The infotainment challenge
THERE ARE BIG DIFFERENCES WITH THESE SIX SYSTEMS, AND NOT EVEN PRICE GUARANTEES BETTER OPERATION
We now take it as a given that infotainment systems — once so lowly that automakers let the aftermarket dominate audio-system sales — are an important, nay crucial, part of the automotive landscape. Indeed, there are some who would say that audio/ information/connectivity systems will soon be the most important aspect of a car’s performance.
That’s why Driving looked at six vastly different units from different cars — different operating systems, different design philosophies and vastly different price ranges — to see if we could make head or tails of what is the best design methodology, which system is more convenient, and whether a car’s price tag makes the same kind of difference to infotainment systems as it does to engines and amenities. Here is our evaluation:
KIA UVO
The little Rio’s UVO system impressed all the testers simply because of Kia’s traditional strength: value for the money. Fully featured, save for voice control, the Rio’s “Intelligence” version of the company’s UVO is the most advanced infotainment system the South Korean automaker offers.
It shows. With top- ofthe- line graphics, easily deciphered controls for both stereo and navigation systems, the UVO — and I should repeat that this top-of-the-line UVO system is available on the Rio EX AT for as little as $20,945 — offered all the necessities of infotainment life.
Pros: Excellent bang for your digital buck; physical volume and channel- tuning knobs; Intelligence version boasts a sizable ( for the segment) seven-inch screen.
Cons: A little slow on the uptake; radio stations and maps take time to load; no voice control. Overall rating: Excellent value for the money.
GMC INTELLILINK SYSTEM
Next up the price range was GMC’s most advanced infotainment system, found in the all- new Terrain. And, in something of a trend — at least in this test — the GMC was an extremely competent, extremely fast full- featured system let down by a few cost- cutting design details endemic to its price point.
Pros: Blindingly fast processor; quick Bluetooth connectivity; excellent predictive navigation system address entry and voice commands.
Cons: Not the most fashionable design; graphics a little underwhelming; difficult keyboarding.
Overall rating: Lightning quick and intuitive, but a tad prosaic.
FIAT CHRYSLER UCONNECT
Not surprising is that FCA’s Uconnect was well received. Well documented is the fact that Uconnect is a solid performer in the infotainment field; perhaps its highest compliment is that the same basic hardware is used in Maseratis without complaint.
Complaints were few. The Uconnect system is a Plain Jane screen- in- dashboard design, but it’s a fairly sizable affair, some 8.4 inches across. More importantly, it is, like the General Motors unit, speedy and reliable, never failing to connect Bluetooth and rapidly searching out addresses (though without the GMC’s almost uncanny “predictive” quality).
Pros: Fully featured, with Apple CarPlay, Android Auto, Sirius Radio/ Traffic/ Traffic Link, plus many other apps that can only be used with the van in Park to avoid distraction; plenty speedy.
Cons: Controls a little complicated; ordinary graphics.
Overall rating: An excellent system that deserved its No. 1 placing in this test.
VOLVO SENSUS
If there’s one thing we gleaned from this test of infotainment systems, it’s that, while there may not be an advantage in performance with higher price tags, there is a huge improvement in design and graphics display. Compared with the three systems noted above, for instance, Volvo’s Sensus display is positively huge, reminding us very much of a Samsung Galaxy Notebook plunked into the XC60’s centre dashboard.
As such, it was like operating a tablet with all the benefits — and foibles — we’re all used to. One of the system’s big pluses is that it allows you to scroll through all the radio channels, displaying the song and artist on each, without switching from the station you’re currently listening to. Unfortunately, navigation system address input was an exercise in frustration; manually keying in was a slow process, voice control was unreliable and the handwriting recognition system was as likely to take you to Pluto, the planet, as the street in St. John’s, N.L.
Pros: Attractive vertical tablet-like format; swipe controls to access different menus; excellent radio controls.
Cons: Frustrating manual address entry; frustrating voiceactivated address entry.
Overall rating: Huge potential that needs better data entry.
RANGE ROVER TOUCH PRO DUO
If Volvo’s Sensus system is like having a Samsung Galaxy built into your centre console, then Range Rover’s new Touch Pro Duo system — as seen in the new Velar — is akin to having an Apple iPad built into your dashboard. Actually, two Apple iPads, as befitting that Duo moniker. The latest Touch system employs two 10- inch screens, both in the centre stack.
Pros: Screens impeccably integrated into cockpit design; appealing graphics; excellent navigation system.
Cons: No physical radio-tuning controls; no voice command for address entry.
Overall rating: A beautiful system that needs finishing.
BMW IDRIVE
If the Range Rover Touch Pro system is an iPad, then BMW’s iDrive is an Apple MacBook. Unlike the other two luxury entrants, which have gone the tablet route, iDrive is very much computer- like with a “mouse” and lots of submenus.
The iDrive’s saving grace is BMW’s latest voice- command system. If not the very best voice recognition system ever, it was certainly the most accurate and speedy in this test. The 10.2- inch display, like all the other luxury- marque screens, is also large, bright and attractive.
Pros: Beyond excellent voice-command system; large, well designed 10.2- inch iDrive screen; logically laid-out submenus.
Cons: Too many submenus; complicated system can occasionally baffle; system still uses too many buttons.
Overall rating: A complex, complicated system made more than livable by an exemplary voice command system.
CONCLUSION
The most obvious conclusion from our test was that the computerized automobile is still in its infancy. Each manufacturer’s system had its strengths, and one could imagine a perfect — OK, better — system if one combined Range Rover graphics with GMC speed, BMW voice control, Volvo radio tuning and FCA’s interface, all, of course, at the Kia’s price.
That said, Fiat Chrysler’s l atest Uconnects ystem ranked highest, its edge over the Terrain’s IntelliLink in the tester’s subjective ratings greater than GMC’s speed advantage. The GMC system was a close second. BMW’s iDrive and Kia’s UVO system were so close in our points standing that differentiation was difficult, hence they tied behind FCA and GMC ( though big points to Kia for value for money). Range Rover’s Touch Pro Duo and Volvo’s Sensus were fifth and sixth, respectively, based mainly on their poor (in the case of Volvo) and nonexistent ( Range Rover) voice-command abilities for the navigation system. Both, however, were more esthetically pleasing than the other contestants, the Range Rover system in the Velar, especially so.