it will differ (albeit not by much) from that of it's cheaper sibling.














On a totally unrelated note, I was at BMC/BL day in Peterborough on Sunday, and I discovered to my immeasurable ecstasy that this blog has an audience (Well, besides those who I make read it). Jonathan Sellars, you made my day by telling me that. It's thus the least I can do to promote your blog in return - for any interested parties, click here.

Peugeot's 306 - the best banger for your bucks?

Between 1993 and 2002, Peugeot's 306 was one of the most popular small family cars available in the UK. A replacement for the Peugeot 309 (Does this make the 306 a Talbot Horizon MK3?), the car was styled by Pininfarina, based upon the Citroen ZX platform, and built at the former Rootes factory in Ryton. Engines spanned 1.4 to 2.0 4 cylinders, with a couple of popular XUD-based tractor powerplants thrown in for good measure. Two facelifts; one in 1997 and one in 1999, ensured that the car remained fresh until it's demise.


Yes, I admit it, the 306 is old news. The youngest of the cars is now seven years old, and its successor has also been replaced. But there is method in what seems like a mad choice of review. I've been running the family 306 now for a number of months, and as such I feel it's the perfect car upon which to cut my reviewers' teeth.


We've had the 306 in the family for about six years. It's a 1995 M plate 1.8 XT automatic, in Forest green with a beige velour interior. Due to a dealer error, we got it well below book - £1500, now worth between £500 and £700. And I genuinely think that at that money, it's a bargain worth investigating.


Let's start with the positives. The car is reasonably quick - although it's a little car with a 1.8 engine I'd expect the autobox to rob it of power. The car seems lethargic on paper, but unlike anyone else Peugeot measure these with fully laden cars. It handles well; the passive rear wheel steering conspiring with the excellent chassis to ensure that the car remains sure footed in any real world situation. The steering itself is well weighted, and spirited driving can put a smile on your face. The ride seems poor, but that can be attributed to the condition of Sheffield roads. If I'm honest, it's certainly no worse than, say, a Jaguar X Type. The car is comfortable, spacious (I'm 6'3", and have transported people of considerable girth in comfort - for people of a more orthodox size there is plenty of room for five), and with the beige interior, it's an airy and pleasant place to be. The radio in the car is a Blaupunkt unit, of a design exclusive to Peugeot, and whilst I've only ever used it to listen to Radio 2 I can confirm that it is a good unit; with superb sound quality. The boot is reasonable for the size of car, and on short local runs the car will return twenty miles per gallon. On a long run I am confident the car would return between 35 and 40mpg, which for a large engined automatic is by no means bad. And, purely from an aesthetic point of view, a day spent cleaning and polishing the car, and re-blacking the rubbing strips, can make it look almost new.


However, it's not all good. I have seen it said that French cars are essentially solid, but the 'tinsel' - unnecessary bits such as trim and toys - aren't of superb quality and will break. This is the case. The radio unit sometimes requires a restart before it will play anything, and even then on occasion it refuses to emit sound. The trim surrounding the sunroof switches is currently held in place by two blobs of Blu-Tack; the original clips having succumbed years ago. The trim piece on the rear ashtray is in the glovebox; several attempts to mend it having proved futile. And the steering wheel is made of a soft touch plastic which looks like elephant skin. It isn't, however, quite so resilient. Fourteen years of be-ringed hands upon it have left their mark - the top half feels as if it is made of sandpaper. And because ours has the rare beige trim, and a rare steering wheel design (In 1995 Peugeot must have used 7 different styles, one of which - ours - is like hen's teeth), we have been unable to source a replacement. I am, as such, actively seeking a set of driving gloves.


But these are but a few flies in what seems a very pleasant ointment. For £500, there are few cars that are so accomplished, and that I feel would offer the same amount of driver enjoyment and confidence. I am a Rover group fan, but I seriously doubt that either the R8 series 2/400, or the HHR series 400, is quite so accomplished for quite so little an amount of money. Buy a 306 if you're on a budget. You shan't regret it.

And now for something completely different

Just been dared to post this. I wasn't told where I was to post it, so i thought I'd stick it here out of harm's way.


That is all.

The Jaguar Mark X. J.

Last week, I wrote about the new XJ. I am sad to say that my last paragraph seemed awfully prophetic. I stated that it could well suffer the same fate as the Mark Ten; it could end up being too big, too vulgar, and too brash for Britain. It could also have suffered the same problem as it's ancestor; that of employing styling motifs not suited to a car of it's size.

I was only too right.

The front end is superb, sublime, and lots of other things beginning with S. However, I refuse to believe that the back of the car is Callum's work. That man can style cars - the back of the new Jag hasn't been styled. Behind the rear doors is all wrong - that boot is at the wrong level, the rear window extends too far, it's too slopey, and I've seen better arses on chimps. And I haven't yet seen Ray Charles credited for his hand in styling it; the black D-pillar. Ultimately, the problem is that it doesn't really flow. It's too fussy and disjointed to really look good from the rear - the rear window is far too shallow in it's rake, and extends too far towards the back of the car. Don't in any sense get me wrong, I love four-door coupes, but (and it does pain me to say this) even Merc's CLS is more coherent.

What Jaguar SHOULD have done is a swoopy three-box design. Leave it as it is to the back of the rear doors, and after, say, the foremost edge of the rear lights. But the bit between these should have been more restrained, more upright, more - dare I say it - like a proper Jaguar. Had they managed to pull this off correctly it would have sold like hot cakes on a cold November morning in the snow. But it was not to be.

The interior also represents a radical departure for Jaguar - and having conferred with a number of friends I have discovered that the walnut makes the dash. I'd quote my mate Will, but what he said regarding the Sport interior (which lacks the walnut and eschews cream leather for an all black, Germanic look) isn't really suitable for public consumption. All recognise it as a Jaguar - but then my tests were conducted with a standard interior. A de-tree'd and black interior would produce very different results.

So. Jaguar have cocked up. Let's hope there aren't too many of my mindset out there. But there's still a faint glimmer of hope. I do get the impression that it would look good in black. Let's pray it's the only shade they decide to offer it in.