Recently, I was given a chance to test drive the Proton Inspira for a debugging activity. I know there's many reviews out there on the Inspira, but here's my view on it after driving it for about 660+ km. We were given 2 cars to debug. The 2.0 CVT and 1.8 MT.
Exterior
By now, I am sure most of us have seen the exterior styling of the Insipra which is basically a Mitsubishi Lancer with PROTON's Styling touch to it. Overall, I think the look of the Inspira was toned down quite abit compared to the Lancer, considering the fact that the target market is for the family and senior executives. Personally, I wouldn't compare the looks of the Lancer and Inspira, due to the fact that it is targeted at a different segment of people. On the other hand, to compare the basic 1.8 MT and the 2.0 CVT, i would prefer the 2.0 CVT better. This is because, the 2.0 CVT comes with additional front and side skirts and also a rear spoiler. Somehow, I feel the additional bits and pieces makes the car look more complete compared to the bare 1.8 MT.
Inspira 2.0 CVT
Interior
The 2.0 CVT had a full leather interior, thus giving it a slight advantage compared to the 1.8 MT which only has fabric seats. The leather that wrapped the seats, was nice and soft and it dissipated heat quite fast too. It had a nice, clean sophisticated look to it. There are additional leather trim on the front doors as well, which gave it the up-market feel. The IP looked sleek with the wooden-finish trim at the center (for the 2.0 CVT) compared to gray-ish trim center in the 1.8 MT. The HVAC control looks more elegant and well built in 2.0 CVT, whereas the 1.8 MT has a very cheap looking HVAC control. It seemed like the indicator was printed on a piece of paper and sticked on the dials!
Inspira 2.0 CVT
Inspira 1.8 MT
Equipment Level
In terms of equipment level, I would say the 2.0 CVT was well equipped. Compared to the 1.8 MT, it has a cruise control system, with the buttons on the steering wheel. With this, setting and resetting the cruise speed was much easier compared to the conventional stalk type cruise control. The 2.0 CVT also comes with an auto climate control which might explain why the 1.8 MT has such cheap HVAC dials! And the most prominent, difference is the magnesium alloy paddle shifts in the 2.0 CVT. However I felt the paddle shift's was abit too big and it was blocking the indicator and wiper stalks which was placed behind it. Another downside to it, the paddle shift's are static because it's placed on the steering column rather then the steering wheel. So if you wanna shift gears while you are turning or negotiating a sharp bend, you might have a slight problem.
General Driving Experience
2.0 CVT
The acceleration and throttle response was good and noticeable in this car. On the D mode of the transmission, the torque delivery was smooth and the gear change couldn't be noticed at all. This was mainly due to the nature of the CVT itself. The ECU and TCU did a good job in ensuring the engine provides the highest torque at which ever speed that I was driving at. Overtaking was easy, as the CVT quickly finds the best ratio for the optimum torque! At legal speed, NVH was good. There was no engine booming while cruising, and wind noise was at a very acceptable range, however at speeds over 130 km/h, wind noise could be heard clearly. Engine booming was apparent when accelerating especially after 4500rpm. This might be due to the MIVEC mechanism working overtime to ensure optimum valve operations. High speed stability was good, and comfort level was pleasant. At 190 km/h, the car felt stable, and planted. I didn't notice any 'floating' or boat like feeling at those speeds.
1.8MT
Having a manual gearbox, the car was a tad bit responsive compared to the 2.0 CVT. In terms of power, I can say that I hardly could notice the difference between the 1.8 and 2.0 engine. The clutch of the manual gearbox was effortless, giving almost an empty feeling. I didn't quite like this as there was lack of feel when I engage and disengage the clutch. The gear shift knob was acceptable, however it had the slight rubbery feel to it when u engage. This makes it less tacky and 'tight' when I wanted to do a fast down shift especially from 5th to 4th gear. In terms of power management and delivery of the gear box, it is acceptable. However, in terms ratio, I would say the 3rd and 4th gear ratios are not as close as from 1st to 3rd. This could be very well noticed when I was dropping gear from 4th to 3rd during downhill driving at high rpm's. In terms of NVH, this car had similar characteristics as the 2.0 CVT. High speed stability was similar as well. However at 200 km/h in this car, there was a very minimal 'floating' effect. This could be due to the lighter weight of the car and the missing skirts and spoilers.
Ride & Handling
2.0 CVT
In general comparison with the original Lancer, the R&H has improved significantly. The car feels more balanced and composed in corners. Negotiating corners at low and medium speeds doesn't impose any threat...however at high speed corners and instant direction changes, the car starts losing grip early especially at the rear. This was evident and significant when I was negotiating the corners at the Karak Highway. Since the standard tires are high profile tires, this would be one the reason why the car loses grip early. The car also has quite significant body roll, making it to under-steer quite early into the corner. As i said before, the tire profile contributes to the body roll as well. Since Proton was only able to tune the spring and damper rates, the car lacks the typical Proton's R&H signature, which is the 'nose-in-first' into a corner. This is mainly due to the 'center weighted tuning' and the lack of feel of the steering wheel. At high speed, in straight line and also corners, the steering feels disconnected and becomes too 'light', thus reducing response. As i said previously, the car under-steers quite heavily as I accelerate in the corners, compared to the typical Proton's R&H set up, which is almost neutral.
1.8MT
The 1.8MT felt slightly better composed then the 2.0 CVT. This is mainly because the weight distribution is different and the suspension was tuned using the 1.8MT as the base. Thus, I noticed difference in terms of grip, steering response and body roll. The rear still loses grip, however a tad bit latter compared to the 2.0 CVT. Steering response was slightly sharper and more responsive. Body roll was slightly less due to the better and more balanced weight transfer, especially to the front.
ICE
The In Car Entertainment system was a Clarion double din head unit with 4 speakers. In the original Lancer, there are 6 speakers (including tweeter). However, in the Inspira, the tweeter was removed since a better sound quality could be achieved with only 4 speaker system. This was made possible by the addition of the 3D-Sound Staging Chip into the head unit. This is the first Proton to use it. The result is, superb, crisp and clean sound! So far, this is the best sound that I have heard among all Proton cars. The effect of the 3D-Sound Staging could be noticed when the 'VAPS' button is switched on and off. Proton gave the option of switching off the 3D-Sound Staging so that customers can notice and appreciate the 3D sound quality. There are 3 settings under the 'VAPS' menu; Driver, All, and Off.
Overall
Overall, I would say, the Inspira is worth the penny, as it's much cheaper then the Lancer. Even though it's locally build, the quality from Mitsubishi is maintained. This is evident through the built quality and fit & finish of the car. Above all, the Inspira has the Proton's R&H touch which the Lancer doesn't have. It also features an up-market ICE system, and additional cooling system for the CVT to eliminate any transmission overheating issues that the Lancer faces. For those out there, looking for an upper range car in the C-Segment, I would highly recommend the Inspira.
