But I doubt I'd class the (circa 1850kg) Kuga PHEV as nimble!. I believe they mustered 225bhp originally or 243bhp now (presumably a facelift),.......

For a heavy car to be nimble on a twisty hilly road, it needs lots of power and four wheel drive to use it. This electro-mechanical lump has neither. Astonishingly, it is only two obese passengers short of the quoted kerb weight of my heavy, but very nimble, Audi A8 (2035Kg - 4WD -450hp).

I would absolutely complain (if you haven't already) about being given a PHEV as a hire car with a flat battery!. Very poor show, if they aren't going to supply PHEV's charged, they should stick to HEV's or MHEV's.

Yes, a PHEV will use brake regen to put power back in the battery in the same way a HEV does, but because its battery is so big (relative to a HEV), you'd never get more than a very small percentage of charge back in. The battery on a HEV is much smaller and designed to discharge its power and recuperate it quickly.

If HJ says the Kuga is nimble, I suspect that may be relative to other PHEV SUV's (as traditionally Fords do tend to handle pretty well). But I doubt I'd class the (circa 1850kg) Kuga PHEV as nimble!. I believe they mustered 225bhp originally or 243bhp now (presumably a facelift), so should be reasonably swift in a straight line with power in the battery (but that has nowt to do with nimbleness). Not sure what the power is using only the ICE, but I'd guess maybe 170(ish)bhp, which isn't that much to be lugging around all that weight.

That car's nigh on 50% heavier than my (albeit 19yo) Mazda3 saloon, a car with a similar overall footprint and interior/boot space.

I suppose that's part of the problem with PHEVs - they aren't really a full EV or ICE car, just about 66% of both, but lugging around a hefty sized engine or EV motor & battery combo that for most of the time, one of them does nothing but take up space and weigh a lot.

That plus the car's default chassis / sub-frame and especially suspension is really designed for a lighter ICE-only or at best an MHEV car's weight, and presumably has needed beefing up to cope with the extra weight of the EV traction motor and battery pack.

To me, they are rather too much of a compromise vehicle, even in 'range extender' form where the fuel tank and ICE engine are much reduced to save weight and space.

That so many of such cars seemingly require (or at least only take) wide, low profile large diameter tyres which require a month's salary to replace (and are likely to need it more often because of the higher chance of damage) as well as suspension parts that take a 'hell of a beating' as a result with that extra car weight and lumbering handling, never mind the firm ride quality this doesn't enamour me to ever buying one.

As much as I don't think EVs are (yet) our saviour, at least they are just one tech and in theory simpler to look after, if designed and implemented properly.

Note that my dad's newish (2020) MHEV Fiesta MHEV weighs just 60kg shy of my bigger and older Mazda3 saloon. Newer cars have seriously put on weight.

Maybe I'm weird but try a little EV a Fiat500e. Absolute hoot, little go kart. Bags of get up n go.

I've just signed up for an MG4 coming end of the year ( factory order). Just done a test drive but that was pretty nimble too, despite being 1.7t.

It's because the C of G is so low on an EV. Eats up the battery though.

I remember cars from the late 1990s being fun to drive. That thrill seems to be missing these days. Getting into a car feels for a journey, feels more like a chore than something enjoyable.

Interesting - I've found the opposite. I bought my Swace which uses gen 5 Toyota HEV (not PHEV) gubbins and wasn't expecting to find it "fun". You know what on twisty roads up and down hills it really puts a smile on your face. Even though it has a good ride the handing is surprisingly good and that's before the slingshot exiting a corner where petrol power combines with electric as you power out of the corner. It might be because it's a low car though with a low centre of gravity. In this car the hybrid batteries are located under the back seat - obviously much smaller than for a PHEV.

In 1996 I can't remember my 1990 1.6td Passat Estate being fun although I had a 1989 1.3 Astra for a while and yes I suppose that was ok. The last Escort produced wasn't fun at all but the first version of the Ford Focus was.

I think you're right. Possibly because automatic gearboxes are now good. You used to have the choice of an auto that was incredibly slow or a manual that meant you had to have a hand free for changing gear. These days, you can hold on with both hands, point and fire.

Our little twingo (manual) is a great laugh too, though. I suppose pretty much everything having turbos or electric assistance has made it more fun.

I owned 2 Golf GTi Mk2 1.8 8 valves from 1986 to 1986. During those 10 years I covered about 160,000 miles and I enjoyed every one of them. 185 60 14 tyres and 112 bhp, seems puny compared to the willey waving number manufacturers insist we need in todays GTi's. Kerb weight was quoted as 960 kg. On the roads you could enjoy the performance with no cameras to worry about, just the occasional bobby with a speed gun lurking in a bush to be aware of.

Then in 2018 the wife got a Fabia 1.0 TSi 110 PS. Pretty much the same size as the Mk2 Golf, very close on power but it weighed more, 1055 kg according to the price list. But what it did have was 148 torques at 1900 to 3500 rpm instead of the 112 torques at 4000 rpm in the Golf. It also had 45 profile tyres which never make any car better IMHO.

Like Golf the Fabia was a hoot to drive, keep the revs above 2000 and no turbo lag and power all the way to the red line, brilliant.

The Fabia also averaged about 48 mpg over the almost 6 years we had it, never recorded the figures for the Golf but doubt if they were any better than the low 30's.

Both very enjoyable cars in which you could exploit the performance safely.

To me enjoyable driving is effortless comfortable insulated driving at any speed on any and every surface, with adequate easy power on tap good all round visibility (that alone rules 90% of moderns out) and without any inferfering nannying from the vehicle.

A decade earlier I was working at a Saab dealer when the 9000 2.3 turbo was introduced, cumulating in the 9000 CS Aero. Handling was OK, if well short of a contemporary 5 Series Beemer, but the enjoyment to be had deploying that sledgehammer torque was off the scale. Overtaking opportunities opened up pretty much anywhere and was guaranteed to put a smile on your face!. But enjoyment is enjoyment, right?.

Saab 9000cs - one of my all time favorites cars that I've run. I had a newish one back in 1991/2 as my last ever company car. I had to have the 2.0 turbo version though as back then going over 2.0l cost you a lot more in company car tax.

Edited by Big John on 19/07/2025 at 16:18