It is interesting to see the evolution of in-car entertainment. What was once considered just a simple way to have music in the car while you drive has changed tremendously over the last 40 years.
It started off with just the basic radio tuner with 2 front speakers in the 1950s and then gradually evolved to include the 8 track tape deck.

The 8 track tape deck then was phased out and replaced with the smaller, lighter and thinner cassette deck which were able to play back more songs.

The cassette deck was then phased out in the 1990s with the CD player which was a step up in audio clarity and quality. The CD player was always prone to skipping during the early days as the CD reader were sensitive to bumps and vibration. Car audio manufacturers fixed the problem with advanced laser reading technology whereby the CD player would read ahead by a few seconds and store the music in the memory and in the event the car hits a bump on the road the CD player will produce the music uninterrupted. Cars also came with 4 speakers to enhance sound production to enable all the occupants of the car to hear the music equally well.

In the mid 2000, DVD players were introduced to provide video playback and better quality audio. The DVD was also able to store more music. The regulations in many country forbid video playback when the car is in motion hence the video playback will be disabled. This frustrated a lot of car owners with DVD players and many overcame this problem by grounding the negative wire of the car audio system with the park brake wire. This enabled the video playback to appear on the LCD display.

Next came the GPS navigation system which was a handy tool for motorists since it was impossible to remember all the streets in any city. GPS navigation system provided turn by turn instructions to get to a destination. GPS system is not 100% fool proof however as many motorists who lacked common sense drove their cars into flooded streets or into bridges that were flooded over. This goes to show that the tool is only as good as the user. The GPS navigation system cannot be considered in-car entertainment but in many cases it is integrated into the car audio system.

With the impending music and video files being digitized, more and more people were moving away from DVD players and started using USB drives which were much smaller and were able to store multiple gigabytes of data. Literally thousands of songs could be stored on a small USB drive with no distortion and is not affected by bumps or vibrations.

Having one LCD monitor at this point didn't seem enough for large cars so head rest LCD monitors were introduced to provide rear seat entertainment. The head rest LCD monitors came with DVD players and video games embedded for ultimate rear seat entertainment. Some taller cars had roof mount monitors for rear seat entertainment.

Then came the Ipad and Iphone wave which saw car audio system coming with ipod connectors and head rest mounts for Ipads.

As technology progressed the in-car entertainment had to constantly evolve to match. This on going changes meant that more functions were integrated into the car audio system. Like the BMW, the in-car entertainment system was integrated with the car's diagnostics and computer control system. It is no longer just a stand alone system where it works independently of the car's other functions.

Perodua started in the early 1990s with the introduction of their first model, the Kancil with a 660cc engine. This little car was not considered a threat by Proton at the time as the car was much smaller than the top selling Proton model, the Wira. Little did Proton realise, Perodua had many more plans up its sleeves and soon came introductions of several new models that ate into Proton's market share. Perodua promised better build quality and better after sales service than Proton and this worked in Perodua's favour to capture more sales.

With the ever increasing price of Proton cars (due to massive internal corruption and inefficient production cost), Perodua offered the Malaysian public an alternative to an affordable car. Pricing its cars below RM40,000; new graduates and young people were able to buy a cheap car for daily commuting. Keeping prices low did not mean compromising on build quality. Perodua were able to maintain a better build quality standard than Proton. Perodua also were very careful with the models they chose introduce to the market as they saw many prior failures by Proton.

The real boost in sales came when Perodua introduced the Myvi which was a rebadged Daihatsu Sirion. It was able to drive sales figures up to 8,000 units a month and knocked Proton off the top seller position for the Gen2.

Perodua launched the first small MPV under RM70,000 called the Alza. This model is currently the top selling small MPV in Malaysia. Proton's MPV, the Exora cannot compete with the Alza in terms of total sales. The driving experience of the Alza is also much better than the Exora as the Alza is not under powered and returns better fuel economy than the Exora.
Perodua the second national car maker in Malaysia is now the current market leader in terms on total sales volume and it does not look like it will lose this market leader position any time soon.

Having strong support from Daihatsu Japan and Toyota (Toyota owns Daihatsu), Perodua was also able to benefit from the efficient Japanese management and production methods. Perodua kept true to its plan and continued to offer affordable cars to the Malaysian public. Despite introducing newer and more expensive models, Perodua did not ignore its origins and maintained low end models to serve the public. Perodua cars are now the car of choice for many young people. Perodua is more worthy of its national car status than Proton as its original plan was to make quality affordable cars to the Malaysian public.

Perodua's success proved that Malaysia does not need a national car that is locally developed. A good rebadged model will suffice considering that the Japanese auto makers have more experience in product development and design than any Malaysian auto maker will ever have. Proton engineers may beg to differ but Perodua has proven this point time and time again.

test driving cars

So people may disagree with how I test drive cars but here is my list of criteria that I test the cars on:

- winding road test for handling, cornering stability, limit of traction from tyre / suspension setup
- braking - how the stable the car is under braking and how much stopping power the brakes offer
- ride quality over speed bumps - yes I do fly over them just to see if the car will bottom out and how well it recovers after going over speed bumps, drive over rough patches of road to see how well the suspension soaks up the bumps.
- 0-60km/h acceleration and in gear acceleration from 50km/h to 100km/h, and from 80km/h to 120km/h.
- wind noise at 110km/h
- high speed stability above 140km/h
- parking (to see how good is the view outwards from the driver's position)
- sitting position and seat comfort
- engine noise and ability to rev without shaking the nuts off the car!

 My expectations of a car is dependent on the market price. If the car is perceived to be a luxury class car but does not live up to the billing, I will put forward my opinion on it.  I will also compare my findings against the specifications printed by the manufacturer. Not all that is printed is translated into the driving experience. The reason for this is that sometimes the driving experience is blunted by certain factors that cannot be explained on the brochure. The car may have 200hp on the brochure but it may not deliver the expected performance because the car could be using an inefficient transmission.

I may not be a motoring journalist and I have no allegiance to any car manufacturer. Here are some of the common discoveries I have made while test driving various cars.  
Korean cars : -
- poor brake feel and inadequate stopping power
- no steering feel or steering feedback
- good low end torque (new models) and power delivery up to 3,500rpm, after that the engine is flat.. no high end power and torque. Will struggle with a full load going uphills
- decent ride quality
- small fuel tank
- assembled in Korea versions have good build quality

Japanese cars:
- non sports models have very little steering feels (especially for Honda)
- power delivery is more spaced out throughout rev range and responsive engine
- has tendency to have a floaty feel at high speed (above 140km/h), as the car is too softly sprung
- decent braking performance
- sports model have hard suspension that aren't suited for Malaysian roads
- small fuel tank

German cars:
- good high speed stability
- good steering feel and feedback
- more suited for highway cruising than in the city
- ride quality is firmer than Japanese cars
- engine power delivery is spread throughout rev range with good low and mid range torque
- car feels heavy compared to Japanese and Korean

China cars:
- improved interior designs (last 2 years)
- no steering feel
- coarse engine with lower power output than Korean, Japanese and German cars
- below par build quality
- massive panel gaps
- average ride quality
- could do with better sound insulation

Malaysian cars (meaning self designed and not rebadged cars)
- lacks low end torque
- good handling and ride quality (for a cheap car!)
- coarse engine
- poor quality plastics and lacks sound insulation
- could do with better steering feel and feedback
- decent braking performance
- engine power is concentrated at high rpm which makes it sluggish to drive in the city

Proton: a poor excuse for a national car maker

Proton was conceived in 1985 by the Prime Minister of Malaysia at that time. The idea was to make Proton similar to Volkswagen in Germany where the car is designed and priced so that everyone can afford a car. The idea was good initially until the Malaysian government decided to introduce protection for Proton by way of imposing import taxes to force imported car prices up giving Proton an unfair price advantage. This bode well for Proton as it was the cheapest car in the market for many years until the emergence of Perodua in the 1990s. Proton's models we simple rebadge jobs of out going Mitsubishi models. Proton had practically no input in terms of product improvement or engineering. It was merely assembling outdated Mitsubishi models.

Proton's management did nothing to develop new models on their own and the second model introduced in 1992 was the Wira which was also a rebadged Mitsubishi Lancer. The quality of the cars continued to decline as corruption seeped into the Proton corporate culture which saw many low cost parts used. There were many rumours floating around in the automotive industry that part suppliers had to pay off directors and other personnel in position of influence to secure contracts and secure payment for parts supplied. Several vendors were also told to charge full price for certain parts in their invoice but supply lower quality parts with the price difference given as kick-backs to Proton personnel. The cars were also deemed low quality and lacked the necessary crash safety.

This habit of corruption was the real decay in Proton. As a result production cost of Proton cars went up significantly and this drove the Malaysian government to further increase the import taxes and imposed a new excise duty for cars. This made Proton arrogant to the point that if a car buyer didn't like Proton, Proton would tell them not to buy their cars. Proton at this juncture could not produce cars fast enough and customers had to wait up to 6 months for a car. Instead of investing the money it made wisely into engine technology (which is the heart of the car), Proton instead took the glory route and bought Lotus which was dying at the time. Lotus saddled Proton with its debts and took a massive toll on Proton's bottom line. Proton until today is keeping Lotus alive at the expense of its profits.

Proton only introduced its own home grown designed model with help from Lotus in 2004 which was the Gen2. Proton claimed to have spend over US$300 million to develop this model which many believed that more than half the amount was siphoned out by the management in corruption money. The Gen2 was considered a fresh look to Proton, however the car's engine was poorly designed as it lacked torque and the fuel consumption was higher than its Japanese competitors. The build quality was also poor with bad reliability for power windows and terribly hard plastics and poor sound insulation.
Proton also introduced models that no one wanted to buy. The models were the Tiara, Juara, Arena and Savvy.

Proton's status as top selling car in Malaysia was also lost as Perodua over took Proton sales with it's Myvi which offered a current design rebadged model of a Daihatsu Boon. Proton had no answer for the ever growing Perodua competition. Proton's corrupt corporate culture was their Achilles Heel. Proton kept looking to the Malaysian government for assistance and after over 20 years of making poor cars and living off the protection provided by the Malaysian government, it was time for Proton to show that it was capable of making decent cars that the Malaysian public would want to buy rather than forced to buy because of price. With the long history of selling poor quality cars, the Malaysian public if given a choice would not buy a Proton. The Malaysian automotive industry lost out tremendously when the big auto makers decided to invest heavily in Thailand as the Malaysian government continued to protect Proton.

Proton lost the plot when it started becoming arrogant and complacent with government protection. Proton is aware that without government protection, it will not survive. Most Malaysians who can afford to buy a car can't wait for the day to come when the protection for Proton is removed completely giving them the real chance to choose the car they wish to buy with their hard earned money.
With the impending general elections approaching in Malaysia, if the Opposition coalition party wins, Proton's future is in doubt. Overall as a so called national car maker, Proton was a huge let down and a huge burden for the Malaysian public.

CVT vs DSG transmission

The traditional manual transmission is being phased out and in 10 years time we may see only a small number of new cars on the road with manual transmissions. With more cars on the road and increasingly bad traffic jams, most drivers will choose to have an automatic transmission to make driving easier.

The most common types of automatic transmission available now are: -
- CVT or constant variable transmission
- DSG or direct shift gearbox (twin clutch transmission)
- normal automatic transmission with torque converter

CVT was originally developed by Audi in the 1980s and it was fitted into Audi cars in the early 1990s. This transmission system comprised of 2 drums that had a belt running between them. The hour glass shaped drums altered the so called "ratio" when the belt moved up or down along the drums. This constantly changing movement of the belt meant that the car would accelerate very smoothly and offered good fuel economy as the transmission system will ensure that the engine would rev lower in the RPM range. The CVT transmission was more efficient than the traditional automatics as the CVT had low transmission power loss and had an efficiency rating of up to 95%. This meant that the engine power was better used to drive the wheels. This transmission is now highly popular with Japanese car makers as they strive to improve fuel efficiency for their cars. The down side of the CVT transmission is that it is unable to handle a lot of torque and horsepower hence you will never see it being fitted into a very powerful car. It also has problems with excessive heat at high speed. Honda used the CVT transmission in their previous generation Honda City, but chose to abandon it after they were saddled with numerous warranty claims from gearbox problems. CVT transmission cars felt strange to drive as you cannot feel the gear shifts (because there are none to begin with), and the car would accelerate despite the RPM remaining the same. It had a rubber band like feel to it that many driving enthusiasts didn't like.

DSG was originally developed by VW group in 2005 and was first used in the VW Golf Gti Mk5. It is now used across all VW  models and has filtered to the Audi models as well as the Porsche models. The DSG gearbox is not actually an automatic in the traditional sense as it actually is a manual gearbox using 2 clutches. The automatic mode was added to perform self shifting like an automatic.
The DSG transmission was unique in the sense that it used 2 clutches instead of 1. The first clutch controls 1st, 3rd and 5th gear, while the second clutch controls 2nd, 4th and 6th gear. The gear shift time is so fast that it is impossible for a human to manually shift faster than the DSG transmission. The DSG gearbox is also designed in such a way that it is able to handle high horsepower and torque. The DSG transmission is currently rated as the most efficient transmission in the market with efficiency of up to 98%. DSG transmissions are split into 2 categories, wet sump and dry sump. The wet sump type which is slightly heavier are used for higher power applications while the dry sump type are used for lower power applications.

The normal automatic transmission has now taken a back seat as it is not nearly as efficient as the CVT or DSG. Normal automatic transmission only offer efficiency of up to 85%. Car manufacturers are moving to either CVT or DSG type transmissions and starting to abandon traditional automatics in the endeavor for better efficiency.

progression of turbo technology

In the past when someone mentioned that their car was turbo charged the first thing that sprang to mind was the car is costly to maintain and you would need to change the engine oil every 5,000km, and maybe do a turbo rebuild every 30,000km! You would also think that the car will be a wild beast to drive as there would be a lot of turbo lag below 3,000rpm and the car will suddenly surge forward when the turbo started to boost. It was like driving a car with an "On / OFF" switch!

All of this is in the past. The new age turbos coupled with better exhaust flow design and engine combustion have significantly reduced the dreaded turbo lag and the engines are better designed to handle the extra stress from high power and torque.
Turbos are now much more reliable and the cars using turbos are not required to change engine oil every 5,000km. Turbo technology has progressed by leaps and bounds compared to 30 years ago when the turbo craze was going on. Now with the European car makers taking the lead in engine down sizing turbo engines are found in nearly all European car manufacturers. The efficiency of the turbo has improved so much that super charging has now taken a back seat. Companies like Mercedes Benz which previously was a strong proponent for super charging has changed to turbo charging for their small engines. Turbos are more efficient than super chargers since they only use the exhaust gas to drive the turbines rather than using engine power to drive the super charger pulley.

The main changes to the turbos now compared to 30 years ago are:
- roller bearing with inertia
- Variable geometry turbo system which allows the blade to change the angle of attack to reduce turbo lag, faster spool up and improve boost across a wider range of  the RPM
- ceramic turbos (for better heat management)
- triple turbo technology (BMW pioneered this with the new M50d)
- multi stage boost pressure control (for cars with additional boost for overtaking)

Currently you can find turbos fitted in cars with small engines (660cc) to large engines (5,000cc or more). The application range is much wider now and turbo charging is now more affordable than before.

Hybrid or diesel?

Here is an interesting question to ponder when buying a new car. Whether to buy a hybrid or diesel if both were priced almost the same.
The Hybrid will offer very good fuel economy in the city and is practically silent while the diesel may not be as cheap to run in the city but it beats the Hybrid for highway fuel economy.

Here are some of the key points for comparison:
Hybrid:
- silent operation when running on electric motor
- good torque when both petrol engine and electric motor work together
- smooth power delivery
- bland driving experience
- good city driving fuel economy
- uses CVT transmissions
- some partial hybrids will shut off air conditioner when the car's transmission is in neutral or park

Diesel:
- high torque engine
- noisy engine
- good highway driving fuel economy
- Does not use CVT transmission
- drives like a conventional car

In my own personal opinion I would buy a diesel instead.
Here are my reasons:
- I don't need to change the hybrid battery that will cost me a bomb and a half! after 7 to 10 years
- a used car dealer will give me lousy trade-in values when the car reaches 7 years because he knows that he may have to change a new hybrid battery and the next buyer will not want to buy a hybrid with a dead battery
- i don't want to run the risk of electro-magnetic field radiation when driving a hybrid (as reported by a motoring journalist in the US that hybrid cars emit much higher electro-magnetic field radiation than claimed by car makers)
- I want to hear my engine roar when it put my foot down
- I want pedestrians to hear my car when I approach a crossing so I don't run over any pedestrians or blind people
- I never like CVT transmissions as it feels very odd

For those people who spend 90% of the time driving in the city in slow traffic the hybrid is still the best option.

Car performance in 2012 vs 1980s

The performance of car engine has improved tremendously since 1980s where a car that is able to accelerate from 0-100km/h in 8 seconds is considered very fast. The car's ability to accelerate to 100km/h is often used as a guide on the level of performance a car has. Previously one would just assume that by adding power the car would accelerate faster, which is true but now automotive engineers have also trimmed the weight to improve the acceleration time. Less weight means less work required by the engine to push the weight hence faster acceleration.
Back in the 1980s a good yard stick for performance would be the Porsche 911. This iconic car was able to accelerate to 100km/h in 7+ seconds which was considered very quick. Fast forward to 2012, a VW Golf GTi can hit 100km/h in 6.9 seconds! Things have changed so much that acceleration time of 0-100km/h of 5 seconds is considered slow by super car standards which have an average acceleration time of less than 4 seconds while powerful hot hatches or power saloons like the BMW M3 can hit a 100km/h in less than 5 seconds.
In the 1980s anything with more than 250 horsepower is considered powerful, and anything over 300 horsepower is extremely powerful and usually reserved for Ferraris and Lamborghinis. These days many cars have 250 to 300 horsepower. Modern saloons like the Mercedes E300 has over 250hp. This is not a performance car by any means.

Here is a comparison of how engine technology combined with gearbox technology has transformed vehicle performance:

Using the Porsche 911 as an example:-
- 1980s - power output hover around 250hp for entry level Carrera, acceleration time around 7 seconds
- 1990s - power output increased to 280hp for entry level Carrera, acceleration time drops to 6+ seconds
- 2000s - power output increased to 300hp for entry level Carrera, acceleration time drop to 5 seconds
- 2010 - power output increased to 350hp for entry level Carrera, acceleration time drops to 4+ seconds

As the cars got progressively more powerful the efficiency of the engine also improved. A current model 911 3.4 Carrera with a larger engine uses less fuel than the 1980s model with a 3.0 litre engine. Previously big family saloon were never thought of to be fast. Most of them were used to ferry the family in comfort and were designed to very safe. All this has changed when companies like BMW decided to spice things up with the M5 and Mercedes Benz with the AMG range. These cars average well over 400hp and can accelerate to 100km/h in 5 seconds. The word fast is no longer reserved for super cars. It is now available for all types of cars.

Diesel cars were also considered slow and dirty. A diesel car that can accelerate to 100km/h in less than 10 seconds were unheard of previously. These days turbo diesel engines are the most popular in Europe since turbo charged diesel engines were introduced. The latest diesel engine from BMW is the triple turbo (yes! 3 turbos) which punches out 375hp and 700+Nm of torque. The 5 series fitted with this engine can hit 100km/h  in less than 5 seconds! who says diesels are slow?!

The performance envelope is constantly being pushed further and further ahead. Crazy cars like the Bugatti Veyron has over 1000hp and little cars like VW Polo Gti has 170hp. I seriously wonder what kind of performance we can expect in the next 10 years.

German vs Japanese car design philosophy

The Germans and the Japanese have different car design philosophies. Each will stick to their tried and tested approach to car design based on their automotive engineering technology and sales strategies.

The Japanese were traditionally focused on city based cars meaning that cars that are very economical in the city and were very comfortable pottering around city speeds. The Japanese were also the best at making small 4 cylinder engine cars that sipped fuel. All Japanese car makers made small cars with small engines under 1,300cc. Daihatsu were the leader in this segment making cars with 660cc which is by far the smallest in the world. The Americans were at one time laughing about the miniscule engine size. This didn't deter the Japanese car makers because when the oil price shot past US$100 per barrel, suddenly instead of laughing at the tiny engines the Japanese car companies were making, the Americans car manufacturers almost went bankrupt as people were abandoning big inefficient engine cars. The Japanese were also the pioneers in hybrid technology to further improve fuel efficiency. Japanese cars having designed their cars based on city driving conditions didn't seem to be as good on the highway at high speeds exceeding 140km/h. The typical Japanese driver would spend more time driving in the city than on the highway unlike their European counter parts. Japanese cars are also traditionally more bland to drive and didn't come across as a driver's car. The cars were economical, easy to drive and reliable.

The Germans on the other hand had a different approach to car design. Companies like BMW, Audi and Mercedes Benz would regularly impress the motoring world with their new technology as each new model was introduced. These car makers made their car more luxurious and came with many innovations to distance themselves from Japanese cars. The cars are also made with a certain level of passion for driving dynamics which made the ownership experience different. The Germans also took a different route to fuel economy by down sizing engines and adding turbos to boost efficiency. Their approach to hybrid also was different compared to the Japanese as the hybrid technology was used as performance and fuel economy booster rather than being an outright detuned engine with an electronic motor attached to it. Germans in general spend more time driving on the autobahn and as a result the cars are designed to be highly fuel efficient on the highway and would comfortably sit on the highway at speeds exceeding 150km/h. German car makers currently lead the way in terms of fuel economy with the new diesel hybrid. Companies like BMW and Mercedes have been pioneering their way with diesel technology to extract maximum performance and best fuel consumption. Working in combination with hybrid technology they were able to further improve fuel consumption.

Here are some of the current innovations or technology that the Japanese and the Germans are using:-

Japanese:
- CVT transmission (not new but is used for fuel economy)
- Petrol / gasoline hybrid
- cylinder deactivation technology
- full electric car (nissan Leaf and Mitsubishi MiEV)

Germans:
- down sized engine with turbo charging
- diesel hybrid
- twin clutch gearbox
- direction injection technology for gasoline engine
- hydrogen engine (BMW)
- cylinder deactivation technology
- multi map ECU technology (allows for different levels of performance)
- active chassis and suspension control

Motoring authorities in Malaysia

In Malaysia we have a Govt department called JPJ which are given the authority to administer rules over motor vehicles and licensing. This decides on laws that apply to motor vehicles ranging from motorcycles, cars, vans, trucks and buses. They have very strict laws which apply to certain aspects of motor transportation such as exhaust emissions, window tinting, car modifications and overall safety of the vehicle. In order to create laws that are progressive with the times the persons in this Govt department need to be refreshed with what new technology has emerged in the automotive field. However, JPJ is a lazy and backward looking Govt department that is not really in touch with the current technology.
Some of the laws created are down right poorly thought out before it came into force. A simple example is how the window tinting law forbids any car to have window tint that permits less than 50% visible light transmission. Malaysia is a tropical country where daily afternoon temperatures hit over 35 degrees C, having a slightly darker window tint that is able to reduce internal heat would make sense.

The JPJ also forbids the following:
- kit cars (unlike the US or UK where you can buy a kit car and assemble it)
- under carriage neon lights
- no flashing lights or strobe lights
- Big GT rear spoiler
- wide body kits exceeding 100mm in width from original size
- cars lowered to less than 50mm ground clearance.
- large exhaust
- Nitrous Oxide kits
- video viewing when car is in motion
- Window tint with less than 50% light transparency for sides and back windows, and less than 70% light transparency for front windscreen
- roll cage on street cars

If compared to the Transport Ministry or Department of Motor Vehicles in UK and US, all these items are not illegal. In fact there are thousands of kit cars or cars that custom built in UK and US. These countries have much more sophisticated understanding of motor vehicles and have less restrictions.
I don't understand why the JPJ in Malaysia need to be so strict and restrictive. It is quite obvious that the JPJ is backward looking and don't quite understand as much as their counter parts in UK and US. 

Apart from just restricting modifications the JPJ also does homologation for new cars that enter the country. Doing homologation for new passenger cars is understandable as they are able to document the specifications of the cars. However this exercise has been abused in Malaysia by many JPJ officers who took the opportunity to thrash several expensive super cars such as Ferraris and Lamborghinis. Some of these cars that would normally take only several days to complete the homologation exercise were kept by the JPJ for weeks so that the offices could take them out for joy rides and drive them at crazy speeds on the highways. This is total abuse of authority.

Chassis Stiffening

These days we read a lot of about how car manufacturers are stiffening the chassis for every new model that they develop. Each replacement model seems to be increasing chassis stiffness by 30% to 50% on the previous model. What this basically means is to improve structural rigidity of the car. This has a direct impact on handling and safety. With reduced chassis flex the car will have better cornering stability and also better crash protection for the driver and occupants.

You may also notice that some car manufacturers seem to have cars that appear a lot stiffen in construction than others. A good example is Porsche, it has one of the stiffest chassis for any production car in the market, and with the opposite end of the scale being Proton and some China brands. Naturally Porsche being a performance car manufacturer they would be using stiffer chassis compared to a mass market passenger car manufacture that is more concerned about profits. European car manufacturers adopt a different approach when designing their cars and have made their car chassis stiffer than most Japanese cars. This is very evident in the NCAAP crash test results. Making cars with stiffer chassis is more expensive and heavier.

For older cars that have less stiff chassis there are many aftermarket solutions available. There are strut bars, fender brace bars and other chassis stiffening bars. These add weight to the car but also significantly increases the chassis rigidity. The key thing is that the brace or bars are made to high standard and will not break off easily under load. There have been incidences where a car fitted with several chassis stiffening braces have helped the driver survive big accidents. The chassis stiffening braces were able to absorb and defect the energy from the crash and channel is away from the cabin. In some cases the chassis stiffening braces kept the cabin's structural integrity intact.

The other alternative is the Chassis Foam. This special foam is injected directly into the chassis cavities and allowed to expand to fill the hollow sections of the chassis. Once cured the foam will improve chassis rigidity significantly. It will also reduce the road noise and vibration. The foam will reduce the sound waves traveling through the chassis. One of the other benefits of using chassis foam over strut braces and other bars is the chassis foam only adds less than 2 kg of extra weight compared to 1 strut bar alone will weight 4 to 6 kg.

For cars designed and build in the 1990s and the early 2000s, I would recommend installing some chassis stiffening braces or having the chassis foam treated.

Fuel savers, do they work?

When fuel prices go up many motorist start to panic and buy all kinds of fuel saving gadgets to help reduce their fuel bills. The question is do these devices work?

Here are the traditional fuel saving products that we have seen in the market for years.

- Fuel saver magnets - works on the principle of ionizing the fuel particles in the fuel line to improve combustion. I have experimented with many of these devices before and all with different levels of magnetic strength. The idea is to have two pieces of opposing magnets attached to the rubber fuel hose where the fuel is entering the engine after the fuel pump and fuel filter. Some of these magnets do work if the magnetic strength is high enough but some will lose its effectiveness as the engine becomes hotter. Some brands require multiple sets to be installed together to get any kind of effect. From the cars that I have tested on, the results are better on older cars where the fuel efficiency isn't as good. The cars that we saw reasonable (meaning 10% saving or more) results were Nissan X-trail, Nissan Sentra, older Honda Civic ES, BMW 320i (E36), Toyota Corolla (old model), Toyota Camry (old model), Proton Wira, Proton Waja and Perodua Kelisa. I would not believe crazy claims that this device could save more than 12%.

- Broquet fuel catalyst - works to refresh the fuel with tin like pellets and has a chemical reaction with the fuel to boost combustion efficiency. I saw good results on stationery industrial equipment such as generator sets and heavy machinery that uses diesel. For such equipment where the RPM is constant the fuel savings were up to 25%!! but for cars and trucks where the RPM is always fluctuating due to different driving speed, the savings were at most 15%. The strange thing about this product is that it is able to reduce (almost eliminate) black exhaust smoke from diesel engines. I personally had this fitted into my Turbo diesel SUV many years ago and what used to be black (not very thick) exhaust smoke when I accelerated hard became light grey and was significantly cleaner. The engine was also quieter and smoother. The chemical composition of the pellets is a trade secret but when a pellet is placed into a clear glass with gasoline, you can see bubbles emerge indicating the reaction with the fuel.

- Cyclone air diverters - this concept was originally developed in Korea. Sold relatively well in South East Asia despite being such a simple product. The principle was to create a spiraling effect for the incoming air. Spiraling air spins faster than air moving straight hence the driver would experience a bit more power and response from the engine. The down side of this item is that you may need more than 1 piece to really feel a significant difference and at high speed the in coming air is moving very fast and the Cyclone air diverters may cause some interference. Despite claims that it will save up to 25% on fuel, I have never seen or heard any users of this product confirm this claim. Most of the users say that they feel better acceleration and maybe save at most 5%. Some installation centres will push the customers to add up to 4 pieces which may help in acceleration but the fuel consumption also suffers.

- micro compressor - This device is attached to the brake booster vacuum hose. It allows small amounts of pressurized air to enter the engine via the vacuum valve at the back of the engine. This actually leans the air fuel mixture to allow the fuel to be burnt more efficiently. This device has to be tuned to control the right amount of extra air entering the engine. If too much air enters the engine, the engine will be too lean and will start to vibrate due to insufficient air, too little air enters the engine, there is not difference to the performance or fuel saving. The danger of using this device is that if the air is not properly filtered a lot of extra dirt particles will enter the engine and potentially damage the engine. The other problem is the unit uses a spring valve to control the opening and closing of the air valve, with the engine vibrating the spring valve will move and the amount of air entering the engine will change. Fuel saving wise, I have heard claims from car owners that they managed to save about 8% to 10%.

- voltage stabilizers - Voltage stabilizers in principle does not save fuel at all despite all the claims by the companies selling this product. The product was originally by the Japanese company Pivot which are famous for many automotive electronic meters, push start buttons and other gadgets. with their transparent design this led to numerous copy cats developing their own version of voltage stabilizers. The device is attached to the car battery and while the car is moving there will alternating voltages due to different engine speeds driving the alternator to produce electricity at different speeds. Voltage stabilizers has an effect on electronic components of the car especially car audio, head lights and other electronic components. The effect is more pronounced when used together with a good grounding kit especially on older cars where the grounding points have oxidized. In terms of performance, the voltage stabilizer may help to improve performance by 1hp at most and possibly save 1% to 2% on fuel. Nothing significant by any means.

For those who do not wish to buy any gadgets to save fuel here are some tips to help you save fuel:
- make sure your tyres are properly inflated, adding an extra 2 to 3 psi will help
- take out all unnecessary items from your trunk such as golf bags, boxes and other stuff you don't need, this will help reduce the weight
- in colder climate locations, try not to use the air conditioner as this will reduce the burden on the engine
- do not install crazy wide body kits or spoilers, these add aerodynamic drag and will take a toll on your fuel consumption
- remove your roof rack if you have one

Nissan GTR R35 vs 911 Turbo (997)

Having driven both the GTR and the 911 turbo in the recent months I can now write about my experience and how international motoring journalist articles about these two cars are quite accurate. The old rivalry between Subaru and Mitsubishi Evo is a thing of the past. The performance car rivalry just got more intense further up the ladder between the GTR and 911 Turbo.

I will start off with the Nissan GTR - this car is a technological marvel. Having bench marked its development on the 911 Turbo, Nissan went all out (and took them a number of years) to develop one of the best all round supercar beating performance car that you can drive on a daily basis. Being the first to have a transaxle gearbox and big 3.8 litre V6 twin turbo, which is considered big by Japanese standards and pushing out well over 480hp has broken the traditionally respected Japanese law of producing no more than 280hp for a production car. The car itself is not light weight at over 1800kg but there is a reason for this according to the chief engineer who developed this car. This logic was that the F1 car weighs 600kg and produces 1200kg in aerodynamic down force at high speed, and the Le Mans cars weighs 1200kg and produces 600kg in aerodynamic down force. Both of these racing cars add up to 1800kg in total weight (so called total weight after adding aerodynamic down force). With a weight of 1800kg including driver the GTR is deemed to have the ideal weight for its performance. Many would argue that it would be better if it was lighter since we usually associate nimble handling with light weight cars such as the Lotus Elise. However with the 1800kg weight the car had the necessary weight to keep it planted on the track and stability at high speed.
I put this to the test when I threw the car fast into corners and sweeping turns. The front end gripped like a leech and there was no protest from the tyres. For a car weighing this much it felt strange and one would feel that it would understeer. The balance of the car was amazing as it felt neutral at all times. The torque split reading on the dash board showed how fast the computer was shifting the torque from rear to the front at all times. It was like driving a playstation car.

The turbo boost came in very early in the RPM range and show virtually no turbo lag. With the slight prod of the throttle the car would accelerate smoothly and with predictable and manageable speed. The monster only wakes up when you push the throttle harder and that would invoke a heart attack for some people with the massive shove in the back type acceleration. With the massive torque produced the car always felt very light on its feet and behaved like a car that you would think is 500 to 600kg lighter. This has to be one of the fastest accelerating production cars from standstill for under US$100,000.
This car will no doubt be a popular choice among Sunday Track enthusiasts with a bit of money. This is by no means cheap but it is a real bargain if you compare it with the competition it is rubbing its shoulders with. The performance, handling, braking and top speed is way into the supercar league and it has scared a few big names in this segment. Being this easy to drive fast really on a daily basis and makes an average driver look good, this car has definitely moved the goal post very far ahead for the competition to follow. The GTR has a cult like status in Japan and has long racing pedigree behind it to carry the GTR tag that is well respected around the world. This car is arguably the best Japanese supercar (if you can call it a supercar) on the market for its asking price.

The 911 Turbo is one of the most respected supercars around with a long history of evolutionary design and big leaps in engineering technology. Having an engine at the back the car means that the car traditionally has struggled with front end grip. Porsche has over the generations improved on this area and made the car handle a lot better to give the driver more confidence turning cornering. The 997 edition saw massive improvements over the 996 model. The VGT turbo made turbo spool up much faster and offers a wider torque band across the RPM making the car very drivable at almost any engine speed. This car has the ability to accelerate like a bat out of hell with incredible smoothness and ease. The fat torque curve meant that even on 6th gear at 70km/h the car is still able to accelerate hard. With the addition of the Sports Chrono pack the overboost function comes into play and gives the engine extra horsepower and torque momentarily for manic acceleration.
The facelifted version in 2009 saw the introduction of the PDK twin clutch gearbox that made huge improvements to the driveability and fuel consumption. Having driven this car around the city during heavy traffic and on the highway at high speed, this car can be said to be very easy to live with and can be used on a daily basis without any fuss. Unlike the old 911s which hated heat from traffic jams, the new 997 model has no complains about it. Handling wise the car still has some of the tradition light front end feeling associated with the older models but it has vastly improved. Accelerating out of corners the tail of the car would want to swing out but putting a bit of opposite lock is sufficient to control this beast. In comparison with the GTR the 911 turbo is lighter and this is difference in weight and size is obvious when you put both cars through tight twisty turns. The 911 Turbo feels a bit more nimble but the GTR has good traction to keep up. I have always thought that the 911 was a slightly flawed design with its engine at the back but Porsche has managed to make this flawed design a selling point. With the engine at the back there is more traction for the rear wheels to put the power down. The new 2011 911 Turbo S has demonstrated that it is one of the fastest accelerating cars in the world with a 0-100km/h in 3.2 secs. The 2012 GTR has matched it with the higher power output.

My comments on driving both cars:-
For the well heeled and those who love the badge, it is without a doubt the Porsche 911 Turbo. Still one of the best daily drive supercars in the market. It is more of a handful to drive at the limit and requires more skill and concentration to extract all the performance from the car. Most untrained drivers will only be able to extract 80+% of the car's full potential.
For those who want an all out super fast car without having to shell out a large sum of money, the GTR is the way to go. This car will definitely scare many Ferraris, Porsches, Aston Martins, Lamborghinis and Maseratis on the road. It is very easy to live with and makes you look like a professional driver. With this car most drivers will be able to extract 90+% of its potential without too much difficulty.

Now I understand how the GTR could beat the 911 Turbo's Nurburgring lap record which annoyed the hell out of Porsche. Both cars have their pros and cons, it really boils down to weather you want a techno-filled Japanese Samurai or a proven and well respected solid German autobahn stormer. I believe this new rivalry will be here to stay for another 10 years to come.