Renault Duster

RENAULT DUSTER "DESIGN FOR BEING REGAL"

PROS:-

• Design
• Value
• Fit and Finish sophisticated look

CONS:-

• No 4x4 Wheels

OVERVIEW:-

With striking looks, well-appointed and spacious interior, loads of cargo space, and nice ride quality, the Duster makes for a compelling package. The top-end variant with a 1.5-litre dCI engine that pumps out 110PS is definitely more delightful to drive than the detuned 85PS version. The Duster has the mettle and the grunt to handle the urban jungle and a bit of spirited rough road driving with élan. It’s ideal for small-sized families wanting a bigger car.

There has been considerable hype surrounding the Duster. That it was going to be launched with a killer price tag, that it will be a make or break vehicle for Renault in India and that it will be well-built, reliable and easy to maintain. Does it live up to all that hype and more importantly, will it satiate this fast emerging hunger among car buyers for a vehicle that is like a sports utility and is yet as practical as a car?

Just like the scenario in the late nineties when there was a latent demand for small cars, I'm now at the cusp of an explosion in demand for SUVs and vans. What is driving the surge in demand - the need for a second car, the pent up desire to own a vehicle with a butch road presence and possibly to a much lesser extent the need for a people's mover.

EXTERIOR DESIGN:-

The Duster which sports a Dacia badge in many other markets shares more than just the name with the previous car from the stable. The Logan platform forms the base on which the Duster was built. In terms of design though, the Duster is a step up over the Logan, but just about. The Duster's design is not very adventurous or quirkily French, but at least it is got all the right attributes that we Indians appreciate in a stocky-looking SUV.

At about 4,315mm, the Duster is just over the 4-metre length limit for small cars. But, the Duster looks much bigger thanks to its raised stance (ground clearance is 205mm), the large, flared wheel arches rising all the way upto the shoulder line and the off-road worthy approach and departure angles. More SUV-ish features that add to its muscular stance and road presence are the roof rails, the running boards on either side and the big bonnet slab, which is laid almost horizontal to the road. The India-spec Duster has had a few changes to its design, the most prominent of which is the fresh and chunky bonnet grille. The fat three-slat grille design adds a dash of aggressiveness to the design of the Duster.

Like many SUVs today, the Duster positions its full-size spare tyre under the body rather than on the hatch. The rounded tail does make the Duster look a bit hunchbacked, but the blister effect beside the small tail-lamps is unique.

Underpinning the Duster is Renault’s hardy B platform that also forms the basis for the Renault Logan (now Mahindra Verito), though the Duster’s wheelbase is marginally longer. Its Monique construction also allows it to sit lower than conventional body-on-ladder SUVs. For now, India only gets the front-wheel-drive Duster, which employs MacPherson struts in the front and a programme-deflection torsion beam axle at the rear. The four-wheel-drive version, which is unlikely to be available before late 2013, uses a slightly different rear suspension (independent MacPherson struts) to accommodate the 4WD hardware. All 108.5bhp diesel Duster variants get ABS, EBD and brake assist and ventilated front discs and rear drums as standard.

INTERIOR DESIGN:-

The Duster's cabin is very much sedan-like, though the slightly over-vertical centre stack is the give-away SUV trait. When I sit behind the wheel the raised SUV seating position is very obvious, but still, my shoulder is above the window line. The interior of the Duster sports a biege-black or cream and black twin colour theme. The dashboard design has been reworked in parts for the Indian version. The design is simple and functional overall, with all the knobs and controls within easy reach for the driver, except the rotary electrical adjustment knob for the door mirrors which is strangely located below the handbrake lever.

The Duster is a bit wider than the Logan, but there is not much of the extra space in the cabin. I am guessing much of the extra width must have been lost to fatter door panels. So, when you sit at the wheel, the door armrest is right next to you. But there is no feeling of being cramped and the eight-way adjustable driver's seat is so comfy that you'll hardly notice the Duster's hatchback levels of shoulder room. But, you get fairly generous amounts of legroom and headroom (905mm at the second row) both at the front two and the rear bench seats. In fact, the rear bench seat hardly feels like a bench, with very decent amounts of lumbar and thigh support. I was told that the seats were completely reworked for the India-spec Duster. The rear parcel shelf is also different from the other country versions

.

But more than anything else, it is the quality of plastics throughout the cabin that disappoint. Some bits, like the well-finished door handles and curvy instrument binnacle, do look nice, but elsewhere the hard plastics seem straight out of a budget hatchback. The pillar-like rear AC vent (engineered especially for India) stands out like a sore thumb, looks cheap, and also eats into middle-passenger legroom. Everything does feel solidly put together though and the fit between panels on the dashboard is decent. The dashboard itself is quite functional, but places the air-con controls a bit low for comfortable access; the mechanically operated air-con switches, both front and rear, also feel quite rudimentary. Then there’s the unusual positioning of the electric mirror adjuster under the handbrake lever, and audio controls on the steering column (and hence out of sight) that take time getting used to. Thankfully, Renault has re positioned the power window switches from the dashboard to dedicated pods on the doors before launching the Duster here, but it’s still not perfect.

With no third row of seats to eat into boot space as with seven-seat SUVs, the Duster has plenty of space for cargo. The boot is cleverly shaped and can gobble up a lot more luggage than its 475-litre capacity suggests. Folding down the single-piece rear bench further increases the carrying capacity to 1,064 litres.

PERFORMANCE:-

The Duster is offered with two engines, one each of petrol and diesel. Knowing well that the diesel is likely to be the overwhelming choice, Renault India is offering the engine in two states of tune. Of course, the engine here is the now familiar 1.5L K9K dCi engine, which is shared by quite a few cars from the brand. The variant with the higher state of tune features this 1,461cc diesel engine with a variable geometry turbocharger and an intercooler, which together bump up the peak power to 110PS, which is available from about 3,900 rpm. Peak torque of 248Nm is delivered at a bit delayed 2,250 rpm. Just like the numbers indicate, the engine starts delivering decent levels of pulling power to the front wheels only after the needle crosses the 1,500 rpm level.

I drove this version of the Duster only and though I felt the turbo lag a bit more due to the hilly terrain that I was testing it out in, buyers who will be mostly driving it in urban conditions will probably not miss more torque in lower end of the rpm band. This 110PS variant is mated to a six-speed gearbox with a very sedan-like short throw, slick shifting gear stick. The same common rail direct injection engine is also offered with a lower tune state. Here the engine produces 85PS of power at 3,750 rpm and peak torque output is 200Nm at 1,900rpm.

Going by the stats, this engine could be the one that is more suited to urban driving conditions, with more lower end torque and possibly more fuel efficiency too. This could be the version that rakes in the most numbers, since most city buyers should be satisfied with this level of performance. Both the diesel variants offer the best performance when the engine is kept within a 2,000 to 3,500 rpm band.

The petrol engine on offer is the Renault 1.6 K4M engine. The 1,598cc engine produces 104PS of peak power at 5,850 rpm and 145Nm of peak torque at 3,750 rpm. The petrol engine version and the 85PS diesel version are both paired with a 5-speed gearbox. The Duster is not being offered with a four-wheel drive option, though it is available in other markets.

RIDE AND HANDLING:-

The manner in which the Duster casually dismisses the worst patches of road makes it a more comfortable drive than all comparably priced saloons too. The suspension always goes about its business in a quiet manner, sharp bumps like expansion joints are easily filtered out and your passengers won’t be able to tell the size of the crater you just drove over.

Even at highway speeds, the Duster remains very composed and free from any undue up-and-down movement. Its wide footprint and relatively low centre of gravity also come together to give it good stability at all speeds and also under braking. Body control is also good and roll is fairly well contained. But, driving up a twisty section, I found the Duster lacked the agility you’d expect from a monocoque SUV. While it is not ponderous around bends, it is not as engaging as a Honda CR-V either. The electro-hydraulic steering doesn’t serve up much feedback either, with some slack at the straight-ahead position. However, it is light enough at low speeds, which is a boon in city confines. A tight turning circle further aids the Duster’s ease of use.

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION:-

What's the cost:-

• Ex Showroom :- Rs. 10.99 Lakhs
• Warranty :- 4 years/ 80K KM

Engine:-

• Fuel:- Diesel
• Installation:- Front, Transverse
• Type:- 4 Cylinder, 1461 CC
• Bore/Stroke:- 76.0/80.5 mm
• Compression Ratio:- 15.3:1
• Valve Gear:- 2 Valves Per Cylinder
• Power:- 108.5 BHP @ 3900 RPM
• Torque:- 25.3 BHP/ Tonne

Transmission:-

• Type:- Front-Wheel Drive
• Gear Box:- Six- Sped Manual

Dimension:-

• Length:- 4315 mm
• Width:- 1822 mm
• Height:- 1695 mm
• Wheel Base:- 2673 mm
• Boot Volume:- 475 Litres
• Ground Clearance:- 205 mm

Suspension:-

• Front:- Independent, MacPherson Strut, Anti-Roll Bar
• Rear:- Non-Independent, Torsion Beam Axle

Steering:-

• Type:- Rack and Pinion
• Type of Power Assist:- Electro-Hydraulic
• Turning Circle:- 10.4mm

Brakes:-

• Front:- Ventilated Discs
• Rear:- Drum
• Anti-Lock:- Yes

Performance:-

• 0-20:- 1.23
• 0-40:- 2.64
• 0-60:- 4.78
• 0-80:- 7.79
• 0-100:- 11.85
• 0-120:- 17.56
• 0-140:- 26.78

Economy:-

• City:- 11.8 KPL
• Highway:- 17 KPL
• Tank:- 50-Litres

Range at a Glance:-

• Petrol:- 1.6 Petrol, 102.5 BHP Rs 7.19-8.19 Lacs
• Diesel:- 1.5 Diesel, 84 BHP and 108.5 BHP Rs 9.99-11.29 Lacs.

VERDICT:-

The Duster is compact, yet offers the right road presence, its kerb weight is just about 1,300 kgs, has a turning radius of just 5.2 meters and is said to be capable of a rated mileage of about 18 km/pl (84 PS diesel variant). All of these are almost small car like and just the attributes that value conscious buyers will look for. Between the three engine versions there are a total of 8 variants and they are priced in the range of Rs 7.2 lakh to Rs 11.3 lakh (ex-showroom). That positions it squarely next to the existing SUVs like the Scorpio, XUV 5oo, Tata Safari and even sedans like the Hyundai Verna and the Honda City.

COURTESY:- AARUSH

Read More

Sony Xperia V

PROS:- 

• Decent Screen
• 4 G supporting Network
• PlayStation certified
• NFC

CONS:- 

• Not available everywhere
• ICS
• Waterproof worry

Overview:-

With a 4.6-inch screen offering HD resolution and a 13-megapixel camera, the Xperia T is definitely meant as Sony's new flagship handset.

The Sony Xperia V enters into the new range of handsets from the Japanese firm, nestling in between the Xperia T and Xperia J.

The Xperia V looks very similar to the Xperia T, with a slightly smaller, 4.3-inch 720p HD display, thinker 10.7mm chassis and tipping the scales at a lighter 120g.

You'll find a 1.5Ghz dual-core processor powering Ice Cream Sandwichinside the Xperia V, which is the same as the T, but Sony has also managed to squeeze in 4G LTE connectivity, allowing you to take advantage of super speedy network connections.

The Xperia V will use the same 1.5GHz dual-core CPU but have a smaller 4.3-inch display; it will pack a 13-megapixel camera as well. The Xperia V's most intriguing feature, though, is its water-resistant skin. Sony says the device can withstand immersion in water, enough to meet the international IP55 and IP57 protocols for durability. LTE 4G compatibility is planned for the Xperia V, too, as is a later update to Jelly Bean from ICS.

The arched back harking back to the late Xperia Arc Sony Ericsson handsets is clad in rubber, allowing for a comfortable and secure hold, and the Xperia V feels solid and well built – overall a design we're fond of.

Interestingly for a water and dust proof handset, you can take the back off the Xperia V, giving you access to the full-size SIM card slot and removable battery – there's no obvious signs of watertight-ness around the back cover and we managed to peel it off easily, making us question if we'd trust taking this phone for a dip.

However my mind was put slightly at rest, as another Xperia V handset was getting a regular shower on the Sony booth – confirming its IPx5/7 certificate credentials, the highest level of water resistance currently on a phone.

However our mind was put slightly at rest, as another Xperia V handset was getting a regular shower on the Sony booth – confirming its IPx5/7 certificate credentials, the highest level of water resistance currently on a phone.

Although the Xperia V is packing the same power as the Xperia T, Ice Cream Sandwich doesn't feel quite as nippy on this 4G, waterproof handset.

The Sony Xperia V isn't slow, it just lacks the finesse of its bigger brother, and that puts a slight dampener on things.

Apps take that extra half a second to load, which is noticeable if you've just been using a quicker phone, and the camera app loads up in a couple of seconds.

The Xperia V is blessed with the same 13MP sensor as the T, and this allows you to snap high quality photos, with a range of effects and scene modes to choose from, plus auto-focus, 16x digital zoom and an LED flash to aid your photo taking escapades.

There's a second or so delay from pressing the shutter to the phone snapping a pic and making itself ready for the next, but I didn't find it to be a particular problem.

For those of you who like a physical shutter button then you're out of luck with the Xperia V, as an on-screen trigger is your only option.

The 4.3-inch screen sports Sony's Mobile Bravia Engine 2 technology, which increases the quality on the 720p display, making movie watching a pleasing experience.

I did notice that colours appeared a little washed out at times, but this didn't detract from the overall performance of the Xperia V during video playback.

Sony is talking a lot about connected devices and the Xperia V comes packing NFC technology, which will be able to talk to other NFC devices, including speaker docks and headphones.

Obviously 4G is known to be a bit of a drain on battery life, but the Xperia V comes with a decently sized 1,750mAh battery, which should see you through the day – but I'll put that to the test during our in-depth Sony Xperia V review

The 1.5 GHz Qualcomm MSM8960 dual-core processor inside the Xperia V proved plenty capable, with that high-resolution screen offering space for on-screen Android 4.0 buttons. It's an Xperia kind of Android, though, with similar widgets and drop-down menu adjustments, but it's all inoffensive enough. There's also raft of Sony's new Android widgets that I'd soon drop from our homescreen -- but again, it's an easily solved problem. It also packs a 13-megapixel sensor versus the 12-megapixel shooter I saw earlier on the Xperia S, although I'll have to wait for the final review model before I can compare results. The Xperia V will come in pink, white and black paint jobs when it hits stores later this year.

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION:-

• Manufacturer:Sony
• Part Number:XPERIAVWHTULK

General

• Product TypeSmartphone
• Width2.55 in
• Depth0.42 in
• Height5.07 in
• Weight4.23 oz
• Body ColorWhite

Cellular

• Service ProviderUnlocked
• Operating SystemAndroid 4.0 (Ice Cream Sandwich)

Processor

• Clock Speed1.5 GHz

Display

• Diagonal Size4.3 Inches

Courtesy: AARUSH

Read More

13 INCH MAC BOOK AIR REVIEW

FOR:-

• Ivy Bright Power
• USB 3.0 Port
• Thunderbolt Connectivity
• Incredibly thin and light

AGAINST:-

• No Ethernet Option
• Same old design
• No SD card reader
• No optical Drive

OVERVIEW:-

The Apple MacBook Air is back, in the same super-skinny chassis that I originally fell in love with back in 2010. The latest model was officially unveiled at the Cupertino company's WWDC conference in June, along with the refreshed MacBook Pro models and the incredible MacBook Pro with Retina display.

The MacBook Air boasts a design that has become a classic, a blueprint for contemporary technology done correctly, and an inspiration for the ever-increasing Ultrabook brigade. But it's also the third time that I've seen the tech giant wheel out the same exterior for its slimline laptop.

BUILD AND DESIGN:-

The design of the MacBook Air is nothing short of amazing, when you compare its basic shape and look to a standard notebook. It is so incredibly thin compared to anything else I have played around with, and seems paper thin during use. With the display open and the notebook laying flat on your desk the palmrest is a pencil eraser's height above the surface of your desk. The real beauty of this notebook though is its clean design with only one visible port connection, with the rest hidden by a magnetic latch cover. The body continues with its sleek look with all rounded and polished surfaces and not even a foot to catch when the notebook is being slid into a bag.

The downside to this beautiful design is the missing features that have been standard on notebooks almost since conception. User replaceable batteries, decent port selection, or even a docking connector are all missing. While you could get away with an external hub and USB devices on the road for additional hookups, not having a spare battery to swap in is a huge disadvantage. Combine this with a slow charging battery and you have the opposite of an ultimate road warrior.

SPECIFICATION:-

The 11-inch MacBook Air that I used as the subject for this review packed a 1.7GHz dual-core Intel Core i5-3317U chip, which can be ramped up to 2.6GHz using Intel's Turbo Boost function. There's a 1.8GHz Core i5 CPU for the 13-inch version as standard, and you can also opt to upgrade to a 2GHz Core i7 processor on either version for £130/$150 extra.

Storing your HD media could be problematic, however, especially if you're the type of person who likes to have extensive high-quality digital libraries everywhere you go. The cheapest option offers just 64GB of flash storage, and our review model packed a mediocre 128GB. You can go up to 512GB of storage for a whopping £640/$800 extra, should money be no option.There's no discrete graphics option but, this being an Ivy Bridge setup, you are treated to integrated Intel HD Graphics 4000, which means graphic processing is twice as fast as the previous MacBook Air models. With 4GB of 1600MHz DDR3L RAM onboard - also a significant upgrade from the last MacBook Air - the performance is much slicker and impressive than the already-impressive 2011 MacBook Air range.

Many Ultrabooks now, such as the Sony Vaio T13 and the HP Envy 6, offer a dual SSD and HDD option - enabling more space while keeping the price down. Apple has decided against moving parts in its MacBook Air laptops though, stating that complete flash storage is the key reason for the skinny notebook's responsiveness.  This flash storage, the company tells us, is up to four times faster than a traditional 5400rpm hard drive. You certainly won't hear us disagreeing or complaining about speed - the MacBook Air is lightening-quick.

To call the 2012 Apple MacBook Air's design identical to the last two is not entirely accurate. You may notice that the MagSafe power connection has been redesigned. MagSafe 2 is thinner and longer. No probably I'm not sure why either, but unless you've got a close affiliation with your old Mac power pack, you shouldn't have a problem. There is an adapter that Apple will sell you for £9/$9.99 if you do intend to use your old power source.

There's now a USB 3.0 port duo - although this being Apple, there's no blue marker to indicate them. It's white and silver all the way. Added to these there is a Thunderbolt port and a 3.5mm headphone jack. On the 13-inch 2012 MacBook Air, there's enough space for an SD card reader as well, but there's not one on the 11-inch model that we reviewed, unfortunately.  The webcam has also been improved; it's now a 720p HD one - so your FaceTime calls can be clearer than ever.

Apple states a battery life of five hours of wireless web browsing for the 11-inch model, and 7 hours for its bigger brother. In our test, which involved looping Full HD video on full brightness, it lasted just under four hours, which indicates that Apple's estimate for normal usage is about right.

DISPLAY:-

The screen on the MacBook is very nice, with vibrant colors and intense backlight. Black levels are nice and even with very little backlight bleed showing through even on very dark scenes in movies or games. Comfortable viewing brightness during my review was around 15-20%, matching 80% on my Thinkpad. 100% on the MacBook Air is close to the brightness levels that my desktop LCD can reach. Viewing angles of the LCD were above average.

Horizontal viewing range was perfect up until the screen was blocked by metal backing, but vertical viewing range was limited if you went 10 to 15 degrees up or down from straight on. No screen defects were present on our online purchased model; this included stuck and dead pixels as well as backlight bleed.

KEYPAD AND TOUCHPAD:-

The MacBook Air keyboard is the slim key design that is also found across the board on other Apple products. Spacing is slightly off compared to a more normal keyboard, and it took a while to get used to the layout. Once you get past the transition, you notice the keyboard is very well built and pretty comfortable to type on. Individual keys require little pressure to activate, and the keyboard has zero flex.

Some items missing from the keyboard are markings for page up/down, home/end, but those key functions were present if you press the FN key and one of the arrow buttons

The touchpad has a few unique qualities that are either not seen in most notebooks, or were a first for notebooks. Windows users will notice right away that the touchpad is roughly a billion times larger than anything they have seen before, while Mac users will feel right at home. Measuring in at 4.12" by 2.48" it was larger than anything I have ever used in the past. The new feature new to this touchpad on the MacBook air is its multitouch capabilities, which give the user the chance to play around with objects like they would on an iPod Touch or iPhone. This means pinching or spreading apart your fingers to zoom in and out, circling your fingers around to rotate objects, and other advanced motions.

General use of the touchpad inside Mac OS 10 or Windows Vista was spotty with either sensitivity that was not adjustable to suite my preference, or the multitouch features kicking in when I was not expecting. The problem I found was my palm was always touching the edge of the touchpad while I was typing, and it would trigger a two-touch motion like scrolling, instead of moving the cursor.

Another obvious problem we encountered with the multitouch touchpad under Windows was the issue of touchpad freezes and blue screens. I suspect there is an issue with the touchpad drivers for Windows since I could consistently cause a failure simply by touching the touchpad with multiple fingers. It's pretty clear there is a problem when multiple touches disable a "multitouch" touchpad.

PERFORMANCE:-

The speed of the MacBook air was surprising from the moment we received. I expected it to be somewhat slow with its mobile processor, but its real world performance was lacking especially inside its native OS 10.5. Boot times were in the 56 second range, and starting up a wide array of programs took much longer than normal. Even basic rendering of web pages seemed to lag when viewing new pages. Bootcamp performance though (while very buggy) was quite snappy. Including the 16 seconds or so from power button press to the loading of Vista Ultimate, total boot time was 50 seconds to the Windows desktop. IE and Firefox loaded up much faster in Vista than Safari or Firefox did in OS 10.

Overall the machine seemed to enjoy running inside Vista more than it did OS 10, but bugs were prevalent all throughout bootcamp with the current Apple-provided drivers. The touchpad was the source of many problems, including six bluescreens and 30+ touchpad lockups from "multiple touches." While the features worked occasionally trying to use the scrolling motions or even tapping multiple fingers on the touchpad would be enough to lock until a reboot. The bluescreens would often come at random, with the culprit always being the "Applemtp.sys" driver crashing. More than a few times the machine would bluescreen when I was not even touching anything on the notebook.

Audio is surprisingly good, if somewhat tinny, for such a small machine. It's no audio dock replacement, that's for sure, but for video watching or the odd bit of background music streaming while you're web surfing or working, it does the job nicely. Of course, you can always plug some external speakers or some headphones in, or even make use of Apple AirPlay through iTunes for a much richer audio experience.

Using the MacBook Air is a real pleasure, with the isolated backlit keyboard still being about the best in the business. Travel is minimal, but there is still enough bounce and response to invoke confidence while typing, and the intelligent backlight is great for when the sun starts to set.

The multi-touch gesture-tastic trackpad is also a delight to use, although fans of older Mac OS versions may have to do a bit of tweaking to get it performing like it did in the old days. I find the two-finger scrolling, three-finger swiping and four-finger pinching an incredibly intuitive way of controlling the system, though. iPad owners, in particular, will feel right at home.Don't worry about the backlights running the battery down when it's light enough that they are not needed - the system is clever enough to switch them off when your environment is well lit.

BATTERY AND POWER:-

Apple claimed five hours of battery life with wireless enabled, and from my testing I think that would be possible ... under the right situation. With screen brightness at 25%, Bluetooth off, and WiFi on, the MacBook Air got 4 hours and 20 minutes of battery life with above average web activity. Half of this time was spent in Mac OS, with the other half in Vista. If you had very light internet traffic, or even had wireless disabled and were just typing on the notebook you should get five hours or more productivity from the battery.

One huge complaint this notebook gets in my opinion is the integrated battery. Not only can you not swap the battery if it dies while traveling, but to make matters worse the charging speed is abysmal. Our MacBook Air from a dead state would only reach 25-30% after charging for one hour with the notebook turned off. On most notebooks, in this period of time the battery would be well above 50% if not much higher.

VERDICT:-

While Apple doesn't own the exclusive rights to the super-skinny notebook guest list any longer, it is still the market leader. But while the latest MacBook Air impressed me greatly, the wow-factor has worn off slightly, due to this being the third iteration of the current design.

In a market becoming densely populated with slim-line laptops from a massive range of manufacturers, Apple still holds the trump card with the MacBook Air - but only just. And as such, I fully expect a design overhaul from the Cupertino-based tech giant in 2013.

It's easy for me to recommend the newest MacBook Air, because it's a fantastic machine. But, unlike this time last year, there are other impressive lightweight options out there. So be sure to check out my Best Ultrabook feature and reviews to see if the MacBook Air is the right ultra-portable notebook for you.

COURTESY:- AARUSH

Read More

MAHINDRA REXTON REVIEW

VERSION:-

• Ssangyong Rexton RX5- 2966 CC- 17,77,000 INR
• Ssangyong Rexton RX7- 2696 CC- 19,78,000 INR

REVIEW:-

Mahindra absorbed the Korean car manufacturer Ssangyong last year. Since then I have been waiting for introduction of bigger, premium SUVs under the Mahindra-Ssangyong banner.I now have official confirmation that the first Ssangyong SUV coming to India is the Rexton, which has been launched on October 17 – the same day as the Tata Safari Storme.

Mahindra's first product from its Ssangyong stable, the Rexton is now out, priced at Rs 17.67 lakh, ex-showroom Mumbai for the RX5 manual version and Rs 19.67 lakh for the RX7 automatic trim. The pricing is rather wonderful, the automatic is a good Rs 2 lakh cheaper than the equivalent Toyota Fortuner while the manual is now the cheapest of the lot, making life tough for not just the Fortuner, but the Ford Endeavour, Mitsubishi Pajero Sport and even the Chevrolet Captiva and Hyundai Santa Fe. But can a lower price tag along make the job easy for Mahindra? Lets see

For starters, the Ssangyong Rexton uses a lot of underpinnings as well as the powertrain from the first-gen Mercedes-Benz W163 ML. The body-on-ladder chassis lends it a certain sense of robustness, its two-tonne plus weight isn't making matters easy though. It looks contemporary, especially this the W version that was launched just a few months ago in Busan.

Despite that, however, the car manages to look a whole lot better than the model it replaces and the overall styling, especially at the front, is quite contemporary. That chrome-rich grille gives the front plenty of flash, the headlamps with their projector pods are smartly detailed, and those heavily flared wheel arches give the design much needed muscle. Further back, the wraparound rear windscreen looks quite neat and injects much flair to the tail section.

Open the Rexton’s doors and you will find that the cabin looks plush, everything appears solidly put together, and the leather seats with their soft cushioning and smart stitching are really inviting too. Panel fit is excellent and the soft-touch plastics on the dashboard-top feel like they’re from an expensive German saloon.

Mahindra will undercut the competition on price to get sales for the new Korean brand. The Rexton will be imported to India as CKD and will be assembled at Mahindra’s Chakan facility. It comprises of some exceptional feature  like most vehicles from South Korea. Globally the new Rexton gets six airbags, ESP (Electronic Stability Program), ARP (Active Roll over Protection), UWS (Ultrasonic Warning System), cruise control, Bluetooth connectivity and Rain-sensing wipers. 

The Rexton also comes loaded with features like a touchscreen interface for the audio system, DVD player, Bluetooth telephony, satellite navigation, sunroof, climate control, rear parking sensors, automatic headlamps, rain-sensing wipers, cruise control and steering-mounted audio controls.

However, it’s when I move to the back that the Rexton’s cabin loses some points. For starters, the slightly low-set seats and high floor compromise the seating posture to some extent, though it’s still better than an Endeavour. The cabin also isn’t as roomy as the large exteriors lead you to believe.

As for the last row of seats, the less said the better. You sit virtually on the floor with your knees pointing towards your chin, and with no headrests for these seats, your neck is left unsupported too. If there’s some consolation, it’s that the rearmost section gets a pair of air-con vents with their own blower speed control.

The new third generation Rexton gets an all-new frontend with projector headlamps and daytime LED lights, chrome grille, new bumpers with integrated fog lamps and LED indicators. The Rexton W looks more proportionate with black treatment around the bottom and wider with fared wheel arches. The rear of the SUV looks unexciting, but it is functional. It will comfortably seat seven people – keeping it aligned with the Mahindra range! – and still have some space in the boot. Overall the Rexton feels premium, something that it will need to compete with the likes of the Toyota Fortuner, Ford Endeavour, Chevrolet Captiva, Mitsubishi Pajero Sport, Hyundai Santa Fe and Renault Koleos.

ENGINE SPECIFICATION AND PERFORMANCE:-

The Rexton comes with a 2.7-litre, in-line five-cylinder DOHC turbo-diesel motor, with the option of five-speed manual and five-speed auto transmissions. Curiously, the engine is tuned differently for the two gearboxes, so as a manual it produces 162bhp and 34.7kgm of power and torque, respectively, while in the automatic it produces a far more substantial 184bhp and 41kgm. The automatic variant also comes with permanent all-wheel drive, and this allows the Rexton to get off to a clean start and post a quick 0-100kph time of 10.92 seconds.

However, the engine makes quite a racket, one that gets progressively louder as the revs rise. The nine-blade radiator fan is responsible for most of this. Then there’s the slow-witted automatic gearbox that takes much away from the driving experience. You can change gears manually via buttons on the steering wheel, or alternatively, a switch on the gear lever.

While the Rexton Auto’s 11.18kpl ARAI-tested figure makes it quite the diesel-guzzler, its power delivery is nice and linear, and for relaxed driving in the city or on the highway, the engine should cope well enough.

Weighing in at around two tonnes the Rexton is just as heavy as its body-on-frame contemporaries. Its suspension, which is a combination of double wishbones in the front and coil springs and a live axle at the rear, is also similar to what you’ll find on the Fortuner and Pajero Sport. However, the high-profile 235/75 R16 tyres do absorb a lot of the road shock and, in that sense, work admirably to shield you from smaller surface blemishes.

Dynamically too, the Rexton's biggest strength is its ride. It rides pretty well, thanks to its soft ride setup and that should be a selling point for those looking for comfort on bad roads or general urban driving. The problem is there is just too much body-roll and a fair amount of pitching and diving. The 16-inch Hankook tyres do a good job of providing grip but the steering is too light and a bit slow to react. Don't go looking for feel with this one, you are probably better off with the Santa Fe, Koleos or even the Fortuner.

Like with every other launch from Mahindra, the trump card of this vehicle is its price and the robust underpinnings that go with it. Ignore the average dynamics and slightly poor plastics and the Rexton makes for a sensible purchase decision. Mahindra has an installed capacity of 5,000 units per annum and looks to sell about 500 units a month. Will that be easy? I'll have to wait and see

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION:-

Price Range (in lakhs)*

Ex-showroom price Rs 17.67lakh (MT), Rs 19.67lakh (AT)

Engine

Fuel Diesel

Type 5-cylinder, 2696cc

Power 162bhp (MT), 184bhp (AT)

Torque 34.7kgm (MT), 41kgm (AT)

Transmission

Type Torque on demand/ All-wheel drive

Gearbox 5-speed manual, 5-speed auto

Dimensions

Length 4755mm

Width 1900mm

Height 1840mm

Wheel base 2835mm

Ground clearance 252mm

Coutesy: AARUSH

Read More

REVIEW ON IPHONE 5

The iPhone is closer than ever to disappearing. No, not in a dinosaur kind of way, not even in a Sue Storm kind of way.

Certainly, the iPhone is in high demand and nowhere near being in danger of losing its popularity. And, at least as of this point, Apple hasn’t figured out how to make it completely transparent. But what it has been working to do—on a number of levels—is to create devices that do everything they can to fade from your attention when you start to use them, like a gadget Jedi mind trick.

Apple has been making small but important decisions here and there since the original iPhone to ensure that as little as possible comes between you and whatever you happen to be interacting with on the screen.

For:-

• Great Design
• Larger Screen
• Quality Camera

AGAINST:-

• High Price
• Poor Maps
• Ageing Os

DESIGN:-

How the thing actually feels in the hand. With the iPhone 5 there will be many types of prospective buyer: the upgrader from the 4 (or more-money-than-sense iPhone 4S upgraders), those tired of their Android handset and those taking their first steps in the smartphone market and want to get one of them  iThingies their friend/child has.

You'll obviously see the change in height too – the iPhone 5 stands 123.8mm tall to allow for the larger 4-inch screen. In truth, those not familiar with the iPhone 4S probably wouldn't notice the difference, which is why it's a good move from Apple to include the larger screen if it's not going put people off that hate larger phones

.

The decision to stick at 4-inches is Apple's admission that while it recognises people are all over the idea of having more screen real estate to play with it doesn't want to move away from the thumb-friendly nature of the device.

Through a mixture of moving the centre of gravity slightly as well as repositioning the screen within the bezel, it's still possible to scroll your thumb mostly around the whole display one-handed, which Apple is clearly keen to keep hold of.

However, I'm not convinced of that argument any more, and the power button was still a little out of reach when using the phone normally, as was anything in the top left-hand corner of the screen. 

This was no issue in reality, as scooting the phone down a touch in the palm is a natural action. But if that's the case, then why not offer a 4.3-inch screen at least? There's more to a phone than a screen these days (although increasingly less and less) and the general construction of the iPhone 5 is excellent to say the least.

I've seen both the ceramic white version and the anodised black, and the two tone effect on the back of the phone is stunning, both visually and under the finger.

It doesn't beat the sheer beauty of the HTC One S, with its micro-arc oxidised back and rounded lines, but it's well-set in second place.

The two sections of pigmented glass at the top and the bottom of the phone add a pleasant effect, and the sapphire glass is meant to be thoroughly durable, to complement the Gorilla Glass on the front.

Apple knows consumers get furious when they drop and iPhone, and is clearly seeking to stop the smashes before they happen with a tougher exterior - although it seems the anodised black version is pretty prone to scratching, with a number of users mentioning chipping on the darker hue.

But enough about what the phone looks like - the killer question is how the thing feels in hand. And I'll sum it up by saying: smooth. It's a little slippery, and I was always worried I would drop the darned thing.

But that's the only negative thing about the design (apart from the low weight initially and scratching aluminium) as it sits in the palm nicely and allows you to do it all with one hand, including hitting the top-mounted power/lock button with ease.

That lock button is actually still loose, as it was on the iPhone 4S, meaning when you shake the phone around you can hear it clicking away, which undoes a lot of the premium feel Apple is going for.

Make no mistake, the iPhone 5 is one of the most beautifully crafted phones out there - but when you're paying £529 ($199) up front for the thing, I'd hope this would be the very minimum Apple would be doing.

DISPLAY:-

When Apple laminated the touch sensor to the front glass with the iPhone 4, It was hard to think that they could bring the images on the screen any closer to looking like you were directly touching them. They blew that feeling of ‘closeness’ away with the iPhone 5 by integrating the touch sensors and the display panel and then laminating that unified panel to the front glass.

This results in a reduced feeling of ‘gap’ between the glass and panel. When I say reduced, I actually mean pretty much nonexistent. If you turn the iPhone on edge and look at were the gap between glass and panel should be, you can still see a sliver of black, but it’s incredibly tiny. By comparison, the small gap in the iPhone 4S’ display array looks like a canyon, it’s pretty impressive.

This heightens the feeling that you’re manipulating the things that you see on the screen directly, rather than having your touch transmitted through the glass. It’s as close as it can get to holographic projection without it actually jumping out of the screen.

In addition to giving benefits in thickness, this screen is also a combination of manufacturing processes, which means that — in the long run — it will be cheaper and more efficient to make than the older crop of Retina displays.

The color quality is also off the charts. From the first moment you see it you know that this screen is displaying deeper blacks, more accurate colors and more vibrant than ever before. I've had the opportunity to look at a massive amount of LCD displays as a reviewer of gadgets.  I've never seen a display this impressive in any device — much less a couple hundred dollar phone.

And the all-important bright-light visibility is great on the iPhone 5 as well. When shooting images to test out the improvements in camera, I had both the iPhone 4S and iPhone 5 at maximum brightness and the 5 clearly outshone (heh) the older display. This should make it easier to use the still very shiny glass screen of the new device in direct sunlight. A lot of this is due to the fact that the iPhone 5 reflects 52% less ambient light than the iPhone 4S due to better coating.

The size of the screen was a worry for me from the first moments that I began hearing rumors about an increase. The 3.5“ screen of the previous iPhone models was far smaller than a lot of Android phones, like the 4.3” Galaxy Nexus or 4.6″ Samsung Galaxy S III, but it made up for it in relative quality and easy one-handed operation. I have a Galaxy Nexus and I constantly make subtle shifts in grip while using it. A slide downwards to reach a button at the top of the screen, a finger crawl to the top to reach a top button and so on. It’s not a lot, but it’s noticeable to a person used to the iPhone’s solid one-handed performance.

Increasing the size of the screen vertically by 176 pixels has done little to change the way I use or hold the iPhone 5. For the first couple of days I found myself anticipating the need to reach to the top corners of the screen and adjusting my grip to do so. But after ten days or so with it, I no longer shift my beloved ‘pinkie on the bottom’ grip, and I’m able to reach all corners of the screen. It does require more stretching than it used to, but not uncomfortably so. If you try out an iPhone 5 in a store or handle a friends and feel uncomfortable, I’d encourage you to spend a week or so with one before you make the final call, because you get used to it faster than you’d think

CONNECTOR:-

The iPhone 5’s new Lightning connector is a smaller and more clever solution to its decade old 30-pin Dock Cable connector. Introduced with the third generation of iPod, the Dock Connector was intended as a way to offer additional connectivity to third-party devices and, yes, to lock up that ecosystem so that Apple could control the ways that the connector was being used. Lets not kid ourselves that Apple’s motives were completely altruistic when coming up with its original connector or the new Lightning connector.

However, Apple has a proven track record (at least in recent years, though generally always) of not making decisions to lock users down to a certain standard without some tangible benefits. They may make choices that benefit themselves, but they’re never without tradeoffs that also benefit the user. Only the blindly anti-Apple would argue otherwise.

The new connector is radically smaller, with rock-solid construction that even experts are finding tough to disassemble for analysis.

In the case of the Lightning connector, there are some clear advantages over generic connectors like Micro USB. For one, the Lightning connector is reversible, allowing you to forget about trying to align it right before you insert it. Add up those missed seconds over the years and they’re gifting you minutes of confused fumbling back. This is facilitated by the inward bevel of the connection port, which guides it into place when you stab it.

The Micro USB standard also would not allow for full-speed charging of the iPad, which pulls more current than the USB 2 versions of that standard allow. Since the Lightning connector is doubtless coming to the next version of the iPad, they had to think ahead. If Apple wanted to go with a USB 3 compatible controller then there would have been bulky addi`tional chips necessary, increasing the internal volume of the device and likely its thickness.

Those are the tradeoffs that Apple decided to make in order to provide a majority of the connectivity offered by the old 30-pin connector along with a path to the future.

Does it suck that people are going to have to buy one or two extra cables, or adapters that are kind of pricey because they have electronics embedded in them? Yes, absolutely. Is But there was a point when the original iPods switched from Firewire to 30-pin that people had to do that as well. And one connector change in 9 years isn’t too shabby.

And aside from those technical advantages, there’s always the ergonomic bonus that the new dock connector provides.

CAMERA:-

The iPhone 5 camera might not look materially different to that found on the iPhone 4S, and in truth it is very similar.

But then again, when you're winning plaudits across the board for your smartphone photography, stepping things up in terms of specs isn't really a priority for Apple.

Just because the specs are the same, doesn't mean there aren't new features. The two biggest differences are the fact the iPhone 5 can take photos 40% faster than its predecessor and the new dynamic low-light mode reduces the pixel count but improves darker images dramatically.

I shot some video and still image comparisons, but most of them turned out so very similar that I’m not bothering to include them here. You can see from the ones that I have that there’s nothing to complain about with regards to image quality. The iPhone 5 is on the left and all of the images in this section, you’ll notice a slight increase in sharpness at times, but that’s likely software improvement.

Simply put, the iPhone 5 can capture an image in situations where you wouldn't have even bothered to pull your iPhone 4S out of your pocket. The iPhone 5 retains the fixed f 2.4 aperture of the iPhone 4S, which — due to the compressed distance between the objective and sensor — is roughly equivalent to f/18 on a 35mm camera. This means that you still get the massive depth of field compression that you’d get from a much smaller aperture. Unless you’re very close to a subject, both the foreground and background will remain very, very close in focus sharpness.

.

The sapphire lens cover, which has absolutely nothing to do with the purple flaring above, should provide better scratch protection than the glass in the iPhone 4S, though I had no problems with that to begin with.

Overall, it’s a nice improvement to an already great camera, and the low light utility means that you’ll take it out and use it in more situations than ever.

The front-facing camera’s improved resolution means that you’ll end up with crisper conversations over FaceTime, but the network management of the protocol means that you’ll rarely see that resolution top out. It is nice for local self portraits though.

PERFORMANCE:-

The iPhone 5 is quick. It’s kind of difficult to quantify just how fast as there are so many hardware-accelerated elements to iOS that you don’t see a raw performance boost reflected in many day-to-day activities. But a general feeling of quickness is pervasive throughout the phone, even when comparing it to a freshly wiped iPhone 4S. With both devices at a ‘day 1’ state, the iPhone 5 loads and plays videos quicker, renders iOS 6’ vector maps quicker and generally feels…wait for it…snapping turtleier.

Needless to say, the iPhone 5 stomps the iPhone 4S . A lot of that has to do with the custom-built CPU. Apple’s A6 processor doesn't just feature a bespoke design, which was the case with all of the previous A-series processors as well. It also features custom cores designed by Apple’s own chip team, likely made up of folks acquired along with P.A. Semi in 2008 and Intrinsity in 2010. A Chip works examination of the A6 reveals that uses a 32nm HKMG process that results in very low power consumption, and that its cores were laid out by hand, a time consuming and expensive process that speaks to Apple’s commitment to eking out every last bit of performance and power conservation it can from its chips. In many ways, this is the first fully custom CPU Apple has included in its iPhones.

And the battery life suffers nearly no hit from this increase in performance. In my testing, it hit nearly identical life under normal usage (about 3/4 WiFi and 1/4 LTE with some gaming and email but mostly Twitter browsing). The fact that Apple was able to only increase the battery by around 1% in capacity, yet still manage to eke out roughly the same battery life just speaks volumes to the care it took in balancing the battery consumption of the components inside, including the hand-crafted CPU and bleeding edge Qualcomm radio chips.

VERDICT:-

This device is a tour de-force performance of a company firing on all cylinders. The internal components work together in concert to deliver one of the most pleasant and powerful experiences of any ever produced. If you’re reading these sentences and rolling your eyes, then you probably have an allergy to hyperbole, and I understand because I do too. But this isn’t hyperbole, it isn’t exaggeration.

Apple actually managed to create a phone that’s so good it has become an archetype. And when things become archetypes, they become intrinsically less interesting to people who thrive on dissonance and disruption. That’s why the iPhone 5 got such a converse reaction from the tech press when it was revealed. It’s an exercise in precision and restraint, not a play for our wildest imaginations.

When Apple’s Jony Ive says that they “take changing the iPhone very seriously”, it doesn’t mean that they’re averse to changing it at all, it just means that they’re only going to change the parts that would make it work better. The radical re-imagining stages of the way that the iPhone looks are over, but the process goes on at magma-hot levels inside, and there’s a ways left to go.

The next iPhone isn’t going to be boring, it’s going to be more exciting than ever. You’re just going to have to look inside to see it.

COURESY:- AARUSH

Read More