When Mitsubishi made the current Outlander, both Citroen and Peugeot were involved, and so, it was announced that they would be making their own versions of the Outlander platform. The Citroen C-Crosser was quietly released in 2007 - I say quietly because aside from the more Citroen-esque nose, the shape of the car was pure Outlander. Even the interior was identical to the Mitsubishi. Peugeot then released the 4007, which again, was virtually identical, except for the face. So don't say anything about the Mitsubishi Outlander in front of people that work for Peugeot or Citroen. And no-one's really buying the C-Crosser or 4007 because we can all see through their lies - they're not new cars in their own right, merely copies. So Peugeot didn't want that to happen again with their latest attempt at a Compact SUV. It is all new, based on the 308 platform, and got an extra 0 to its name.

Actually, I'm reasonably impressed by the 3008. The overall shape of the car is quite pleasing, if a bit bulky and chubby. Of course, because this is a Peugeot, the face of the car is horrible - how hard can it be to make a car with a nice nose? Oh, wait a minute, I forgot - the French have no inspiration for nice noses. The domestic trend is quite the opposite. On the other hand, because this is a Peugeot, it will look much better in real life than it does in pictures. Hopefully. Well, I hated the 407 in pictures, but when I see them out on the road, they somehow look elegant. This had baffled me for a long time, until I realised the truth - Peugeot have invested a lot of money in the paint finish of their cars. Have you ever seen a 407 with a boring looking paintjob? They're always sparkly and stunning, or glossy and classy. Perhaps this is what is blinding me to the true ugliness of a Peugeot.

Anyway, the 3008. In Europe, the 3008 will be offered in a vast range of petrol and diesel engines, but when it arrives here in 2010, the story will be a bit different. The petrol range of the 3008 only reaches 1.6 Litres and 115kw, so it is most likely that we'll only get the top-of-the-range 2.0Litre diesel engine, producing 120kW and 340Nm. In 2011, Peugeot plan to introduce a diesel-electric 3008, like the Prologue HYbrid4 concept shown last year. Don't expect that to come here though, sadly.

The new 3008 will be offered in 5-seat and 7-seat configurations, and Peugeot want the 3008 to fill the roles of SUV, people mover, and family hatchback. I personally think it will join the Nissan Dualis in a new market segment - a sort of 4x4, sort of hatchback kind of car. Perhaps then it would be a good idea to create a front wheel drive version of the 3008, Peugeot? In this way, the 3008 will save weight (increasing performance, economy, etc.) and hopefully also make some gains in the handling department. It's not like people who want a 3008 will want to go off-road, by any stretch of the imagination.

Like when they launched the 308, Peugeot are harping incessantly on about how their new cars are of vastly better quality. And though I'll admit that the interior looks pleasant, in an Audi R8 kind of way, time will be the judge of their claims. Wouldn't it be great if other car makers could make their more interesting cars as reliable as a Toyota?

But do you think that Peugeot really is purposely entering their car in a new market segment? Does the 3008 really compete with the Nissan Dualis? You know what I'm talking about when you see them next to each other. They both share the same low ride height, anyway. Let me know whether you think the concept will take off - I believe, providing the price is right, that it will.

NEWS: Peugeot 3008 Officially Launched into a New Market Segment

Oh yeah, fight to the death! These are two new Toorak Tractors ready to show up in a showroom near you. The difference is that these are the smallest compact SUVs these car makers have ever made. And they're poised to be in head-to-head competition.

This market segment is not new. The BMW X3 has been there for a few years already, but it was so ugly I didn't want to poison my site with pictures of it. It will not take part in this battle, because it is simply not stylish enough to compete with these two - looks count for a lot when a the target market is cashed up and super-trendy. The Audi Q5 is also kickin' around, but it is so bulky and lardy that it's hard to call it compact. It's largely irrelevant. Volvo and Mercedes promise stylish, luxurious and safe transport for a family of up to five people. Which one truly delivers? Which comes up trumps? Read on...

In a style contest, there really is no competition. The Mercedes is basically a smaller version of the GL-Class, hence GLK. If you see a "K" on the end of a Mercedes-Benz, then you know it is the smaller or coupe version of another Mercedes-Benz. The GL is just a 5 metre-long luxo-truck, and for the GLK, they chopped off half a metre. It looks oddly boxy and utilitarian, but never exactly tough, because of its lack of size and ultra-glossy paint. I'm also wondering how big Mercedes can possibly make the badge on the front grille - surely they don't get any bigger than this. The three pointed star looks like a fan that will generate a category 5 cyclone.

The Volvo is a smaller version of the XC90, and builds on that design theme by adding more curves and a truly sporty look. It really is a statement of how far Volvo has come in recent years in terms of design. It looks streamlined, detailed, and thoroughly modern in 2008. It's a far cry from some of the awful box-on-wheels-type cars that came out of Sweden in the nineties. It's quite hard for me to say this, but has Volvo created an SUV that is actually pretty? I'm going to be bold, and say yes. Emphatically.

Inside, the contest is far closer. The Mercedes carries over the theme from the successful C-Class, which looks really architectural, but probably a bit too busy for my liking. Too many squared off edges all over the place. It doesn't look unfinished exactly, just a bit hectic. I love the sporty-looking wheel, though, with the coolest audio buttons I've seen for a while - although its curvy design seems at odds with the rest of the interior.

The Volvo is more simple, if not minimalistic like the S40/V50. I still do not understand the "floating" centre console idea Volvo loves putting in its new cars. All it creates is a hole of empty space behind the centre console, which is unusable as a storage compartment. It has no function whatsoever other than to impress your friends - I don't know about you, but it wouldn't impress my friends. If I got enthusiastic about a "floating" centre console, my friends would think I had finally (finally...) lost my marbles. That being said, the XC60's interior is a nice place to be, is user friendly, and more spacious than the Mercedes (due to larger overall dimensions). I quite like the two-tone leather upholstery - it's a bit "cookies and cream", and a nice different, but possibly a bit gauche for some people. Bully for them. I like it. The instrumentation also balances form and function, and I am appreciative of the metallic strip around the circumference of the dial.

Driving? Well, do you think people who are buying these cars will care? They will care about how safe it is, if their darling children will be comfortable sitting on the rear seat, and in these respects, both cars are without peer. They are both very comfortable, and safe as houses. Safer, I'd say. And I don't know why just about every automotive journalist thinks they need to test how these cars perform off-road - they must be behind the times, and think that people want to go bush-bashing the outback in a Range Rover Sport. Both these cars are going to suck off-road, because they are not designed for it. If you want a XC60 or GLK because you want some butch outback action, you are base and ignorant. Simple as that.

Power probably isn't a huge priority for a new luxo-4WD buyer, but both the XC60 and GLK have plenty to offer. And I think everyone gets a little perverse pleasure out of seeing a big heavy SUV being able to rocket off into the horizon. The XC60 T6 has a turbocharged straight-six engine with 213kW on tap, which wins the power stakes here. The GLK350 has just a plain 3.5 litre V6 (200kW), which we've seen in Mercedes models before. It won't disappoint you either. Both cars have fuel-sipping diesel options, if you want to feel less environmentally guilty.

The verdict? There is ultimately little to separate these two cars, but the Volvo wins in my opinion. It seems like a far less offensive, more stylish, refined and livable way of carting little minions (kids) to and from Auskick each Saturday. The Mercedes is trying to be too sporty and masculine, and instead seems grotesque and over-done. I guess I'll never be butch enough, or enough of a pimp (like the "homies" in the top left picture) to look good driving the GLK, and I'm guessing neither will you. And I'll never stop having nightmares where I get sucked head first into the Mercedes' colossal propeller-like badge. If you must shout to the world that you own a Mercedes (no matter how fugly it is) then the GLK is for you. Otherwise, be a bloody Volvo driver. They're bloody good-looking these days.

BATTLE: Mercedes-Benz GLK-Class vs. Volvo XC60

The new Volkswagen Golf is coming very soon - sooner than we all expected. Because Mark V was expensive to build, Volkswagen rushed in its new Golf so that it could make more money on it. Only five years after they built the last one. That's an even shorter time between models than most Japanese cars (traditionally, European cars take about 8 years per model cycle).

Well, the big news is that your bog-standard Golf now gets the face of a Scirocco (in the words of Borat: "Nice"), and an even better quality interior. One of the critisisms of the last Golf was that interior quality wasn't up to the same standards as Mark IV, but Volkswagen say that this new Golf will "completely redefine the quality and comfort level of its class". But I'm always more sceptical.

The whole point of releasing the new Golf so early is that it is cheaper to make. Does that mean cheaper interior materials? We'll have to wait and see. The pictures make it look rather nice, however, if rather generic.

Of more interest is the new GTI, which will now have 157 Kilowatts (210 HP) of power, an increase of 10kW - which of course is great, because everyone loves more power. It puffs out less carbon dioxide too, which pleases the greenie in all of us. The R32 will be replaced with the GTI-R, which does not retain the former's engine (due to emissions regulations), and instead gets the engine from the Audi S3 - a 191kW (256 HP) donk.

NEWS: Volkswagen Golf Mark VI