Got A Frosty Windscreen?
During winter, frost is one of those annoyances that face drivers after a cold, clear night. OK, we don’t get frosts anywhere as near as hard as they do in, say Canada or Norway, but we still get them here a bit in the southern bits of Australia (OK, you lucky Queenslanders and Northern Territorials, you can feel smug and go off to read something else). Frost isn’t just a hazard on the roads but it’s a real pain all over your windscreen. If you’ve had to leave your car out overnight, or if you were parked on the street during that late-night party, then you can come back to a sparkly windscreen that won’t let you see anything except glitter. Not safe for driving, especially in icy conditions.
So how are you going to get that ice off your windscreen? It’s all very well to stay that prevention is better than the cure and that you should have garaged your car overnight or at least tried the old trick of putting a cover over the windscreen to keep the frost off (e.g. a tarpaulin or even a flattened-out cardboard box – and those sunshades can do the job, too, giving them a job over winter as well as during summer). Your windscreen is iced up and you need to get the kids to school on time or get home from the party, and everybody’s sitting there with chilly fingers and wanting you to hurry up.
A Lotto Win Away: Aston Martin DBS Superleggera.
Iconic British car maker Aston Martin has unveiled their hotly anticipated Ferrari 812 competitor. It’s called the Aston Martin DBS Superleggera. Priced at US$305,995 it packs a supercharged 5.2 litre V12, punching out 533kW and a tree-stump pulling 900 Nm of torque across a mesa flat rev range of 1800 to 5000 rpm.
Based on the DB11 AMR, that’s 63kW and 200Nm more than the donor block.
The car has a dry weight of 1693 kilograms and rolls on gorgeous black paint alloys at 21 inches of diameter. Pirelli P-Zero tires are the chosen rubber. The drivetrain has been uprated and provides a 0-100kph time of 3.4 seconds and will see the ton three seconds later.
Aston Martin has delved into the books of history with the name. DBS hasn’t been used since 2012 and Superleggera, Italian for “light weight”, goes back to the 1960s. To that end, Aston Martin have eradicated 121 kilograms of mass. It also, until 2012, sidelines the evocative Vanquish nameplate.
One of the design briefs was to visually spread the gap between AM’s model range. To that end, the DBS Superleggera has a more assertive grille and angrier looking headlights complete with angular LED driving lights. The grille is in a nosecone designed to increase down-force before combining with an extensively modified floorpan and rear diffuser to add up to a total of 180 kilos of down-force. Drag wasn’t sacrificed, with the same drag coefficient as the lesser down-force endowed DB11. There’s just 70kg here.
The profile is low, sensual, and definably Aston Martin is some elements. What’s new are the airvents leading from behind the trailing edge of the front wheels and edging back into the leading edge of the doors. The bootlid no longer displays the iconic Aston Martin emblem, it now proudly says the company name and sits between super slimline LED tail lights. This sits above a retuned exhaust, said to offer an extra ten decibels of what chief engineer Matt Becker says is “quality noise”.
There’ll be plenty of that on demand, with the traction control system being reprogrammed to cope with the extra torque and its delivery to the tarmac. Becker says of the reprogramming: “If you slide the car and you know how to drive, it gives you all of the information you’ll need about when to put your foot on or lift from the throttle.”
Aston Martin is targeting both its own existing Vanquish customers, but more specifically owners of the Prancing Horse. This car is part of Aston Martin’s “Second Century” plan, where a new model per year for seven years is released. This includes a convertible version of the DBS Superleggera due for 2019. Aston Martin expects to start deliveries before Christmas of 2018.
Private Fleet Car Review: 2018 Toyota HiLux Rugged-X and Rogue
It’s fair to say that sometimes a manufacturer will release a car that’s dressed up and sold as a limited edition in a cynically grinned cash-grab. Toyota‘s trio of body kitted HiLux four door utes, the Rugged, Rugged-X, and Rogue, are dressed up but Toyota says they won’t be limited editions. They’re actually a mid-life model addition to the range. 
The drivetrain remains the same as the three are, unsurprisingly, based on existing models. A 2.8L four cylinder diesel with 130kW and 430 or 450Nm (depending on whether a six speed manual or auto is bolted to it) is standard for the three. The boss tradie aimed Rogue is auto as standard whilst the let’s get weekend dirty Rugged and Rugged-X can be bought with either a three or two pedal setup. The entry level Rugged manual starts from $54,990 and there’s a $2K premium for the slushbox. Rugged-X starts from $61,690 and again has a $2K auto price jump. Rogue is the same price as the Rugged-X manual. 
Economy was worse in the Rogue than Rugged-X, finishing on 10.5L/100km and the Rugged-X finished at 9.7L/100km. These figures aren’t far off the combined cycle figures of 10.9L and 7.9L/100 respectively from the 80L tank, but as both were used only in urban environments, the dollars start adding up. Plus, Toyota quotes the Rugged-X as being heavier than the Rogue in a dry weight comparison, at 2252 kilos versus 2147 kilos. Hmmm…..
Rogue comes with a restyled front plastic bumper with driving lights locked away in a niche in each corner. Said niche is angular in design and strongly resembles one from Kia’s Sorento from the early-mid 2010s. Both Rogue and Rugged-X have a roll-bar with bespoke nameplate, towbar, bash-plates under the nose, and sidesteps. Here’s there’s a slight difference, with the Rugged-X having narrower all metal steps called rock rails, and Rogue getting wider plastic shrouded steps.
Both Rugged and Rugged-X have a snorkel but again a visual difference. The Rugged has a proper bullbar fitted with integrated LED driving lights, with the Rugged-X a smaller steel front bar, integrated centre mounted LED light bar, and sharply framed corners for easier off-road climbing. At the rear there’s matt black covers for the leading edge of the tail lights. Headlights in the Rugged-X are lined with LEDs but the Rugged dips out.
There’s additional common features for the two; under-body tow hitch points front and rear, an open rear tun with urethane protection for the floor and sides, a blacked-out tailgate handle, and Rugged bonnet decals. The Rogue is more subtle in the decaling plus has a lockable hard cover for the marine carpet lined tub. Rogue has 18 inch black painted alloys, Rugged and -X have the same styled 17s. The Rogue came clad in a pearlescent white, the Rugged-X test vehicle in a complementary to the decaling grey.
Inside the Rugged-X is an interior that’s almost a clone of what’s found in the Rogue. Bar a difference on the floor with rubber mats versus carpet, and slightly different sill trim, the pair are identical, through to the dash design, features, and somewhat near compromise in rear leg room. Even though the three are all over five metres long in total length and have a wheelbase of three, the actual cabin sizes aren’t great and hopefully this is something an update addresses. In essence, the rear cabin is tolerable for anyone hovering at six feet or so in height but if the front seats are occupied by those at the same height and by necessity push the seats back, then…
The dash itself is heavily driver focused. The tiller feels broader than it probably is, a pair of dials bracket a small info screen that plays a GIF on startup and shows info via a tab on the right hand spoke of the steering wheel. The dash itself is a three fold shape and seems to fade off into the distance on the passenger’s side. Neither side wraps around, they simply end abruptly at each door.
A centrally mounted touchscreen, a different design to that found in the Camry and looking more as if bolted in rather than designed in, houses a CD player, DAB tuner (which was fussy in both cars by only displaying a select set of DAB stations), Bluetooth, and via USB and Auxiliary located ahead of the gear selector. The all over look is black on black, with more black thrown in for good measure. This may suit the Rugged, the -X could do with a bit more lightness, and the Rogue needs a broader colour palette full stop.
Seating in the -X and Rogue is leather with a one setting heat button next to the USB port. Driver’s seats were electrically powered and excellent in actual comfort levels. But the pair miss out on some now seen as essential safety equipment. Although a rear view camera is on board, there’s no parking sensors there, no Blind Spot Alert, no Autonomous Emergency Braking and that ;ast one is crucial given the lack of real stopping urge in the Rugged-X, and only slightly more inclined in the Rogue. ESC is standard though, as are seven airbags and trailer sway control. if you do wish to tow, there’s a 3200kg braked towing capacity. Cargo carrying, however, is well under a tonne for both, with Rogue 826 kilos and 748 kg for Rugged-X.
On the road the pair display distinctly different characteristics. The Rogue is more inclined towards being car like, the Rugged-X is typical four wheel drive with a looser rear end and a ride quality tending towards wallowy and pogo. The steering in the Rugged-X was rubbery on centre but backed off from that through left and right. The Rogue again felt more like a car in its steering. Drivewise, being based on the same mechanicals meant they accelerated better in Power, were as equally more sluggish in Eco, and were reasonably quick in normal driving. Hard acceleration had the transmission move through the lower, more closely spaced gears, quickly although the engine became thrashy above 3500 rpm. 
Light acceleration is better for the transmission, as changes were far smoother, and less inclined to be physically felt. More than occasionally though, the transmission was caught out by slowing and then accelerating, as one does coming to a give way line or roundabout. The indecisiveness would have the six speed slip back from third or fourth a cog or two then suddenly drop down again. It was also prone, on longer yet more gentle declines, to drop back a cog too far in an effort to engine brake.
Only the Rugged-X was taken off-road, as the tyres fitted to the Rogue were more of a tarmac spec, plus the Rigged-X was more specifically kitted for the purpose. It’s here that the departure and approach angles also differ between the two. Rogue has 30 degrees, Rugged-X 28. Departure angles are 21 and 20 degrees respectively. On our favoured test track for off roading, a fire trail with a great mix of gravel, rock, mud, mud puddles, and some good inclines, the Rugged-X ate these up without a noise.
High range four wheel drive was selected and that was all that was needed even on the sections where low range, Hill Descent Control (which was tested and worked as expected) and diff-lock would have been suitable. Ride and handling immediately became obvious as being more suitable for the varying kind of terrain, as the spongy leaf sprung rear enabled the Rugged-X to roll over obstacles as easily as tarmac.
Toyota’s standard three year warranty applies, as does their roadside assistance and fixed price servicing packages.
At The End Of The Drive.
After the failure of the Toyota Racing Division experiment, one could cast a cynical eye over the Toyota HiLux Rugged, Rugged-X, and Rogue. With a potential design update hint with the Rogue’s front bar, both should attract a bit of eyeball action. But like a well plated dinner that is eaten in two bites, there’s more to these two than looks. Absolutely there’s that proven off road credential and the Rugged-X will fit the bill for rural and dirt applications admirably.
EVs, Power Bills and Emissions
How do we change a system employed by government? If we went cold turkey on many of our traditional national policies the flow on effects throughout the public and business sectors would be ruinous. If you believe the headlines which state that traditional motor vehicles are heading for a cliff edge where there will be no more fossil fuels available to power them, and that the environment will be so much the better without vehicles that are powered by conventional fossil fuels, then things look pretty dismal. But is this actually so?
Level 2, 9 Help Street