Formula One has changed hands, bought by US company Liberty Media Corporation for around $8billion.

The exact financial workings of the deal are complex, but essentially Liberty Media will take control of F1 in a two-step process to be completed in the first quarter of 2017 which will see it become the majority shareholder with a 35.5 per cent stake.

Current owners, private equity firm CVC Capital Partners, will retain a large stake (24.7 per cent) and also have a representative on the Liberty Media board of directors.

The change in ownership is expected to benefit F1, with Liberty Media said to be taking a long-term view of the sport, including broadening its audience via new broadcast platforms and giving the teams a stake in the sport to improve stability.

The last manual Porsche 911 GT3 is still white hot.

In the September issue we celebrated the manual gearbox, and long may it live. But at the same time it was a reminder of the many cars that have already made the transition to auto-only – including, as you will know, Porsche’s 911 GT3.

Currently, all are about $230K – and even if our bubble theory itself pops, our 2007 Performance Car of the Year is still a mighty tempting alternative to a new base Carrera.

For more details search Porsche 911 GT3 on tradeuniquecars.com.au.

First published in the October 1988 issue of Wheels magazine, Australia’s best car mag since 1953.

Wheels took the two rivals and pounded them over a four-car total of 21,000km in our toughest-ever comparison. Trail boss Mike McCarthy gives the verdict.

BREAK THE bastards! That’s what the man said when he learned Wheels was testing the Holden VN Commodore and Ford EA Falcon. Like other blokes all along the way, blokes who told us to drive them into the ground or give ’em bloody heaps, our Toowoomba carwash critic wasn’t kidding. Nor were we.

It’s a classic confrontation – Ford versus Holden. But never has the battle between the General and Henry had so much at stake. Never have the cars and the companies been so closely matched. This is where they tough it out for the Number One spot with Ford in defence, Holden on attack.

Knowing this was the first round of the giants’ big punch-up, people everywhere wanted the Falcon and Commodore driven to the limits of endurance; to be tested hard and fast, good and proper, to find the strengths and weaknesses.

That’s what Wheels was there for. This became our biggest, longest, toughest four-car comparison ever, with a crew of six testing two sedans and two wagons over more than 21,000 km. We were 10 days in the saddle, including the first day ferrying the Fords from Sydney to Southport, and the last day running performance tests at a private road outside Sydney.

There have been many other epic Wheels drives, but never a four-car comparo on this scale. It was, however, the only way to find answers to the questions posed by the release of a brand new Falcon and brand new Commodore in the space of six months. If nothing else, we needed to know whether, after some early hiccups and the benefit of nine months in production, Ford had got the Falcon right.

And whether, after 10 years of playing second fiddle not only to the Falcon but also to the indelible memory of the immortal Kingswood, the new VN was good enough, tough enough and really big enough to put Holden back in the winner’s circle.

It was obvious from the outset that the answers wouldn’t come easy because the models have grown very close in their basic designs, their size and their curvy aero styling.

Indeed, many interested onlookers had trouble telling them apart, especially when the four were covered by a drab coat of reddish mud best described as Birdsville Brown.

Several people called them Button-mobiles and mused, only half joking, as to whether some panels might be interchangeable. The design similarities don’t go anywhere near that far, but even so, both camps share some mechanical aspects such as live rear axles with coil springs (except on the leaf springed Falcon wagon), variable ratio power steering and four-wheel disc brakes. Apart from disagreeing about front suspensions (the Commodore continues with struts and the Falcon with wishbones), the biggest single differences are under the bonnet.

Both engines are sixes, but Ford stuck with an in-line design (with three variations on the theme) where Holden opted for a V6 version (to be supplemented by a VS next year). Then there are the transmissions. Both makers use similar Borg-Warner T5 five-speed manuals but disagree on automatics.

PRICES, EQUIPMENT

Everyone assumed Holden would bump prices up a bit for the new VN. Instead, the old figures stood. And the industry went into mild shock. A Holden dealer told us his first reaction (thinking of how to unload remaining old-model stocks) was “bloody near a heart attack”. Holden’s pegged prices meant cardiac concerns at Ford, too. But where Commodore dealers’ fears were unfounded because the old VL was almost sold out before the VN arrived, the price problem won’t go away that easily for Ford.

Dollar-wise, the Falcon and Commodore models are locked together. In basic sedans, for instance, the five-speed Falcon GL and Commodore Executive list at precisely $20,014. Pricing can’t be more competitive than that, right? Wrong. The base Falcon, y’see, comes with a small 3.2 litre/90 kW engine that’s not within coo-ee of the 3.8 litre/125 kW port-injected Commodore. To compete directly with that, the Falcon needs the 3.9 litre/139 kW multi-point injection model which adds $984 to the base figure. For those torn between price and performance, Falcon’s other-choice compromise is the 3.9 litre/120 kW throttle-body engine which costs only $319 extra and takes the list figure to $20,333.

As with the base models, there’s seeming price parity at other levels, too. The Berlina auto sedan, for instance, lists at $24,781 which is line-ball with the throttle-body 3.9 auto Fairmont, or $579 less than Ford’s multi-point model.

Direct price/performance equivalence is reached only at the $31,265 level where the Calais faces Fairmont Ghia.

PERFORMANCE

This is one of the areas where Commodore’s challenge is strongest, and where its superiority is most visible. As the manual wagons’ acceleration figures show, the result is fairly close when Ford’s big gun is under the bonnet. But when the Falcon is an automatic with the 3.9 throttle-body engine, the results are as predictable as they’re far apart.

Neither engine is regarded as a high revver. The Commodore’s (optional) tachometer is redlined at 5500 rpm and the Ford’s at 5000 rpm. Holden enforces that mark with a fuel cut-out that stops play at 5400/5500 rpm whereas the Ford’s can be wrung out to about 5700 before cutting out.

Even before the cars are fired up, the performance factors tell the story. The Commodore is a smaller, lighter car with more power, strong torque and lower bottom-end gearing. The Falcon uses more power to push through the air because its body has more frontal area and (judging by the claimed Cd figures) isn’t quite as aerodynamically slippery as the Commodore. The Falcon also is significantly heavier; by about 100 kg on the claimed kerb figures.

For interest’s sake, we weighed both cars (and wagons) in as-travelled condition; that is, without occupants but with full fuel tanks, CB radios, the crew’s luggage, sundry provisions, basic breakdown/repair parts, plus extra spare wheels, water and petrol. All this added about 170 kg to the load and was removed for the performance test session.

On the basis of claimed maximum power and kerb mass, the 125 kW/1345 kg Executive hauls 10.76 kg per kilowatt whereas the 120 kW/1448 kg GL is saddled with just over 12 kg per kW. Falcon’s throttle-body 3.9 claims slightly more maximum torque than the Commodore, but Holden’s V6 is particularly torquey through the low to middling rev range and the four-speed automatic confirms that point.

The respective ratios translate to a calculated first-gear speed of 12 km/h per thousand revs in the Commodore, against 16.8 in the Falcon. At the other extreme, the Holden ambles along at more than 52 km/h per thou in fourth where the Ford’s much busier doing just over 40 clicks in its top gear. (In contrast, the five-speed manuals are much more closely geared with only a few points between them in most ratios).

The Holden transmission is much smoother than the Ford’s, especially when they’re being hard driven. Even under full throttle acceleration the Commodore slurs silkily, often almost imperceptibly, as it changes up and down. In the same conditions the Falcon’s transmission always seems to be working more busily and less willingly. More often than not it shifts jerkily, sometimes quite savagely, as though angry at the effort.

Though the Falcon’s power/weight handicap doesn’t help, there’s no doubt that the three-speed auto is the car’s biggest liability in performance (and, as we found, in fuel economy too). The GL yawns away from a standing start, its torque converter whirring the tall first gear into stride. The test car (which was measurably quicker than the multi-point 3.9 automatic Ghia wagon tested in Wheels July ’88) reached 50 km/h in four seconds and 100 kays in 10.5, by which time the Commodore already was more than two seconds ahead. The Ford then hit 130 km/h in 17.1 seconds and the 400 metre mark in 17.2. The Commodore is three seconds quicker to 130, and takes 1.4 seconds less for the 400m sprint.

This is repeated in the kickdown tests. The Holden really hauls and it’s all the Falcon can do to get within a half second or so in the increments from 40 to 90 km/h. But by then it has shot its bolt and falls farther behind.

The Holden’s also about 10 km/h faster in top speed because it pulls about 198 kays flat out in third (a little less in fourth before changing down) whereas the throttle-body 3.9 GL didn’t quite see 190. Incidentally, both the (manual) wagons clocked 205 km/h, a good effort in its own right as well as being a pointer to 210-215 km/h capabilities of the equivalent sedans.

Whichever way you look at it, Holden’s V6 with four-speed automatic combo is an outstanding performer and gives little away to the manual model. Indeed our Executive auto matched the manual Berlina wagon’s standing start times and wouldn’t be far behind a manual sedan either.

This is one of the few models where some of our crew prefer the automatic and would have it over the manual unless every last bit of performance, petrol and price were at stake.

On the other hand, the EA Falcon, any EA Falcon, makes its best impression as a manual.

FUEL CONSUMPTION

Mark this up as another decisive win to the Holden Commodore. During the main run of some 4500 km, we checked the VN wagon and EA sedan a total of 13 times. Because of holed tanks suffered on rocky roads, the EA wagon lost one check, the VN sedan two. It’s probably not coincidental that three of the four recorded their “worst” figures on the hot, hard and fast run from Windorah to Betoota when we were spurred by violent black storm clouds gathering ahead. The Commodore wagon repeated its low score on the slower but sometimes desperate leg from Betoota to Birdsville where the usual rigours were compounded by heavy rain, greasy ground and failing light. The Commodore sedan, however, logged its thirstiest leg along the Birdsville Track to Mungerannie.

The Falcon sedan’s relative thirst and lack of range brought some concern in the outback. It was the only one we (once) had to top up from our petrol reserves, but on several occasions was pussy- footed to refilling points with the needle below the red sector. On the fairly fast but steady hop from Broken Hill to Balranald the EA auto manual aged almost 500 km with something to spare. No worries. Reckon? The fill took 69.77 litres. Capacity is 68.

ON THE ROAD

This is where things start getting really close because both models drive damn well and handle, steer and brake similarly. The Commodore tends to contradict its interior dimensions by seeming smaller and feeling lighter than the Falcon. It drives that way, too. For example, there’s little to choose between the two for steering weighting and feel. That’s understandable because both are power assisted Bishop type variable ratio rack and pinion systems.

But while the Falcon’s steering is amply direct with 3.25 turns lock to lock, the Commodore’s is even more responsive and suggestive of a smaller car with 2.75 turns. On the other hand, the Falcon has a slightly smaller, slightly quicker wheel of 390 mm, 15 mm less than the Commodore’s. Some of our crew disliked the Holden rim’s thumb rests, but none minded its large size.

Both cars are inherently stable platforms but it’s obvious the Falcon tracks truer than the Commodore on straights. You simply aim the Ford into the distance and it goes where it’s pointed with little if any further attention.

Both models handle very well indeed. They’re confidently sure-footed, extremely well balanced and absolutely predictable in their behaviour. Ordinarily, both are typical mild understeerers with well-developed cornering capabilities. Again the Holden gives an impression of being a touch lighter and more agile in its handing, but the Falcon is in fact no less adroit. As a rule the Falcon turns-in a little better, has less inclination to push its nose wide when driven deep into corners, and doesn’t develop as much body roll. Its rear-end is also better behaved on washboard surfaces and corrugated corners; it’s even less skippy or twitchy than the well-mannered VN which shows much improvement over earlier Commodores in those conditions. But in most handling situations and through most kinds of corners the two rivals are so evenly matched that they tend to be separated only by drivers’ personal preferences.

The cars’ ride qualities are easier to separate. Both ride well, but differently, and one’s better than the other. While the Commodore’s not unnecessarily firm or coarsely harsh, its ride is obviously sharper and more vertical than the Falcon’s. And ultimately somewhat less comfortable because of the jiggly bounciness. The Ford has a better rounded ride. Sometimes verging on flopiness, but without wallowing mushily, the EA soaks up small irregularities as absorbently as large ones.

The suspension is supple yet well controlled even though the standard damping errs towards softness. Experience with S model Falcons has taught us that the EA can use firmer dampers to improve suspension control without detracting from ride quality.

In the absence of chassis torsional-rigidity and beam stiffness figures from the makers, our rough-road test suggests the Falcon’s structure generally is the tougher of the two. The Falcon’s doors didn’t drop like the Holden’s for instance, and the Holden finished the run feeling much looser in the body and suspension, with the odd rattle here and creak there whereas the Ford seemed almost as taut as ever. Though the wheel covers are visual, not structural, our indifference to the Holden covers’ unappealing style was vindicated when they trapped mud and stones against the wheel rim and led to a severe imbalance problem.

The brakes on both models are big and powerful, another aspect where their performances are virtually equal. Both have pedal action which is reasonably weighted and progressive to be responsive while not unduly sensitive. In spite of the gruelling conditions and the frequent need to pull the cars down from high speed to avoid birds or beasts, the brakes weren’t found wanting. Even when stinking hot from repeated abuse they remained consistent and held our confidence. Only in very trying conditions on the dirt was the Holden slightly more prone than the Ford to lock-up the brakes. But the tendency wasn’t common or critical.

The outback legs also showed that the Holden hasn’t quite as much ground clearance as the Ford; it was always the Executive that scraped first or hardest on high crowns, and in those conditions both had their share of awful sound effects as rocks and gravel peppered the undersides. There were noises noted in normal conditions, too. Holden claims the VN is much quieter than the EA. Difference is certainly noticeable when driving one automatic immediately after the other. In top, the lower geared Falcon sounds much busier than the highly relaxed Commodore. But at cruising speeds there’s little between them for wind noise. Road/tyre noise, too, generally is similar except that the Commodore emits a dreadful drone on some coarse surfaces. It’s interesting too, that when we did our usual noise-meter test at run’s end, both the Holdens gave noisier numbers than the Fords. The bland-sounding exhaust system took a terrible hammering on rough roads, but all were intact, without leaks, and didn’t affect the noise levels.

ACCOMMODATION

The Executive has a good, one-size-suits-all sort of driving position with which an apt relationship between pedals and wheel is complemented by a seat which has generous fore-aft travel and cushion height adjustment.

The Falcon’s driving position drew a mixed reception from our team. Some found it quite acceptable. Others objected to the seat and wheel being askew, not at right angles to the centreline, and the very tall wanted a bit more rearward travel to get farther from the pedals. Most agree the wheel’s height and reach adjustments are a welcome bonus, but would have preferred seat height adjustment.

Quite apart from the height factor, the Executive’s bucket is the better of the two because its cushion is deeper, more supportive and more comfortable. You sit on, not in, the GLs seat because the cushion is too flat, too firm and lacking in thigh support. The Falcon’s problem is compounded by its untenable armrests and lack of grab handles. The Holden has grabs built into its armrests and includes handles above the rear doors. There’s nothing to hold on to In the GL, and that’s a real bitch even for short distances, let alone on long hauls.

The armrests are no comfort either because they’re as hard as nails. Falcon-elbow was the most universal and lingering ache from the trip. (Though the S has better front seats than the GL, and gets overhead assists for the passengers, it suffers the same elbow aggro.)

Ford wins all the points for its fascia, instruments and controls. The Commodore is singularly unimpressive in its plain panel, its bland binnacle, and its dreary dials. But most criticism goes to the wiper and headlight controls, two small barrels have small tabs which suggest finger-tip operation.

Only by accident. Even with familiarity, some of our drivers knocked the lights on when dragging a hand across behind the wheel while exiting. And the wipe control means at least three distinct off-wheel hand movements for every ac:tuation – reach, turn, retract.

Bad one, General. In complete contrast, Ford’s two-stalk system is easy, fast and foolproof. The left-hand wand is simply flicked down for intermittent or regular wiping, pressed up for single sweeps.

Though the GLs instruments are just as basic as the Executive’s, they’re more presentable, by day anyway. At night the Holden’s dials come good to rival the Ford’s for appearance and legibility. The Falcon has better ventilation and heating distribution than the Commodore, and our crew unanimously preferred the Ford’s slides to Holden’s rotary controls.

And so to the rear bench where the Ford makes amends for some of the front seats’ deficiencies. Both makes have more than enough hip, knee and foot room. For the very tall the Falcon’s headroom is marginal and the Commodore’s almost zero. Both rear compartments are, of course, generously roomy for two. Unlike Holden’s tape measure, ours credits the Falcon with slightly more shoulder width. The Falcon has more usable three-seater width because the Commodore’s seat-belt mounts are much too low on the C pillar and grind into the passengers’ shoulders. The Falcon also has the best seat with the more comfortable backrest and deeper, more supportive cushion. But the Commodore has more backrest rake.

LUGGAGE

Measured to industry standards, the Commodore’s boot has 566-litre capacity, against 470 for the Falcon. But the Ford is by no means eclipsed. Though its compartment lacks the Holden’s sheer height, the floor lengths are virtually the same. And because its spare wheel stows flat in a floorwell, instead of upright on the side like the Commodore, the Falcon’s boot has considerably more width behind the arches, rather less between them.

Initially it seemed the Commodore’s boot was exceptionally well sealed because after the first dusty leg the Holden’s luggage was still clean whereas the Falcon’s was lightly powdered. But as we drove on, dust found its way into the Commodore too, albeit less densely than in the Ford which, by the time we hit the bitumen again, was looking a bit like the inside of a vacuum cleaner bag.

CONCLUSIONS

Hey guys, we tried … but the bastards wouldn’t break. We gave ’em heaps, flogged ’em through the dirt, stone-washed their bellies and muscled ’em through the mud. Though bruised here and battered there, they took everything we and the outback threw at them and still got us home with no major hassles. Some things bent, and some (minor) things fell off, and we had a few of the inevitable punctures (tyres and tanks). But nothing broke.

That was perhaps the real result – an impressive demonstration of sheer stamina. Remember, these were two showroom stock family cars, Aussie style family cars that is, not even rigged as they can be for country driving. We can’t think of many other standard models we’d try to drive so far, so fast so hard with such confidence. They really are built for Australia. And they’re good tough cars. But one is better than the other.

Even if the Executive and GL were absolutely level in every other way, we’d have to pick the Commodore just for its front seats, armrests and handles; they’re that decisive in the long run. But of course the Executive and GL aren’t level in other ways. It’s not enough that the Falcon is generally seen as the better looking of the two and has a chassis that is better than Holden’s in some respects and at least equal elsewhere. The General has trumped Ford on price and performance. You can have a manual Falcon that will keep the Commodore honest for acceleration, flexibility, response and perhaps consumption also. But you won’t get it for $20,807 because that only buys the little engine. To be in the hunt you’ll need another $984 for the 3.9 multi-point engine.

The Ford has an even bigger handicap as an automatic because apart from costing almost a grand more to get on equal engine terms, it doesn’t have an answer to Holden’s four-speed at any price.

Make no mistake, there are things about the EA Falcon to commend it, and it may well be fully competitive at manual Fairmont or Fairmont Ghia level where the multi-point engine is standard. But in the big selling base level the VN looks like being the right car. From where we sat during this giant comparison test it’s clear that Ford has been caught with prices up and performance down. That’s not what winners are made of.

Captiva going, but new Equinox, revised Trax and new Acadia to flesh out growing Holden SUV range.

Holden’s SUV onslaught begins next month with the Trailblazer, which undercuts key rivals by thousands of dollars.

The Trailblazer is the first of at least three new SUV nameplates – the others being Equinox and Acadia – that Holden chairman and managing director Mark Bernhard describes as “critical” to rebuilding the brand’s record low market share.

Based on the Colorado ute, the Trailblazer replaces the Colorado 7 and is a mild facelift of that car, bringing styling tweaks to its nose, an updated dashboard and switchgear, revised suspension, a new torque converter that improves refinement, and more equipment.

The flaghship LTZ is priced from $52,490 and adds 18-inch alloys, 8.0-inch touchscreen, leather trim, electric driver’s seat, tyre pressure monitoring, climate control air-conditioning, rain-sensing wipers, front parking sensors, lane departure warning, blind spot warning and forward collision alert (it doesn’t apply the brakes, only beeps to warn of a crash).

But outputs are unchanged, meaning there’s the same 147kW and 500Nm, each of which beats key class rivals such as the Toyota Fortuner (130kW/450Nm), Isuzu MU-X (130kW/380Nm), Mitsubishi Pajero Sport (133kW/430Nm) and Ford Everest (143kW/470Nm).

However, the six-speed automatic transmission is paired with a new “centrifugal pendulum absorber (CPA) torque, which locks up at lower revs – allowing you to better experience the 500Nm – and improves refinement, a key target of this updated car.

The Trailblazer kicks off an SUV offensive for Holden; the company has been lacking a credible mid-sized SUV, leaving it exposed to the likes of the Toyota RAV4, Mazda CX-5 and Nissan X-Trail.

Holden has also heavily revised the small Trax SUV, giving it a more modern look inside and out; that car goes on sale within months.

And in 2018 Holden will begin selling the Acadia, a seven-seat SUV that is sold as a GMC in America. The Acadia is expected to be priced from about $40,000 and will go head to head with the Mazda CX-9, Toyota Kluger and Nissan Pathfinder.

Nissan Australia’s plans to introduce the NISMO brand to Australia are progressing nicely, according to CEO Richard Emery.

Speaking at the recent 2017 Nissan GT-R launch, Emery told MOTOR “[NISMO discussions] are advancing quite quickly and we’ll be in a position relatively soon to talk about what that means for Australia.

“It’s probably taking more time than we’d like, as we think the market in Australia specifically is quite ready for NISMO. We’ve certainly been putting our case forward and I think when they start to roll NISMO out on a global basis we’ll be front of the queue.”

“There is a range of product offering globally, but from our perspective we want to make sure that when we start we start at the pinnacle of the brand.”

The introduction of NISMO is part of a big push to alter the public perception of the Nissan brand. “One thing I noticed with I came to Nissan [in early 2014] was a lack of excitement around the showrooms,” explained Emery.

There is currently no timing around the introduction of NISMO, but the likes of the NISMO GT-R and 370Z would certainly be welcome additions to the local performance car market. We’ll bring you more details as we have them.

Market uncertainty has put Nissan’s future sports car plans on hold, with no new GT-R or 370Z currently planned.

Despite their advancing years, a shrinking sports car sector globally and uncertainty around both future regulations and customer tastes has put Nissan’s future performance plans on hold for the time being.

Speaking at the recent 2017 GT-R launch, Hiroshi Tamura, Nissan’s chief product specialist responsible for GT-R and 370Z, told MOTOR the next GT-R is “still in my head.” When asked when we’d be likely to see a new Godzilla, Tamura-san said “When? I cannot tell, it depends on the corporate judgement. Somebody [in the media] said 2020, but I didn’t say anything.”

The R35-generation GT-R is now nine years old, however has just received a substantial update for 2017 to keep it competitive in a fiercely contested sports car segment.

The same cannot be said of the 370Z, which has soldiered on largely unchanged since its debut seven years ago, though it continues to sell well, helped in part by a substantial price cut in 2013.

“I think Zed is [in] a diminishing segment globally, so it’s a brave company that would start from scratch in that segment and I think that’s probably extending the life cycle of existing platforms. Zed still performs quite well, still has a high brand standing even though in some elements it’s showing its age a little bit.”

In 2013 Nissan unveiled the IDx concept, a small, turbocharged rear-drive coupe that would have been an ideal challenger to the Toyota 86. Sadly, it appears the numbers did not stack up for the car to be viable on a global basis.

The excitement that once met new iPhone releases has been tempered as people discover that accessories they bought for their beloved older iPhone will be redundant.

Speaker docks and spare battery chargers were rendered useless when the iPhone5 was introduced with a smaller Lightning socket. Aftermarket adapters came to the rescue, but didn’t always work that well as iPhones don’t always play nice with white plastic things that aren’t the genuine Apple product.

The omission of the 3.5mm stereo socket from the iPhone7 isn’t great day for you favourite plug in headphones, but what does it mean for cars now we’re becoming so dependent on our phones to provide infotainment?

1

Not much if your car is pretty new and has USB sockets or Bluetooth connectivity. And it won’t affect the growing number of new cars with Apple CarPlay.

However, it will affect older cars which connect to your iPhone via an auxiliary socket or cassette deck adapter.

If you’re an iPhone devotee the good news is you’ll still be able to use these accessories with an auxiliary-Lightning adapter that will come with the iPhone 7. But because this plugs straight in to the phone’s Lightning socket, you won’t be able to charge the phone via the cigarette lighter adapter which could make long trips hell.

It probably won’t be long before aftermarket splitters that connect the Lightning cable to both the auxiliary and charging cables appear on the market, but it remains to be seen how much they’ll cost or if you can get a cheap one that will work properly.

1

Another option is to replace your car with a new one to get the latest in infotainment technology. But before you go spending tens of thousands of dollars, it’s worth knowing there are some far cheaper existing options.

One is a Bluetooth adapter which plugs in to the auxiliary socket of your car stereo and lets you sync the phone wirelessly leaving the Lightning socket free for charging. Some of these units also provide hand-free phone functions. There is also a unit that plugs into the cassette deck. You can get either from around $40.

Alternatively, you can replace your old car radio with a new one fitted with a USB socket and/or Bluetooth connectivity. This is good option for cars around 15 years old with no cassette deck or auxiliary cable and cost anywhere from around $70 to many hundreds. There are even replacement kits for bigger CD stack units that come complete with a touch screen to let you select iTunes and apps for streaming music and satnav apps.

On the showroom floor Holden was in a big battle with Ford as the clock struck 1980, Kingswood killed and Commodore created with the larger Falcon ultimately overtaking it in national sales for the first time ever all within two years.

Meanwhile on the racetrack Peter Brock had won Bathurst four times in eight years between 1972 and 1979. His fifth win in 1980 would mark the switch from steering Toranas to driving the VC Commodore, a year in which the man fast becoming King of the Mountain would also buy the Holden Dealer Team (HDT) he had been racing for.

He would also be given blessing from bleeding Holden to create road-going ‘homologation’ specials of the Commodore, and so HDT Special Vehicles was born. Set to be sold through select Holden dealerships, they were also a way of making money to go racing after The General pulled factory support two years earlier.

Power from the 5.0-litre V8 was taken from 126kW to 160kW and a 500-unit batch was built in red, white or black – livery of tobacco company Marlboro, Brock’s main sponsor at the time.

It was the VK Commodore Group A of 1985 that would earn the nickname Blue Meanie for its Formula Blue paint. Signed by Brock on the front three quarter panel and dashboard, the 5.0-litre was downsized to 4.9 litres (to meet Group A racing regulations) but substantial other cam and carb modifications leveraged power to a then-heroic 196kW.

Brock had peddled a device called the Polarizer to be installed in Commodores, the now infamous box of crystals that apparently aligned the car’s molecules to improve handling in conjunction with lower tyre pressures. Holden did not approve, and various Group A models were fitted with or without the device; if they weren’t, they wouldn’t get Brocky’s signature.

From the ashes came attempts by Brock to sell Commodores separate from Holden, but the brand also found a new homologation partner – Tom Walkinshaw Racing (TWR) and Holden Special Vehicles was born with the debut of the wild ‘Walky’ of the same year.

He went on to advertise the Volvo 850 R (having steered it in the Bathurst 12-Hour in 1994 and 1995 and driven the Super Touring version in 1996) but by the late-’90s he was back in Holden commercials beside Deborah Hutton; for the 2001 Sydney motor show signing autographs beside the reborn Holden Monaro.

Murky business matters of the 1980s had mended over time, his fans never polarised by the man dubbed Peter Perfect.

With the aging population expected to triple by 2051, pedestrian safety group Victoria Walks, has proposed changes to Victoria’s traffic conditions in a bid to reduce the number of elderly dying on our roads.

Referred to as “traffic calming” part of the Towards Zero 2016/2020 Victoria’s Road Safety Strategy Action Plan suggests reducing vehicle speeds on local streets with heavy foot traffic to just 30km/h.

According to the report, “at speeds between 58 and 72km/h an older person is almost five times more likely to die than a person between 25 and 44 years of age.”

Additional to the reduced speed limits, it advises longer red-light times to give pedestrians longer crossing times. The time of the little green man depends on the width of the road. For every meter of road, one second of crossing time should be allowed. It also says “ideally, the same time should be provided for pedestrians to cross during both the ‘green man’ and “flashing red” period.” This could force motorists to sit at traffic lights for up to seven seconds longer.

And as if that’s not enough, motorists could have to stop more frequently through the recommendation to “reduce intersection signal cycle times to provide more frequent crossing opportunities.”

Other recommendations listed in the document by Victoria Walks are:

• Separation from traffic
• Reduction in the complexity of crossing the road
• Reduction in crossing distance
• Increase visibility to pedestrians
• Reinforce the requirement for vehicles to give way
• And quality surfaces and detailed design

TELL ME ABOUT THIS CAR

The Haval H6 is the fourth model in less than a year to join the growing showroom for the Great Wall Motors-owned premium brand. With swept, coupe-style looks and a rorty turbocharged engine, it’s billed as the sportiest car yet to wear the Haval badge. The Australian arm is keen for this car to do well – it’s the biggest seller in its class in China, and the fifth-largest seller in its class globally. Can it do the same here?

STRENGTHS

• It’s cheap for the amount of gear you get. Haval has priced the entry-level H6 Premium at $31,990 (rivals are priced from here from all the way up to $34K), while the premium-plus H6 LUX is priced from $34,990 (compare that with a $37K-plus benchmark for similarly-kitted rivals).
• The engine is quite good. The 2.0-litre turbocharged four-cylinder powerplant produces 145kW and 315Nm, which gives it plenty of poke compared with classmates. That 315Nm torque figure, though, arrives quite high up in the rev range, which means you best have a few revs on board before overtaking on the freeway.

1

• Rear-seat space is very good. Haval has sacrificed some boot space to make the rear pews a comfy place for passengers, yielding plenty of legroom and toe room under the front seats. The floor in the back is almost flat, too, so you can easily slide across from the kerb site. If we’re going to be picky, the rear bench is a bit flat and the seatback a bit low, which are the only drawbacks.
• You get a five-year, 100,000 kilometre warranty. This is important for a new brand trying to make inroads into one of the most hotly contested markets in the world, and needing to buy confidence from customers.
• It’s well-equipped on the safety front. You need to dismiss those prejudices of Chinese-made cars cutting corners on safety. This one includes the most important modern safety features such as electronic stability control, and six airbags including side curtain airbags that protect rear-seat occupants’ heads in a side-on crash.
• Haval’s engineers are watching the Australian market with interest. Haval says it will listen to owners’ criticisms of the H6 and use the feedback to improve its products. If there’s something you want improved, tell your dealer.

1

WEAKNESSES

• Even though the Haval H6 is new to Australia, under the skin it’s an old car. It was launched in China in 2011, and the one we have today is wearing the automotive equivalent of a lot of makeup.
• The price and performance of the engine may be class-leading, but you’ll notice it lacks a lot of the modern safety being built into rivals. Things such as automatic city braking, and lane diversion warnings that sound an alarm if you stray out of your bit of road aren’t available at any price.
• Some things are lost in translation. There’s no satellite navigation system, so buy a smartphone holder to stick on the window. The car’s electronic brains also flick on the hazard lights if you tip into a corner with a bit too much enthusiasm – Chinese drivers move much slower than us, apparently, so the threshold for the warning system is too low. A fix is on the way. Oh, and blind spot monitoring was an always-on feature for the Chinese market. Here’ we have to switch it on.
• Driveaway pricing for the Haval H6 is lower than the recommended retail price, which will hurt resale value. RRP – the price before on-road costs are added on – for the H6 is $31,990, but for a honeymoon period until the end of the year you can pick one up for just $29,990. That there is a circa $3000 price drop (once add-ons are added on) as soon as you drive out the showroom door.

1

ANY RIVALS I SHOULD CONSIDER?

Do you treat your car like whitegoods, or an asset? If it’s the former, you’re going to struggle to get better value for money. If it’s the latter, you’ll be looking at something like an entry-level Mazda CX-5, Nissan X-Trail, Honda CR-V or even a Hyundai Tucson. They won’t be as richly equipped down this end of the market, but they aren’t as much of a gamble when it comes time to trade it in for something newer.