If the hideous looks weren’t bad enough, 18.6L/100km around town???? That’s just insane!
Guess it really is as rotten underneath as it looks.
Oh and Matt, well done for having the guts to drive it around
This thing is huge, it makes the alloys look like they are only about 13 inches big.
YUK!!!!…..I sat in one at the Sydney motor show last year and the wife liked the interior space BUT i had to be firm and told her that i couldn’t get past the rear end and it was never going to happen!
Conragtulations Ssangyong, you have given the world the ugliest vehicle EVER!
I love reading reviews of these kinds of cars, they are nice and entertaining, then you wonder who actually tested the vehicle and went “Yep, this is great, well finished, let’s build it”…
“And by Picasso I don’t mean that classy little French number either, I mean the having ears where your nose should be kind of Picasso.”
Im still catching my breath afta this little pearl.
This is one of those cars that stops you in your tracks, in this case in a bad way.
I was walking past one a while ago with a friend and we both stopped and commented on how ugly it was. The whole back end does not work.
What were they thinking? a fastback van with a last minute change to wagon? WTF happened?
This would have to be the most shocking thing ive ever seen would be good for scrap metal
well we all know wherer the X^ came fromnow bmw just removed the rear window.BUt still it looks even worse as a yellow cab its orange .My eyes were soiled
There is a need for two vehicles to clearly delineate the lower and upper levels (respectively) of taste and discernment in the market. Thank you Ssangyong, for providing the unarguable, undisputed, all bells and whistles answer to one of the extremes. But did you have to be so blatant? This is like coming last in the 100 metres sprint by a margin of half an hour.
can anyone think of a worse looking car? mmmmm…… , na. makes the AU falcon look sexy.
Gotta question the fuel consumption…18.6L/100km??
Surely that can’t be right for a diesel. Sounds like the fuel consumption of a 3 tonne truck.
‘Polarising looks’? Very diplomatically put. Hands up all those that are for the looks of the, um, vehicle…
Thought so – not so polarising…
18.6L/100kms around town? AHAHAHAHAAAA!
Ha! Wonder if we will see any of these around with Mercedes badges on them! I love to laught at those people…”Ah Sir, what model benz is that?” *Smiles back*
@ mike – there is a sy chairman running around brisbane with mercedes badges on them. the mercedes chairman! *vomits*
yeah yellow & black & white seem to love them, i see alot and have even had the misfortune of riding in one to the valley one night.
18.6L far out!!! thats horrible for a diesel
Yeah I know it’s hard to believe, I thought I’d miscalculated but no, 18.6 was the average of two tanks filled the driven around town. AC was on and a few blokes on board just to make it fair, but my driving was far from excessive. The car also have a few thousand on the odo so it was run in. I thought it may have been leaking fuel at first but no. Not a good one from an economy stand point.
Okay, fresh from the Peugeot 308 wagon post where most folks were crying foul over its looks to this, what are you gonna take, guys?
Peugeot 308 or this?
Peugeot 308 or this?
Peugeot 308 or this?
The Peugeot 308!
Thanks for confirming the 18.6 Matt.
Can you think of another car tested recently that has returned similar consumption around town?
What does a petrol Landcruiser or Patrol return?
What a shocker.
I was going to say that the only thing these are good for are maxi-taxi’s but even that seems too good a fate for such dross.
Second hand ones will make great Mount Druitt/Woodridge people-movers I guess.
Here’s an idea: Buy two compact sedans (eg. Lancer, Mazda 3) for $20k each, and combined they will have more seats and better fuel consumption!
They may not have plastic seats or polarising looks, but it would be cheaper to run, and less embarrassing
Style wise, it’s fine from the grille to the B Pillar, far better than the Peugeot 308 – well, any current peugeot.
From there back, and internally, it’s the worst thing on the planet.
But be a little kind – when Toyota puts the speedo in the middle, all the TPs of this forum love it, but when Ssangyong does it, it’s suddenly hideous. Just for clarification – it’s hideous whoever does it.
If it was a Camry returning such an abysmal fuel figure, it would be explained by the vehicle having some sort of technical fault on the individual car.
Third car in a week to get a FAIL – 2 Koreans and a French.
I just don’t see it? This is the most ugly car on the planet. And to me the 308 looks fresh, interesting and perhaps even beautiful.
Hmmmm…..it may be that I’m just a little odd, but I would consider buying a 308 but this car makes me sick just a little in the back of my throat.
What blows me away even more is that I have seen 3 of these on the road???? That’s 3 people who have actually parted with their hard earned for this hideous, fuel guzzling disaster on wheels??????????????????
If it was a brilliant car I could understand but…….?
Anyway a 308 hatch – Brilliant, a 308 touring – Brilliant, a 308 touring as a 7 seat people mover however – Not so brilliant.
SsangYong Savic – Road kill on wheels.
Citroen C4 Picasso – The Savic’s actual direct French competitor is a brilliant car that is available for the same price in a diesel. And Sh**s all over this car
how old is this design now?
i remember this model shape at a motor show a few years back now and it sure stop me in my tracks! yikes!
surely ssanyong are either deaf or the buyers are blind!!
I always burst into laughter when I see someone who actually bought one of these sinfully ugly buckets….lol!!
Jeremy, yep I agree that this may even make the VN commie vissually passable, but fails dismally to make it sexy.
Jeez. What a feral looking bucket! How could any CEO say “yep, tool up and build it” That’s gotta be instant dismissal material. I hope the board give the CEO one as a parting gift!
Looks like a Dog r..ting a football!
I have to agree with previous posters, the Stavic is the ugliest car on the road, especially from the rear. It looks like a smaller car has been shoved into the back of a bigger one. The front view isn’t too bad, reminds me of the import Toyota Mark II. As for the fuel economy, there was something badly wrong with the test car- I own a Rexton with the same engine and gearbox as the Stavic and despite being weightier (and usually heavily laden) my Ssangyong has averaged 10.1 litres/100km over 33,000km from new. Our rural speed limit is 110km/hr, too, and this is what I usually sit on.
As for the Mercedes connection, it’s my understanding that the 5-cylinder diesel engine blocks and pistons are made in Merc’s South African factory, and the 5-speed auto boxes are made in Germany.
^DA. That’s an unusual way of describing it… but now that you mention it….. Are you an engineer per chance?
what a heap of crap… SsangYong your products are a disgrace. I agree with technofreak these reviews give everybody a laugh at this car builders expense.
Still they deserve it. Just look at that rear!!!!
Bet it sells in droves in the middle east.THe land of golden camrys lol.
Who could design this thing seriously it is the ugliest car ever made.
I see one of these and I want to Stavic myself!
Could cut that funny bit on the back off with an angle grinder and it would look ok.
Got to be something wrong with the demo to get that fuel consumption. Know a guy with a Diesel Rexton and uses half that.
Realcars, why would you waste a perfectly good cutting disc on it. If you just left it near the beach, it would just rust away for nix. Or, if you sent it to a chook farm, it would make a perfectly good chicken coop.
Someone in one of the forums I visit posted a pic of a Ssangyong with very large stickers on the rear window, it said:
“God created sh!t, Ssangyong made it move”
Perhaps Hyundai should buy Ssangyong and put the Stavic out of it’s misery?
What sort of a name is Stavic?
One day all cars will look like this.LOL.
Ssangyong cars are a “disgrace” because they make one ugly model? By the same criterion Ford are a disgrace because they came up with the AU Falcon.
The Rexton is a good looking car, not dissimilar to the Mercedes M-Class to which it is related. Technically, it’s a very good car with only annoying details like lack of storage space and dowdy interior (the latter common to many cars of late, with dark, oppressive and heat absorbing fabrics) letting it down. The Ford Mondeo (an otherwise excellent car) is a case in point.
A couple of years ago when the Rexton II was released there were very few medium-sized automatic diesel 4WDs available. There are very few diesel people-movers available even now.
Mike……give us all a break mate!
This thing is not the only Ssangyong that is hideous, have you seen the twin cab Ute??????????
WTF happened to the front end of that thing???? You obviously have the toughest job in the world……trying to sell Ssangyongs!
Anti Spam Word is Buick. First thing that comes to mind is the strong duarable and relaible 3.8 Litre Buick Engine, that powered the commodore from VN – VY.
By just looking at the pictures you can tell there is quality issues and by the SsangYongs ugly, blindig looks you can tell it will have bad resale.
Carl, I’m not trying to sell Ssangyongs. The Rexton wasn’t even my first choice, it was the Sorento, which wasn’t available in diesel at the time my lease commenced.
As for the Sport ute, yes, it has an ugly front, but would be my choice for a light-duty ute given its excellent price and economical 2.0 litre motor. In fact I asked for one to replace the work Hilux ute but the lease company doesn’t allow Ssangyongs (nor Mazdas, so the BT-50 was out).
What the hell are you guys talking about,
I own a stavic and its the best car i ever had, with a family of 8 it moves us around with ease.
Well fuel consumption, we easily get 8.7 round town well on a trip 1,000 ks plus on a tank, goes like a rocket and handles like a dream.
Dont knock something you know nothing about, well done STAVIC
wow not to many good comments on it this is my second stavic highly impressed with it traveled from WA to SA 800km a tank and around town i fill up when the fuel light comes on which is around the 70ltr mark and just about every time i have done 550km or more which if my calculations are right that works out to 12.72litres per 100km and this is with the 4×4 version which i presume is a little heavier and i get 800km on the highway yes it is quite strange to look at just to add a comment on the luggage room my partner and i have 3 kids aged from 1 to 6 so quite a bit of luggage when we go away and we have quite sufficient room and on the power yes it has turbo lag down bottom but for overtaking wow she fly’s by the time you have passed a road train you are pretty much passed him in a few seconds so apart from looks i think this review has been very exaggerated 18.6ks per 100 what a joke guess you learn to calculate or ask someone to do it for you
I own a 2008 Stavic. I took it to Dubbo with my family of 5. Great drive!!! As for the 18.6l/100Km What a crock!! We’re getting 600-700Km a tank out of ours. The country drive from Sydney to Dubbo gave us 450Km on half a tank. Hating the looks is one thing, allowing it to cloud your judgement elsewhere is another. The fact is I bought it for $32,500 drive away 2nd hand. The kids love it!!I tried to convince them to change our Ssangyongs for 2 Hyundai Imax’s. They wouldn’t budge. I don’t know guys wouldn’t it be boring if all we had in the world were boxes invented by people with the same forsight as the inventors of the square.Most Ssangyong owners I know are passionate about there car, why because despite the looks it actually delivers!!!
Yes I agree the Review is totally Biased abd Irrelevant!
When was the last time that you saw a really attractive People mover?
AHH Well Never. Granted it is not the prettiest, but don’t buy it for the looks but the practicality.
As for the Rest of this BS Review!
I travelled Sydney to Gold Coast with stop off at Byron, 4 people and stacked to the Roof with Supplies and Still had fuel in the tank. Work that Out to be Approx 8 Liters /100K
I am 6ft2in and Have reasonable Head room in 3rd seat in fact found it the most comfortable Shame could not drive from there!
I have Owned mine for 9 Years, and in that time have replaced 2 sets of brakes, a windscreen(cracked), Right Tie Rod, and that is it other then tyres.
It also has very few rattles or squeaks far less then most other cars. The suspension is Noisy but the car is 2 Tonnes and will tow 2.5 Tonnes comfortably! (have done 2 Tonnes as if nothing there other then power up hills)
So get over your Dramas on looks and Get Head from #$@ and do an honest review.
My son is a Real car nut like Me and loves classic and Stylish cars and he loves the Stavic. Not for the Looks but for everything else it offers. Have suggested selling it a couple times and He Tells me to keep it each time.
I own Stavic for last 3 years.
Weight – almost 2500kg – when empty
Motorway – 8.5 l /100km
Sydney city driving – 11.2 l/100km,
I love this Car ( i have own in the past – Toyota, Mithsubishi, Renaut, Fiat, BMW, Cadillac ).
I wonder why Ssangyong has in general very positive car reviews abroad but only negative in Australia???
Cant comment on the fuel consumption, i have never and will never own one. but i can comment on the remarkable hideous looks. Man,where do they get those ideas/designs from? Homer Simpson? Does this vehicle come with a rope? or a mask at least? The back looks like someone rammed a fridge up its behind. I may not be a qualified car designer but i think i can come up with a better looking exterior for this car. Id even do it for free just to save peoples eyes from looking at it and cringe.
mercy on your soul
In Thailand this super van is called Stavic. In arctic white (metallic) it certainly has the looks. In latin America it is called Rodius. I like the big block ‘Benz’ diesel with lots of pulling power. Read my review in http://www.carsanook.com Bangko-Nakhon Sawan.
If you take away the rear glass thing, it looks exactly the same as a BMW X6
Haha the whole car was supposed to capture the design of a “luxury yacht.” Bahahaha, that rear end is hideous. No wonder Wheels quotes is as: “Has a face like burn’t thong” More like the rear end as the front end doesn’t look too bad, but overall “computer says “NO.”
Its a funny thing, but despite all the comments by the non-owners, once you own a Stavic and get used to it you wonder why non-owners rubbish it as you find yourself liking it more and more.
My Stavic has constanly returned fuel figures of around 9.5ltr/100km average for mixed driving/ towing etc. I can’t imagine how the writer could have got 18.6 as even when towing a heavy load at speed I only used 13/100..I’d have to think there was something wrong with the test unit.
I love the fact its a diesel rear wheel drive and it does handle well, much better then most vans/people movers available. It may not be the fastest thing off the line, but once moving with the turbo spining it can move very well and is very good for instance at overtaking which is more then can be said of almost all of the other people movers.
Looks are like anything else, whats in today can be out tomorrow and vise vera. I have had quite a few people (strangers) comment that my Stavic looks nice so obviously there are different views and to a large extent it depends on what you have been exposed to – certainly it seems anyone who has anything to do with a Stavic for any length of time dosn’t find it ugly. Over in europe where there is a much larger range of vechiles and styles the Stavic (known as the Rodius there) does quite well.
I’m just in the process of buying my second Stavic, the first having saved ny familys life in a horrific high speed side impact collision that usually results in death or permenant disability. The so called ugly ducking has well proved to be the elegant swan as far as we are concerned.
We are Stavic owners and sure, we agree it doesnt look great. We were looking for a people mover for 2 parents and 5 kids and this was the only vehicle under $40K which could fit us all AND 5 school bags in. The Tarago was no better, and it was a lot more expensive. The only real comparison at the time was the Voyager for a whole lot more money. We’ve had our Stavic for 3 years and we get 10-10.5l/100k around town, and down to 8-9 if we do some kms on the highway. You barely notice a trailer when you are towing. We have holidayed for a week with the 7 of us and bags inside the car so its got lots of storage room. The back seat is fully removable when you need to carry something and the space then is as big as our trailer. The visability could be better, and it is becoming hard to find spare parts, but we still do not regret buying one.
Bloody chinese import of the Kia Carnival, who else thinks it looks like a Kia or a Nissan.
Absolutely hilarious review, 90% of criticisms just plain wrong. I know, he was dreaming he test drove the Stavic and then made stuff up because that’s the reviewers popular thing to do when the supposed crappy car outperforms its competitors inc price.
As a Stavic owner of 3 years I will never buy another brand people mover again. Those that actually have a Stavic, love and defend them, that says something. Those that assume and believe rubbish reviews will always be in the dark. Keep laughing doubters, it’s us in a Stavic laughing right back at you.
To think I was going to drop $70k on an equivalent Tarago makes me shudder. People have died in a Carnival when it caught fire and the sliding door stuck shut. No sliding doors for us thanks.
For those considering a people mover, ignore the sport car reviewers and check it out for yourself, you won’t be disappointed.