Thats happening to manual variant as well. Apply throttle, engine rpm goes up after about a second, release half clutch, engine rpm drop drastically to around 500 rpm and jerk like wanna stall, then rpm automatically shoots up again after about a second or two eventhough throttle remain constant, release full clutch to let car goes. If straight away release full clutch after applying throttle then have happy time trying to restart yer engine again.
Nope, too old to contribute.
Good chunk of information you've given there, greatly appreciate it.

On the other hand, though, low sales figure on manual iafm+ makes proton seems like lazy to improve the ECU for stick shifter while those CFE variant keep on getting hot updates regularly. Sad case scenario. I was thinking maybe proton could at least improve the stand still acceleration for iafm+ such as making the first gear to engage the responsive S Mode like those of in CFE but retain the same current setting for other gears. At least safer when coming to a stand still while negotiating a slope or rushing out of junction, without reving the engine too much. The throttle lag is dangerous in such situation:

Imagine the car slow down when reaching roundabout. At a glance, there is still quite some distance with those cars traveling at the roundabout. So it is safe if rush into the roundabout quickly but not so if entering it slowly. So quickly shift to first gear and pedal it but the slow response makes it enter the roundroad at a turtling pace a.k.a moving as if without any throttle being pedaled. The throttle only starts to response after some time so in such situation where agile response is much need then it'll be unsafe. If the approaching driver at the roundabout was either insane or slow to respond then you know the akibat lah. Coupled with the fact that it might even stalled easily halfway during first gear made it even scarier! The same goes to maintaining the position without going backwards while climbing the hill at first gear which I find harder to do compare to the old proton hero. Such skill is needed during a frequent stop-go situation at sloppy road.

Well, not to say it's a bad car, but like what GoldenHawk said, there's still rooms for improvement! Hopefully the full potential can be unleashed for all variant, not just for the majority CFE. Come on, we're 1Malaysia afterall. Don't ignore the minority(manual iafm+)! I believe they can improve the driveability of the car without sacrificing the fc much, or even making it better after retune! Agree?

what do u mean by old proton hero? Wira era i presume. Wira still using throttle cable system, so its totally diff from than dbw. Yup, so much talk around the world about dbw throttle lag during take off(easier to control emmision during low rev than throttle cable), but dbw is better interm of efficiency, means better power delivery with how much fuel used when its already on move with the same engine.

Many people cursing coz not using cps. Ok, lets me share a bit story that i know. When pheonix project is planned, it just for turbo variant only. The budget is enough to focus on turbo variant. There are 2 base engine, 1st is original campro with distributor design@ iafm which using distributeless design n better injector than 1st gen campro which cps is based on and iafm campro based already been tested using 32bit ecu(persona elegance), while campro n cps still using 16bit ecu. So, they choosed iafm campro based since its better, less time to develop n easier to meet the objective n costless than 1st gen campro coz many things need to change including the injector systems n intergration with 32bit ecu. Time n budget is really crucial to prtn since dont have much time n money to spend.

During the project running, an idea come out, since prtn still need na engine that meeting the same emmision objective, which cps isnt unless some changing are needed, which will be another cost since cps n cfe using diff based engine, so, by sharing some components from cfe, n revert it back to na form where it is based on. So within same budget which supposed to develop turbo variant, they manage to come out with na n turbo variant.

Why exora still use cps? Already mention earlier, iafm+ dont meet the objective of minimum 80hp pertonne. Even torque is better, achieve max torque lower than cps, and better spread of torque, the relation of torque n hp still intact. U know how heavier exora than preve.

Another note, upgrading cps to meet higher emmision control, not only cost higher than iafm based, but the hp n torque, will be reduce, so, if that so, its not really make sense to do so. To maintain the same torque n hp in cps, means more time need to spend in rnd, it also means more cost need to be spend, while prtn really need the turbo variant for future.

So, cps still euro 3/4, but iafm+ is euro 4/5. This is really crucial if prtn need to go global. When prtn said using cps cost more than iafm+, that was the meaning.

---

Added on November 12, 2012, 12:33 amthats why, maintenace schedule is nearly the same for cfe n iafm+ except for spark plugs n air filter, but iafm, cps, campro, share the same schedule of maintenance. Another obkective during pheonix project is prolong servicing vital components so that can reduce the cost of ownership.

Its a hard decision that prtn need to make. I have to solute the engineers involved to come out with the idea, n they r really competent to make it a success within the same time frame given with the same budget given. If not, there wont be flx, or even cheaper preve variant. They can plonk cfe in all variants, but the price diff wont be that big.

As for leather seats, yup, initial plan was premium will equip with leather seats n it will be german made cow leather, but since need to be set the price really low(the leather is not cheap by the way), so, where the cost cutting measure can be done, it had to be done. Even the material used in preve interior seems cheap for many, but it isnt cheaper than exora's and its expensive than exora.
Many said not global enough, yes, i do agree if u pit it with a real global car. But to develop a global car, with time, manpower, n budget constraint, for me it is commendable, n its global enaugh. Its not cheap to consult with italdesign n magna even co develop braking sytems with trw. Engaging punch n getrag also not a cheap skate. Engaging conti for bcm systems also doesnt come cheap, but luckily that was done during exora development. Spending on hpf machine also not cheap. Prtn can used same technique n material of exora since they share the same platform to reduce cost like waja with gen2 n persona, but they know they need to make preve better than exora in many aspects. Can used original torsion beam to save cost as in exora, but they still change it n even make it better even using multilink, boot space isnt much sacrifice.

With nearly same budget as exora, prtn develop preve which is nearly totally diff n even better in manyaspects than exora.

And i believe, they can do even better with a partner, with more money injected for rnd, n more sales to cover up the money spends.

So, gudnight everyone. Hopefully prtn is doing somethg for iafm+ owners whether flx@preve.