HSV Maloo wins Global Green Car Challenge
October 30, 2009 by George Skentzos
An unlikely winner has taken out the 2009 Global Green Car Challenge with the new HSV E Series 2 Maloo claiming top honours by achieving a 48.76 per cent reduction in fuel consumption when compared to its fuel rating label figure.
Over the entire trip, the Maloo had a combined average fuel consumption of 7.74 litres per 100 kilometres, representing the largest improvement over the manufacturers indicated fuel figure.
Its nearest competitor made a 39.81 per cent improvement, while the third-placed vehicle improved its consumption rating by 33.5 per cent.
The winning team, comprising Senior HSV Engineers Gerry Bechet and Leigh Russell and motoring journalist Joshua Dowling, credit their success to consistent driving and willingness to put up with difficult cabin conditions.
“For instance we kept air-conditioning use to an absolute minimum, which meant coping with cabin temperatures of more than 50 degrees Celsius for hours on end,” Gerry Bechet said.
Although this result does not make the Maloo the most frugal competitor in the Global Green Car Challenge fleet, only the vehicle to improve upon its fuel consumption rating by the biggest margin – a rather dubious method to crown a champion.
Nevertheless, Managing Director of HSV Phil Harding congratulated the team on their result, adding that “the real world fuel efficiency of the Holden Special Vehicles range is extremely competitive.”
Print it: 
Any news on the Senator LPG support vehicle?
Green Car Challenge just lost a ton of credibility…
The Ford Fiesta should have been the winner for using the least amount of fuel to cover the same distance.
Agreed!
Then they say this to back it up? “the real world fuel efficiency of the Holden Special Vehicles range is extremely competitive.”
Ridiculous!
Let the rants begin
I think it’s still quite funny though…
Realistically speaking .. im sure most people would be educated enough to know that the Maloo is going to drink a lot more than a Fiesta..
Just extra advertising by Ford for sure…
I’d be interested to see if Holden/Hsv will be game to advertise the fact that they won the eco challenge..lol…
To say “This is a real world test of how you can save fuel, but we aren’t doing things like folding mirrors”
Then turn around and say they aren’t using air con etc and allowing cabin temp to recah 50+ is stupid, in what circumstance in real life would any person let that happen. I’ve done it in 30-35 weather, but this is tp extreme.
Lots of credibility lost, when they could have gained alot by showing how good they would all go with Air con on.
There should also have been 2 competitions, least amount of fuel used aswell as the biggest reduction compared to Extra Urban (not Combined) cycle.
This race is going to be so severely misinterpreted by the Average Joe it’s quite sad.
Regards
Whitbomb07
Impressive, but why a Maloo and not an R8?
Could we get a list of how all competitors fair ?
Andrew,
I was asking the same question. I’m guessing it’s a way of shaving weight off. Sneaky but it works. Sedan will weigh more than the Ute. Less weight = less power needed to move.
Actually, from memory the Maloo weighs slightly more than the sedan.
Yeah i always fail to understand how that works. If you remove two doors the rear bit of the roof and all the excess trim and bits from the back, the laws of nature state that you should get a lighter car. POsed the question to a HSV dealer one day and he and the Holden fella had no clue or response
I swear all the Ford Fans and haters will never congratulate a real win when they see one. Even if the test is done by independent third parties they still wont except it. Face the Facts, the HSV won and not the Fiesta. The competition was entered by Ford who knew the rules and so did HSV. You dont just say that because a competitor lost a game that the rules should be changed to suit them. GO HSV
Agree.
Of cause Ford knew the rules, why else would they enter a XR6 Turbo which came Second??
GO HSV!!
Gee, someone changing the rules to suit them after losing. Hahaha reminds me of Touring cars when Nissan absolutely flogged the antiquated rubbish Holden and Ford were racing. After many years of trying Nissan finally came up with a winner abiding by the rules, then they change the rules to suit the dinosaurs, and they still are in 2009
in all seriousness, how many people do you know that drive from Alice Springs to Adelaide on a regular basis? Let’s have a test where the combined figire is just, that, 36% driving in the city, 36 in the country, not on a flat dead straight highway with the aircon turned off. Wake up to yourselves GLOBAL GREEN.
‘“For instance we kept air-conditioning use to an absolute minimum, which meant coping with cabin temperatures of more than 50 degrees Celsius for hours on end,” Gerry Bechet said.’
Real world conditions eh? Oh well, the big mac eaters will love it I guess…
Once again “The Realist” with yet another Positive Comment..
You just can’t believe that a so called dinosaur beat a number of more technologically advanced cars can you?
I’m sure you and Pauline Hanson also travel without AC in the heat of summer when cruising around Lakemba in your E36 BMW 318i right?
Well congratulations to them, but I hadn’t realised how flawed the Global Green Challenge is. By this way of winning, you could potentially have a car that uses fifty litres of fuel per one hundred kilometers, but as long as it averaged under twenty-five it would win!
I have no problems with HSV winning, but I think they need to revise how they judge this.
Why? the manufacturers teams and drivers all knew what the purpose of the challenge was and how it would be judged etc
it just goes to show that even a V8 “dinosaur” can achieve fuel economy that is equivalent to that of a 4 cylinder car – it all depends on your driving style and how constant your cruising speed is etc.
My Brother in law regularly gets 7-8L/100km form his SS Ute from the gold-fields to Perth and back
Exactly what happened in the 2008 NZ EnergyWise Rally. A totally meaningless result.
What a crock. The petrol wasted on this fraudulent ‘challenge’ would have been better served fuelling a cargo plane full of rubber dog sh¥t out of Hong Kong.
At least this shows what the cars are capable of in the real world and can help manufacturers with the R&D of their engines.. so it’s not a complete waste.
You won’t hear ranting from me :)
I’m happy the 3.0 SIDI didnt win…my stomach is already empty from all of the sugar coated marketing Holden spit out.
Credit where credits due but mind you….turning off the AC and sitting in 50c Heat?
Stoopid! I’m guessing other teams used the same tactics but it’s not realistic driving conditions for a long stretch at all.
Having said that…HSV’s boss is full of crap, I’ll call him on that one big time :)
Shakeel, Take your fanboy hat off…gloating is just as bad as sooking.
One more thing to note, the HSV’s Carbon output was quite big, a lot more than the 3.0SIDI and the XR6T.
Gee Bucks, certainly hate to hear from you when do rant then!! Sugar coating or sour grapes?? Perhaps Holden is the most intelligent manufacturer when it came to working out the rules then. Yeah, perhaps Holden better be banned next year so someone else can win!!
Im in no wa ya fanboy, i just get annoyed when all the Holden and Ford haters get together and contaminate this site with their rants. I just thought i would try and set one side straight with my own rant
Sorry mate, you are a Holden Fanboy. And there is no way you can hide it.
Why are you happy the Commodore didn’t win?
If the Commodore had’ve won, that would have been a great result for Australia.
Enough of the whining about Holden’s marketing already.
Holden is a COMPANY SELLING A PRODUCT, just like Ford is a company selling a product or any other car company. Blaming Holden’s sales successes on marketing alone makes no sense whatsoever, and crying on an internet forum over and over won’t translate to showroom traffic. If you’re unhappy with the way your favourite manufacturer markets their products, I suggest emailling Mr Ford at forddotcom and raising your issues.
Why not Rant about an overpriced, underpowered, overweight product that won’t make back the difference in running costs for atleast one to two years?
Why, thats the turnaround for most fleet companies anyway!
And why not blame the success on Marketing and Image? They havent had that much of a competetive product in their V6’s for the couple of years anyway.
They cut back the power back of the 3.6 to try and be more economical only to the detriment of drivability and a terrible 4 Speed transmission. How is showcasing the brilliance of Holden? Please enlighten me. Marketing makes all the difference. In a lot of ways, Joe average’s entire lifestyle is a creation of clever marketing.
Holden’s Image is the selling point Ozzie Cars. Their marketing conjures up Images of the great Australian dream, let’s face it, they do Market very well.
Credit to them, they have done very well at maintaining that image for so long.
Their Main rival, Ford Australia have won more awards and collected more Accolades with both their Large cars, SUV’s and Small Cars in the last decade yet they still don’t sell more than Holden save the Territory and some BA’/F’s..
The commodore is the last remotely Australian thing left in Holden’s line up and thats it. A Majority of people believe that Holden are still an Australian company and the rival, Ford Australia are American when in reality, both are owned by Massive Multi-nationals. How does this work? Why its quite elmentary…Marketing. Surely Holden wouldnt pump so much money into it if it didnt make such good returns would they? I dont post on here hoping it will sell another Falcon or whatever. Simply to Discuss ideas and opinions with others.
If People really still believe a small block 3.0L SIDI in a 1.8 Tonne car can be that much a significant difference to a better engineered Engine Gearbox combo from Ford or any other product in the same segment for that matter, then so be it. I’m asking people what is the better overall package Ozzie Cars.
The Commodore is an Joint American-Australian developed platform running an GM designed Engine that in some form is used in Alfa Romeo’s and SAAB’s (pretty sure) just to name a few; Developed to some point here in Austrlia but that is where it ends. Marketing sells the Product as Australian. At the end of the day, I’m happy it means Jobs for Australians but I’m still critical of the product. So what? I’m sure you’ve got your doubt about others too :)
These are simply my observations. I’m here to discuss cars and all aspects of the industry.
PS. I do have a life, I’m just a fast typer ;)
Hi Bucks!
Please don’t try to tell us that Ford is any more ‘Australian’ than Holden.
News flash: Falcon and it’s high-rise derivative is the last remotely Australian thing in Ford’s lineup and that’s it. And sorry, but the Holden SIDI 3.6 is a better thing than the Ford non-turbo equivalent…this wasn’t previously the case, but it is now.
Sorry that you appear to have such a chip on your shoulder about Holden. As with the other fanboys on here, you seem totally blinded to anything that does not have a Ford badge.
I’m happy to acknowledge my love for Holden, but i’m also happy to acknowledge that Ford has a good thing in the Falcon. The difference between the two is so miniscule that purchase comes down to personal preference, and anyone buying either can be confident of buying a quality car. It’s just that all the rice in China would not get me into a Ford.
I think the open hatred towards Holden in these comments is nothing more than sour grapes of disgruntled Ford fans jealous of Holden’s achievments. What achievments? Getting the G8 program up and running – unfortunately meeting a premature end – replaced pronto by the new USA cop deal. Exporting to China and middle East – cars and engines. Introducing the Cruze, a sales success, and soon to be manufactured here in Australia. Holden is the division even Obama could not get GM to offload…and why would they?
Oh but it’s all marketing, it’s all fleet sales, excuses excuses Ford fans are running out of excuses when all they have left to pick on is a thick pillar.
What has Ford done? ummmmm? hmmmm? Local Focus production? Your beloved Ford is a ticking time bomb in this country. They can’t be bothered exporting…where does that leave them? Toyota, for all their blandness and boringness has their act together way more than Ford.
Confused about how you say they cut back the power of the 3.6 and use a 4 speed transmission? Last I checked the 3.6 has 210kw and 6 speeds?
Ozzie,
Sorry for the belated reply,
Apparently my post had something in it that needed to be moderated hense wasnt posted at all hehehe..
Nevermind!
The point i’m making in regards to the Cars, Holden have a global platform, global engine (used in Alfa’s, SAABs etc.)
The Falcon is unique in the way that the whole platform, engine etc has been locally built and devloped as was the turbo variant. This was all done by Ford Australia, not GM-Daweoo, not GM America, Local Australian Ingenuity.
To me, that translated to being very Australian.
This doesnt take away from the Fact that Holden have a very good thing in a global platform. It makes it easier to export and the rest.
I’m not a one eyed fan boy but I do look at the facts and this is how I interpret them.
The competition is very close Ozzie, Holden have a fantastic engine in the 3.6 SIDI Mill (i’ve been debating the true economic return of the 3.0L SIDI vs. the I6+ZF Gearbox…not the 3.6 SIDI).
Having said that, this is why an aging exterior and interior have let it down. As CA said, in isolation, its fine but in comparison- its aging.
The A-Pillar is no small thing. A lot of people I’ve spoken to have come close to having accidents because of the excessive blind spot it creates. Good thing its got a 5 Star safety rating ;)
As for the supposed ticking time bomb that is Falcon, we don’t know what lays in the pipeline for them. Alan Mulally has managed to keep Ford Global afloat with out taking Money from Obama, Ford will have access to a Twin Turbo 4, 6 and Supercharged V8 with in the next year or two so I will wait and see.
As for the remark about Cutting the power back in the 3.6?
I’m not talking about the SIDI, I’m talking about the VE pre-SIDI.
Holden cut the power/torque back last year to make it look more economical. I think it worked out to be $80.00 a year. It was already an inadequate unit yet they go and to this?
I think its easy to see why I wouldn’t agree with that. Talk about cutting corners. Look it up, It did happen.
Still doesn’t change the fact that the front end is still butt ugly.
It would seem that they made a joke of the event by making the improvement over the ADR figure the sole criteria (or was this just Holden’s take on it?). They could probably take a few lessons from the organisers of the NZ event, in which this was the criteria for only a subsidiary prize. The main prize was for the vehicle which crossed the line for the lowest total cost of the fuel used, adjusted for other taxes (which may or may not apply in OZ).
hahahahah funny as fugg
compared to its label????? holden forgot to put real tested figures on its label or other brands lied on their labels!
good win for holden for a change though.
Yeah its butt ugly from all angles
BUT that new colour is the goods! i love it!
Holden’s Marketing is good, its just all umm…sweet? They highlight all the Features and I wish Ford would take a leaf out of their book but having said that is still…uber corny- Ford can leave that bit out. :)
As I said, I’m sure other teams used the same tactics. Read my whole post instead of just seeing red OzProud.
Congrats to the Maloo for winning, but this is a seriously flawed competition. Less than 8lt/100km for a car with this much performance is great, but the ADR figures are purely a guide and using them as a datum for the competition is crazy. They should have classes and have winners from each class and an overall winner for outright consumption. ie sports sedan, SUV, hatch, family sedan etc. Not too many classes as it wont matter, just broad generic classes, just my 2 cents worth.
ADR figure is NOT Purely a guide.
Every car is tested in a Lab in the SAME condition with the SAME distance to cover. The test consisted of two speeds. City and Highway. An average of 40/60 between the two is Calculated to record an “Average Consumption”.
You can expect to archive the same fuel consumption as the “sticker” suggested IF you live in Holland (where their are no hills),
have a robotic Leg with two settings,
and drive exactly 40/60 city/highway roads.
The aim of “highway” Green challenge is for different cars to drive the same distance along the same road on the same day, than compare there result with the Lab result archived before. (and under this condition, HSV wins)
That said, I think GGC should have a “City phase” where the cars on the same day need to drive though the a city’s CBD in Peak hours. Then see who is the City’s winner. (I am guessing it will be the hybrids, or small diesel which switches itself off while stationary. HSV will be around 25L/100km.)
Thanks Jon, you just proved my point – it is a guide to help you pick between similar models. Who does drive their car on a dyno in a lab or in Holland? If its not a guide, then what is it exactly? How many joules per kilometer poindexter can achieve on a dyno?
Yes; but the ANCAP Crash Test Safety rating is also “a guide” isn’t it yet there are those who place as much importance on fuel efficiency as they do on the number of stars a car has….
What the Maloo showed is that depending on your driving style and your speed you can get a considerably different result.
The ADR fuel usage sticker says it uses 14-16L /100Km… if you floor it you can end up using 20L/100Km// if you cruise at an average of 90Km/h you can get 8/L100Km
Just as [according to ANCAP] if you are drive a VE Ute at 60Km/h under a truck or into a pole etc – the 5 stars mean you will have a good chance of survival.. if you’re travelling at 40Km/h the chance of survival increases but if you’re travelling at 80Km/h decreases.. Its all relative
What a joke. The reason it had such an improvement was simply due to it having the worst city fuel economy and the highest difference between city and highway, skewing it’s average figure.
The fact that the ‘winner’ also used the most outright fuel is simply risible, regardless of the brand.
Credit to those vehicles that actually did something special in using so little actual fuel.
Here here. Well put.
The biggest city fuel guzzler was bound to win.
Of course manufacturers who calculate they have a good chance of winning would have nothing to lose by entering. I put all the blame on the GGC organisers for creating such a ridiculous set of rules. Far from green. And surely Australia is being laughed at by the rest of the world today. Shameful.
Congratulations, thats all there is to say.
Even if this wasnt the final measure it would be a fantastic result.. no-one can deny that.
Ok now im going to rant a little…
Why on earth is this measure ‘dubious’??? Is there a better way?
If you gave it on the final L/100km figure then you wouldnt have half the competitors and it would have no credibility because in the ‘real world’ people need to carry passengers and luggage. You cant do this in a fiesta. You cant do it in the Maloo.
If anything I would say that they thought it through and decided this was the closest to fair as they could get.
The Maloo was always going to win.
Its the awards system that is flawed, and as usual Holdens marketing team cash in where they can gain some sort of a wrap. Cant really blame Holden for that.
I reckon they used the Maloo over the R8 because the gearing in the utes is usually different.
I havent compared the Maloo to the sedan equivalent, but usually the utes have a higher consumption mainly because the gearing is different.
Also remember the Worlds fastest ute comp???
They have the Maloo geared for a higher top end to reach a higher top speed.
By having the gears working better at the cruising speed it also helps hwy economy.
it stuffs city driving consumption though.
If Ford were serious they would have also entered a FPV or even an E-Gas.
LPG improves greatly on Hwy cycle
The LPG falcon would be pretty competitive. Back in 2006 Ford grouped together a bunch of v8supercar drivers in an E-Gas Fairmont and drove around Australia covering 13950km for under a $1000 and it averaged 10.2L/100km. So along the same stretch of road you would expect it to get around the same as the HSV.
http://www.lpgautogas.com.au/i.....amp;Type=R
http://www.goauto.com.au/mello.....DA000712CE
My take on the comp is they should have a few awards/classes.
Least fuel used……….Fiesta and Mini sort of battle
Cheapest to run……….Lpg and Hybrid battle for the alternatives
Best improved Figure…..For the big boys
Interesting. If you look at the Global Green Challenge website there doesn’t appear to be one winner, but a series. Including Ford Fiesta ECOtenic for small production, Hyundai Sante Fe SLX for Medium and HSV Ute Maloo for Ute / Truck.
stupid… green people wouldn’t give a damn about what fuel saving a V8 ute achieves…
The Maloo was always going to win from day one.
With it’s thirstier than normal fuel consumption everybody knows if you drive a V8 sensibly you can achieve great results.
If the Fiesta had 48% reduction in it’s fuel economy (ie 2 litres per 100 Klm’s, every man and his dog would want one.)
48.76% unbelievable isn’t it, at 7.74 l/100.
A great result for HSV that this car can have such barnstorming performance, and yet be capable of turning out such frugal consumption.
let me guess the hsv was in 6th gear at 80km/h while the rest of the cars were sitting on 110km/h!
no mate to ensure that method wasnt used each car had a certain time period in which they could arrive and disembark
People who are interested in or are going to buy a Maloo or a Clubsport or a GT Falcon etc are most likely going to buy one regardless of the result of the Challenge..
They want adrenalin rush that you get from driving a V8 performance/muscle car [such as this] and don’t really care about the little bit extra that they will have to spend when they visit the petrol station.
As the irrepresible O’Rourke would say:
Read it and weep Eco-Weenies
Cool comparison. And very relevant results. I am standing by to watch all the Eco conscious fork out for a v8 and drive in 50c cabin temps. REAL WORLD baby
Its a bit like the worst player in a sporting team getting the Most Improved award because he had the most improving to do. He might be most improved but he is still the worst player.
Maybe; but if the worst player is the most improved – then why does the [European] “superstar” continue to get all the attention etc?
If he was as good as he is made out to be then surely he would have performed better?
Because even those at the top of their game can and should try to improve just as much – inorder to stay on top
Is that it? are you just annoyed that “Lewis Hamilton” was beaten by “Todd Kelly?”
Godfa makes a good point Wheelie……
When you are the bench mark for anything, how does one improve???
When you are at the top its very hard to improve.
Those mid pack or at the bottom have it easier to improve because they see the guys at the front and know what is possible.
lets say the Fiesta and Mini are already 99% efficient.
Now if the Maloo is only usually 20% efficient, yet one day shows up 50% better being 40% efficient, does that make him the best???
There have been a number of times after a game when Roger Federer or Tiger Woods have said that they made a few mistakes or that there are a few areas of their game that they would like too neaten up… even though they had just won another major tournament.
They are among the worlds best in their chosen sports but over the years the competition has improved because Federer is having to play more 5-7 set matches whereas before he often thrashed his opponents in 3 sets….
There have been times when Tiger has ended up in the mid-pack after the second round instead of being way out in front like he used to which shows a number golfers [some of whom aren't as well known] are improving – although Tiger manages to dig deeper and still win
So it is possible for the best to improve particularly if they want to stay there…. You should never under-estimate your competition
Yes but its harder for Roger or Tiger to play twice as good.
Those down the ranks can come out and play 2 times better than they ever have and still not be able to beat Roger or Tiger.
Its like giving the tournament win to Rogers opponent because he lasted twice as many sets than he ever has before Roger finished him off
Or like Tigers opponent given the tournament win because he finished 10 strokes behind Tiger instead of his previous best of 20 strokes behind tiger
Yeah, Goodfa(nothing), whatever you say, nice thought and nice comparo in latest Top Gear too.
Seems of the four performance sedans as tested, two were compromised…the BMW M5 goes like a shower of shyte, but has a crap gearbox; the Lexus goes like a shower of shyte but rides like a Suzuki Sierra.
Which leaves the new Jag and the HSV GTS as capable allrounders, the HSV with the bonus of a decent admission price.
Holden and HSV are certainly kicking goals.
The only “shower of shyte” is the one coming out of your mouth …
Truth hurts hey
My car returns the same economy on a 6 degree day (A/C off) as 35 degree day (A/C on)
You read all the time that using A/C will increase fuel consumption, but in any car I’ve ever owned it hasn’t made any noticeable difference
Yep, I’ve tried the difference between [windows closed & air-con on] and [windows open & air-con off] on a long, straight, constant slope 1km section of road @ 100kms/hr.
Method 1 was showing instantaneous consumption of 7.9L/100 kms
Method 2 9.9L/100 kms
During my days at Uni I had a 84 Toyota Corona and the difference the air-con made there was power for going up hills… I’d turn the air-con off for going up a big hill lol
So basically they showed that the Maloo (like all big heavy powerful cars) has a massive fuel difference between city and highway driving, as opposed to something like a Fiesta which is frugal all the time.
Stupid rules, can’t blame Holden for gaming it, but amazing that the organizers didn’t realise this would happen.
The fact is, the HSV was not economical at all compared to the competition. The XR6T is quicker and more fuel efficient. The only reason the HSV beats it is because its AVERAGE FUEL CONSUMPTION IS HIGHER. The difference in fuel consumption is reduced on the highway because any car should be economical on the hwy.
This test certainly does not show that the HSV is an economical car – it used the most fuel! The XR6T is just as big, practical, is faster and more economical.
What it does show is that the HSV has the biggest variation in fuel consumption. If it uses 48% less fuel on the hwy, it will use 48% more in the city in order to achieve its ADR figure. So, in everyday driving, it will be one thirsty car; the worst of the lot. So why, actually, should the HSV win a ‘green car’ challenge? It really doesn’t make a lot of sense, as the only green thing about the HSV was the paint colour.
well i think if it was a challenge just for the least amount of fuel used, we would probally be seeing a predictable competition line up of just light vehicles like hatchbacks and such with small capacity engines.
And most people would have a good idea which cars would make it to the podium
and come on, you have to give hsv a bit of credit
I give HSV credit.
Credit for having a car with the most rediculously poor fuel economy for a start.
In this automotive “biggest loser” competition they were the “fattest” of the field, had the most to loose and therefore lost more. Good achievement, but when you are coming off such a poor starting point improvement is the easiest.
PEOPLE!!!!!!! What this really means is that in the real word with the air on and in city driving is, the Maloo will be at least 60% less fuel efficient OR in other words….absolute MURDER on fuel bills!!!
On the other hand the Fiesta and all the other diesels will be a lot less thirstier when you drive them in the city and with a comfortable cabin temperature…..Don’t you just love modern small capacity diesels!!!!!
No, i’d rather drive a Maloo
LMAO @ Blah!!
Damn, I have run out of popcorn… ;-)
‘“For instance we kept air-conditioning use to an absolute minimum, which meant coping with cabin temperatures of more than 50 degrees Celsius for hours on end,” Gerry Bechet said.’……considering the CO2 output of the HSV, no wonder it was 50′c outside, if more people had driven fiesta type cars the outside temp would’ve been a more manageable 35′c.
Well quite obviously there is nothing more important in life than that $7.42 you could save each week by driving a cramped death trap. I’m sure Coles & Woolies are well into phase2 of the ‘Fleece the cretins with fuel dockets’ planning as we type.
regardless of whether or not the manufacturer’s knew the rules and exploited them, the rules are still stupid – the combined fuel consumption figure is a mixture of city and highway driving – the challenge was more or less purely highway driving. therefore comparing the two is meaningless. if they want to use “most improved” to judge who wins or not, they should have only used the highway component of the official fuel consumption figure.
regardless of what car finished where, it’s just dumb that the 2 cars that used the most fuel came in first and second.
I agree. They need to revisit the rules or no one will take them seriously.
Maybe that’s why Toyota didn’t put a Prius in. They’ve optimised it for the city cycle and something like this isn’t what their target customer will expect to do regularly. Also, imagine what they’d cop from the ignorant masses if they came second or third behind a big V8. Smart move I think.
Congrats to the Maloo for the win.
I’m surprised the “Global Green Challenge” didn’t measure CO2/ NOx or other exhaust emissions and only went for a % improvement over the ADR cycle.
Next time, if they want to keep some semblance of credibility (at least in this enthusiast’s eyes), maybe they should stipulate running conditions (minimum speeds, in cabin temps, other auxiliary loading etc) and include a city run (base it out of a small country town and run it like a tarmac session of a rally or something).
Oooh… The ‘Green’ Maloo won the ‘Green’ Challenge. Get me a bucket cos it still makes me ‘Green’ with nausea to look at it. What an UGLY piece of work…
The V8 produced by Holden has been getting great highway economy for some time now. I used to get less than 8 litres per 100km regularly with my 5.7l VX SS at 110km/h with the A/C on. The 6l Calais we have now is a bit heavier on fuel but still around the 9.5-10l/100km. As I live in the bush this was the right car for us. As a reference a friend of mine has a 4 cyl Camry and it uses 10+l/100km. Same road, same speed. Agreed in town the V8 is shocking but in real Australia both the V8 and the V6 are ideal engines to lug the family of 4 around in comfort.
Yes I could drive a Fiesta but the family would not enjoy a regular 6-7 hour drive.
I’m sure the Ford V8 and I6 are as good. Stop picking on Aussie products. They are actually built for Australia! I guess the problem is, most people don’t live in Australia.
The V8 engine in the Commodore is not ‘produced by Holden’ per se. It comes assembled in a crate from GM North America. It is a similar situation with the V8 Falcon. However you are right, the ‘Big Aussie’ cars are great highway cruisers that give surprisingly good fuel economy if the trip doesn’t involve too much stopping/starting. Some of the results they can give for such a big car is astounding. It can really prove how economical a big engine can be when it is not working very hard.
Having said that, they are not exclusive in being able to lug around a family of 4 as you mentioned in comfort. There are a few mid sized cars that can do that also as well as having a bigger boot than a Commodore to carry all the family’s gear on a holiday. Two examples of this are the Ford Mondeo and Mazda 6, especially the diesel versions that can overtake on the highway just as effortlessly as the big aussie 6s etc and not to mention handle just as well if not better when comparing the ‘cooking’ versions. Also in my personal experience the Falcon is not the most comfortable car over long distances from the driver’s seat. The large transmission tunnel forces you to skew your legs to the outside causing lower back pain in some people on longer drives. I have experienced this myself as well as quite a few other people I have spoken to at work etc.