Some cars have cemented their place in history by being broadly appealing, inoffensive, and largely unremarkable. You’d see one on the street and not even think twice about it.

Those basic beginnings can also give way to spectacular works of engineering, transforming humble commuter appliances into cars with legendary credentials.

Nissan Juke-R

1

At very different ends of the Nissan spectrum, you have the all-wheel-drive twin-turbo V6 GT-R and the first-generation Juke. The latter could be, well, challenging to look at, and its 86kW 1.6-litre atmo engine and CVT auto couldn’t match its motorcycle-inspired styling.

Enter the Juke-R, based on the chassis and drivetrain of a Nissan GT-R, the 406kW 3.8-litre V6, twin-clutch auto, and all-wheel drive system were shoehorned in as part of an after-hours skunkworks project. Crazier still, rather than just a showcar, Nissan offered the handbuilt Juke-R for sale, and updated the original with a Juke-R 2.0 in 2015, punching out 447kW.

Renault Espace F1

1

What do you do when you build Europe’s most popular people mover? The answer is obvious – squeeze a 3.5-litre V10 engine from an F1 car into it.

To commemorate the 10th anniversary of the Renault Espace, Matra, the contract manufacturer that built it, produced a one-off Espace F1 that had much more in common with Renault’s F1 car than anything you could buy in a Renault showroom.

Acceleration was a claimed 2.8 seconds to 100km/h. A carbon-fibre chassis kept the mid-mounted engine essentially where you’d find it in a Formula One racer, with the four-seat cabin adapted to fit around the mechanical package, rather than the other way around.

Toyota Prius Super GT

1

While the Toyota Prius might rank among the more sleep-inducing offerings in the modern motoring landscape, Toyota believed strongly enough in it to enter it into Japan’s Super GT racing series.

The Prius GT300 was not your typical taxi-spec Prius. Sure, it kept a hybrid engine, just like the road-going Prius, but this one was a mid-mounted hybrid V8 with a 3.4-litre V8 developed from Toyota’s IndyCar participation.

Regulation changes saw the Prius GT300 switch to a front-mounted hybrid V8 later in its racing career, and perhaps the most impressive connection to the production car is that its hybrid motor was, apparently, the same unit as used on the regular Prius.

Volkswagen Beetle RSI

1

When Volkswagen launched the New Beetle in 1997, it quickly found an audience more interested in its playful styling and candy-coloured paint finishes than its performance or dynamics.

None of that stopped Volkswagen from pushing forward with the Beetle RSI. A transformative heart transplant from the Golf R32 saw the Beetle’s four-cylinder engine (with as little as 55kW in some markets) replaced with a 165kW VR6 engine, six-speed manual transmission, and 4Motion all-wheel drive.

To match the uprated performance, the Beetle RSI copped 80mm wider guards, unique ground-hugging bumpers, a distinctive rear spoiler, Recaro seats, and 18-inch OZ wheels. Production was capped at 250 units.

Audi RS6 5.0 TFSI quattro

1

BMW launched the V10-powered M5 in 2004, so Audi did the only logical thing to one-up them, and strapped two turbochargers to its own V10-powered super sled. BMW claimed 373kW, Audi said ‘halt mal mein bier!’ and dropped the 426kW RS6.

Its lineage is shared with V10 models like the R8, S6, and S8, but only the RS6 scored the turbocharged treatment. Meanwhile, at the complete opposite end of the A6 spectrum, Audi would also happily sell you a 2.0-litre turbo diesel version with front-wheel drive, a CVT automatic, and just 100kW to its name in Europe.

Citroen BX 4TC

1

The Citroen BX was already one of the more unusual-looking cars of the 1980s, thanks to its cleanly futuristic Bertone-designed bodywork. Underneath the sharp exterior, mainstream versions of the BX were often paired with underwhelming engines, downsized to fit European tax charges that incentivised smaller capacities.

Citroen’s involvement in Group B rallying also led to the development of the BX 4TC. Homologation rules at the time meant 200 production examples, fitted with wider bodywork, and a turbocharged engine turned to run longitudinally instead of transversely, were required. Only around 110 eventuated.

The rally-bred BX flopped, not only in WRC racing, but also in showrooms, with only 86 reported as sold. Citroen’s shame at the whole program saw it attempt to buy back those customer cars, resulting in less than 40 surviving.

Dodge RAM – RAM SRT 10

1

America’s full-size pick-up trucks are often seen as symbols of excess here, but owe their existence to more humble workhorse models, seen towing and serving on fleets across the USA.

The standout exception to the duty-bound life is the Dodge Ram SRT-10. First shown as a concept in 2002, the Ram SRT-10 took its power from an 8.3-litre V10, the same as found in the Viper sports car.

While Dodge also introduced a work-spec 231kW 8.0-litre V10 to the Ram range, the bigger SRT-10 engine boasted 380kW and fed power through a six-speed Tremec manual transmission. The project proved so successful that Dodge later added a dual-cab version and four-speed auto, with over 10,000 units produced between 2003 and 2005.

Ford Sierra Sapphire XR8

1

Ford’s European family car of the 1980s, the Sierra, saw a number of performance versions adapted from its mostly humble core. The best known of which are probably the Sierra RS Cosworth and RS500 Cosworth models that campaigned in Australian Touring Car racing in the late ‘80s.

While the 2.0-litre turbocharged four-cylinder Sierras made an impact, South Africa flipped the script with the Sierra Sapphire XR8. As the name suggests, the Sierra XR8 featured a V8 engine, adapted from the 5.0-litre Windsor engine in the Mustang.

Styling was surprisingly tame, apart from the massive bi-plane rear wing. Outputs for the V8, at 161kW were tamer than the RS500’s 167kW peak, but in an era when either was a significant number, the XR8 was nothing to be sneezed at. Where later Cosworth models adopted all-wheel drive, the XR8 kept its rear-wheel drive underpinnings, with suspension and brakes upgraded to ensure it could handle the pressures of racing.

Mercedes-Benz R63 AMG

1

For a brief moment, Mercedes-Benz decided that it would have an AMG performance version of every passenger model it sold. The strangest product to result from that determined product push was an all-wheel drive people-mover, powered by a naturally-aspirated 6.2-litre V8.

The R63 AMG 4Matic was the most potent version of Benz’s R-Class MPV. The R-Class itself didn’t set sales charts alight, and the AMG version, largely twinned with the ML63 under the sheet metal, proved even less popular, with estimates suggesting somewhere between 200 and 320 examples built for global consumption.

The on-paper stats look sound, with 375kW of power and a 0-100km/h claim of 4.6 seconds, with the more desirable ML and GL SUVs selling beside it, the R63 didn’t stand a chance. 

Aston Martin Cygnet V8

1

The ill-fated Aston Martin Cygnet was designed to be an exclusive city-sized tender for Aston Martin owners forced to leave the comfort of their country estates, fortuitously providing Aston Martin with an emissions offset to counter its V8- and V12-powered grand tourer range.

For one customer, however, the Toyota-derived front-wheel-drive four-cylinder Cygnet was missing something. That ‘something’ was restored in the Cygnet V8, which swapped the regular Cygnet’s 72kW 1.3-litre engine for a 320kW 4.7-litre V8 and custom front and rear subframes adapted from a V8 Vantage.

Drive is sent to the rear wheels, as it should be, via a seven-speed single-clutch automated manual. Double wishbone suspension and a slew of carbon-fibre enhancements help bring Aston’s monster Cygnet to life.

First published in the February 1978 issue of Wheels magazine, Australia’s best car mag since 1953. Subscribe here and gain access to 12 issues for $109 plus online access to every Wheels issue since 1953.

It came in September, 1960, as the first real competition for the Holden and virtually doubled Ford’s share of the market in 18 months before the truth became apparent and the lousy durability became obvious and plunged Ford into the red.

In 1960 the XK Falcon was a very modern car if you used the FB Holden as a yardstick. For starters it was lower, wider and longer and up to the minute in styling with its huge glass areas, almost flush lower body/green house and that low bonnet with the headlights included with the grille. Holden’s FB, in contrast, was a quaint collection of Chevrolet styling circa 1955 to 1957 with a semblance of tail fins and that dreadful wrap-around windscreen.

1

The Falcon offered automatic transmission as an option and it both out performed and out handled the Holden… until the suspension and clutch began to deteriorate.

In concept the Falcon was Ford of America’s answer to the European cars which had been pouring into the USA in the late fifties. Introduced late in 1959, the Falcon, General Motors’ rear-engined, aircooled Chevrolet Corvair, and (a couple of months later) Chrysler’s more powerful Valiant did stem the imported tide until the home grown compacts grew in size.

For Ford Australia the Falcon was the answer to the Holden it had been looking for. The British Ford Zephyr was the right size and specification but it was too expensive. The Falcon was different. And so it proved. An instant success, it suffered badly after the honeymoon was over but then a masterful development program which improved the durability once more turned Ford’s fortunes and made the Falcon Australia’s top seller in 1977.

1

It was the XR Falcon in 1966 that really won the customers back again. It was strong, very good looking and with V8 muscle entered the supercar era – indeed began the supercar era – and created a whole new image for the car. It’s an image that lives on today.

In concept the car has hardly changed, superficially anyway. It is still about the same size and still has a water cooled six cylinder engine in the most popular basic form up front and driving the rear wheels through a three speed manual transmission with steering column gear change. Weight has gone up by almost half as much again and this has forced substantial increases in engine capacity if only to maintain the same performance level, let alone improve it. Of course economy has suffered with every increase in weight and engine capacity.

The model range and the choice of options has grown enormously. Today you can build your own Falcon and have the choice of a fleet operators’ special or a quite grand touring car with standards of braking, acceleration, and roadholding beyond the dreams of the engineers who created the Falcon as an economical, compact car.

1

For Australians the Falcon will live on for at least another five years. The present car, which grew out of the 1972 XA will be replaced by the XD in April/May 1979. This will be the last all-Australian car to come from one of the major manufacturers. So, before the present Falcon disappears from the showrooms we thought it appropriate to drive the three stages in its development. Yes, change is progress (in most areas).

“They don’t make cars like they usedter, mate.”

Thank God!

Direct comparison between the 1960 XK, 1967 XR and 1978 XC Falcon showed the enormous changes which have been forced on Ford. Subjectively, the image had changed from a discreet, gentle American abroad, through aggressive Australian to a transparent attempt at copying European sophistication. A car enthusiast who’d been kept in suspended animation for 20 years when confronted by the three cars would be excused for thinking Australians had changed genetically as well as socially.

The XK we used for the comparison became an XL during the morning. For the purposes of the story this hardly matters since the two models were virtually identical apart from the rear roof line. We collected the XK from Clive Philip Motors on Sydney’s infamous Parramatta Road at Homebush. The car was rough and running on five cylinders because it hadn’t been prepared for sale. After struggling with automatic transmission which refused to change out of first gear, we were stopped by a motor cycle policeman who didn’t see the humour in a mobile bushfire with bald tyres. So we returned the XK and swapped it for an XL Futura (price $499) with two days’ registration.

1

The XL was straight, clean and performed well considering its alarming thirst for fuel and oil – largely due to its five-cylinder engine. It was a tired old car, but at $499, honestly represented. The first few minutes were spent deciding if it was horribly worn out, indescribably bad, or just representative of the standards applicable to 1963. The next hour driving to the photo location was spent assessing worn components and mentally restoring them to determine the standards of the day.

As a Futura, the XL offered a significant touch of European design – bucket seats. The first thing we noticed was the lack of travel in the seats. They didn’t move far enough to the rear for a comfortable driving position but did leave plenty of room in the rear. Our suspended animation enthusiast has an immediate impression of a man with conventional legs and extremely short arms.

And the bucket seats – what a revelation they were back in the early ’60s! Holden’s EJ Premier was talked about as a “sports car” because it had bucket seats. In fact the Falcon’s seats aren’t buckets, just separate seats, but the beggars of 1963 couldn’t be choosers. A sports car was a car with separate front seats, so the Futura was Ford’s first attempt at the Aussie Supercar based on a mums’n’dads base model.

1

On the road, the two-speed (Tree-bar) transmission is remarkably good. Although there’s a lag of about 1000 rpm between drive and overrun, the transmission locks easily and the car moves quite quickly. Bearing in mind the car we drove was running on five cylinders most of the time and blowing more smoke than the Adelaide Hills in February, the performance was still enough to keep the car up with the traffic of 1978.

It must have been a boomer in 1963.

Then there’s the steering. It is hard to detect how much of the woeful steering is due to age and how much to the slop served to buyers in the early ’60s. A certain amount of wear could be felt in the straight ahead position with the side-to-side

Movement prevalent in old cars. About a quarter of a turn (and that’s a lot more than it sounds) is free play, but even when the gears finally mesh and the steering starts to work, winding on several turns for reasonably sharp corners when the wheel is only millimetres away from the driver’s chest is a very peculiar operation. A bit like wiping your chest with a hand towel after a shower.

1

Considering the brakes are unboosted and pretty basic, they work well at conventional traffic speeds. However, unassisted drums on a single-line system would be more dangerous today than in their hey-day. With power-boost, tricky-pads, ventilated disc-braked cars standing on their front bumpers two metres in front, you need more than cocoa tins for stopping in 1978.

The XL may have looked low and lean in 1963, but in reality it is low and it leans. All it needs is a pinball TILT light on the dash to accentuate the severity of body roll in mild corners and a rope for the rats to leave the sinking ship when driving briskly. If you don’t believe the degree of lean on an old Falcon (albeit with very ancient shock absorbers), try remembering the advertising slogan for the XM. It was “Trim, Taut and Terrific”. Even Ford knew the worst.

After our short time with the XL it was easy to see why the XK/XL Falcon became popular so quickly.

Handling isn’t significantly worse than other Australian cars of the era, and performance is definitely better and it looked far more modern than the Holden The clutch and suspension problems had yet to rear their ugly durability heads.

1

The XR became arguably Ford Australia’s first real supercar in its GT form. A fully-imported 289 V8 engine with floor gear-change (another sports car feature), separate seats, trick paint, tyres and suspension. It burst on the scene with a conclusive win at Bathurst in 1967. By today’s gentle powerhouse standards, it is still a hot-rod.

Ford didn’t have provision for a floor gear-change on the production line, so the GT had a hole in the floor, cut with an oxy torch. The gear linkage, held together with a makeshift collection of plastic washers is very sloppy, although its owner (Mac Douglas, Editor of sister magazine TWO WHEELS) says new washers improve the gear change considerably.

The seating position is low, almost womb-like within the tall and thick sides and spreading out in front is the football pitch of a bonnet. Even though the XR feels a large car, the sharp cut-off body shape makes it easy to manoeuvre in traffic and when parking. The limit you see is the limit of the car. The steering has considerably more feel, but at low speed it is very heavy.

Owner Douglas, when asked how many turns lock-to-lock said “I’ve never had the strength to turn it lock-to-lock and I’ve been on a Bullworker for six months.” The clutch is surprisingly light compared to Holden’s 327 Monaro.

1

The test car was prepared for Bathurst but never raced and has lasted the 10 hard years of driving well. Rattles have started to show and the silent muncher has left his rusty stains in all the predictable places – more so than in the XL.

Once the delightful 289 V8 burbles into life it’s easy to understand why the first GT had such a dramatic effect on Aussie supercars. It lives and breathes machismo demanding almost the same physical prowess and compromises of a pre-war sports car while hiding behind the appearance of a family hack.

It is a car for men.

The XC½ is a car for everyman. Progress brought about by the success of the XA marketing program and dwindling Holden sales (more Holden’s fault, not Ford’s genius) gave Ford the confidence it needed to embark on a large number of improvement programs. How many of these have been spurred on by market reaction, stiff overseas competition, cash in the till from good sales or an honest belief in building better cars is hard to determine. The end product, however, bears virtually no relationship to the earlier two models we drove although it still follows the same basic engineering layout. No design revolution here.

1

Because we live very much for the present, or at least for the charismatic past, it is easy to overlook the real achievements of the modern car. Driving all three cars on the same day proved just how far the designers have come. Few products have improved as much as the car, and the Falcon is no exception.

Now that our suspended animation enthusiast has been resurrected to the world of 1978 he can be truly amazed that the three cars have been made by the same factory. 

The steering wheel fits without pressing against his chest, controls are lighter in some cases, heavier in others (steering) and the overall feeling is one of balance. The relationship between the controls has moved closer to a harmony with the needs of the body to exert as little effort as possible while feeding back enough information for the brain to make more accurate decisions.

Noise, vibration and harshness have been attacked at the engineering level not the olde worlde English method of thick padding and Oak veneer. Panels are designed so they don’t resonate and rubber bushes have been designed so they don’t transmit the frequency they are isolating.

1

The XC½ is subliminal technology. There’s no contest between the three cars. It is quieter, quicker, more comfortable and fits the human frame better in temperament as well as shape. The XR may be more responsive but the compromises of driver strength and car noise are intolerable. However it does use more petrol, visibility isn’t anything like as good as the XK/XL and it does cost more.

Ford has come a long way since the XK first challenged Holden’s supremacy in this tiny market. Changes haven’t moved as quickly as we would have liked, but the size of the Australian market hasn’t left much room for elaborate research and development. If Ford has succeeded with the XC½ then it is due in part to imitation of the features of many European and Japanese cars which have worried the local builders for so long.

And imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.

With hybrid and electric powertrains becoming increasingly common across the new car market, buyers looking for a straightforward petrol or diesel medium SUV are finding their options shrinking. Yet there remains a sizeable group of motorists who simply aren’t interested in any form of electrification, albeit for cost, complexity or personal preference.

We’ve rounded up the 10 most fuel-efficient non-electrified medium SUVs on sale in Australia, proving you can still keep fuel bills low without plugging in or relying on a battery.

10) Subaru Forester: 7.9L/100km

1

Price: From $43,490 plus on-road costs
Drivetrain: 2.5-litre naturally aspirated four-cylinder petrol, 136kW/247Nm, CVT automatic, all-wheel drive
Fuel type: 91 RON regular unleaded

Starting off the 10 most fuel efficient non-electrified medium SUVs in Australia is the Subaru Forester, which uses a 2.5-litre petrol engine mated to a CVT automatic transmission and the brand’s ‘symmetrical’ all-wheel drive system as standard. The latest Forester also doesn’t lose the reasonable off-road ability of the previous generations of the car, and can easily handle sand and mud thanks to its cool ‘X-Mode’ off-road system. Even if you never touch a speck of dirt, the Forester is a comfortable, spacious and really practical medium SUV.

9) Volkswagen Tiguan 110TSI and 150TSI: 7.6L/100km

1

Price: From $45,650 plus on-road costs (110TSI), from $56,850 plus on-road costs (150TSI)
Drivetrain: 1.4-litre four-cylinder turbo-petrol, 110kW/250Nm, seven-speed dual-clutch, front-wheel drive (110TSI); 2.0-litre four-cylinder turbo-petrol, 150kW/320Nm, seven-speed dual-clutch, all-wheel drive (150TSI)
Fuel type: 95 RON premium unleaded

Interestingly, we have not one but two drivetrains in the Volkswagen Tiguan range rated at exactly the same combined fuel consumption figure. That’s right, both the 110kW 1.4-litre front-wheel drive 110TSI and the 150kW 2.0-litre all-wheel drive 150TSI versions of the Tiguan use the same 7.6L/100km. That’s a surprise and gives those wanting the maximum efficiency reasons to feel less guilty about wanting the more powerful engine that’s also equipped with all-wheel drive. The 150TSI is also quicker by around two seconds to hit 100km/h (low 7s versus low 9s) and punchier in the mid range too.

8) Mitsubishi Outlander ES 2WD and Mazda CX-60 G25: 7.5L/100km

2

Price: From $39,990 plus on-road costs (Outlander); $44,740 plus on-road costs (CX-60)
Drivetrain: 2.5-litre naturally aspirated four-cylinder petrol, 135kW/244Nm, CVT automatic, front-wheel drive (Outlander); 2.5-litre naturally aspirated four-cylinder petrol, 138kW/250Nm, eight-speed automatic, rear-wheel drive (CX-60)
Fuel type: 91 RON regular unleaded

Next up are two Japanese medium SUVs that both use naturally aspirated 2.5-litre petrol engines, though that’s where their similarities end. The Outlander is a well-rounded offering and in base ES 2WD form, is at its most fuel efficient in non-electrified form, while the CX-60 G25 is actually the thirstiest CX-60 model as all the other available drivetrains feature some sort of electrification. But the G25 is also the only rear-wheel drive CX-60 model offered locally, and features an engaging dynamic set up. Both the Outlander and CX-60 are spacious and good quality inside too.

7) Nissan X-Trail 2.5L 2WD 5-seat, Haval H6 2.0T and new Mazda CX-5 G25: 7.4L/100km

3

Price: From $38,140 plus on-road costs (X-Trail), $35,990 driveaway (H6); $39,990 plus on-road costs (CX-5)
Drivetrain: 2.5-litre naturally aspirated four-cylinder petrol, 135kW/244Nm, CVT automatic, front-wheel drive (X-Trail); 2.0-litre four-cylinder turbo-petrol, 170kW/380Nm, nine-speed dual-clutch, front-wheel drive (H6); 2.5-litre naturally aspirated four-cylinder petrol, 132kW/242Nm, six-speed automatic, all-wheel drive (CX-5)
Fuel type: 91 RON regular unleaded

Using just 0.1L/100km less than its Outlander twin, the Nissan X-Trail is also a well-rounded and practical medium SUV that can be quite efficient in the real world – in our testing, we’ve seen comfortably under 6L/100km on highway runs. The entry-level 2.0-litre turbo-petrol engine in the GWM Haval H6 is its only non-electrified drivetrain but is actually quite punchy, making 170kW/380Nm outputs. Mazda’s new CX-5 uses the same G25 engine from the previous model, though detuned to 132kW/242Nm meet new emissions standards – though use premium unleaded fuel and it apparently makes 138kW/257Nm, which is only 1kW less but 5Nm more than the previous model.

6) Skoda Karoq 140TSI: 7.2L/100km

1

Price: From $54,990 driveaway
Drivetrain: 2.0-litre four-cylinder turbo-petrol, 140kW/320Nm, seven-speed dual-clutch, all-wheel drive
Fuel type: 95 RON premium unleaded

The Skoda Karoq doesn’t feature any electrification in Australia, but that doesn’t mean that it can’t be fuel efficient. The 140TSI 4×4 variant features a 140kW/320Nm 2.0-litre turbo-petrol engine mated to an all-wheel drive system as standard, which is enough grunt for a claimed 0-100km/h time in just 7.0 seconds. But its combined rating of 7.2L/100km is relatively low for a sporty medium SUV.

5) Cupra Ateca V and Honda CR-V VTi X: 7.1L/100km

2

Price: From $51,990 plus on-road costs (Ateca), $45,900 driveaway (CR-V)
Drivetrain: 2.0-litre four-cylinder turbo-petrol, 140kW/320Nm, seven-speed dual-clutch, all-wheel drive (Ateca); 1.5-litre four-cylinder turbo-petrol, 140kW/240Nm, CVT automatic, front-wheel drive (CR-V)
Fuel type: 95 RON premium unleaded (Ateca), 91 RON regular unleaded (CR-V)

The Cupra Ateca V uses the exact same drivetrain as the Karoq 140TSI, though somehow it’s rated at 0.1L/100km less at 7.1L/100km. You’re unlikely to see even that difference in the real world, but like the Karoq, the Ateca V can fuel efficient for a sporty-leaning medium SUV. The Honda CR-V was recently given an update and its 1.5-litre turbo-petrol engine is now only available at the bottom of the range with a 2.0-litre hybrid featuring in the other models. It’s a fine engine and capable of good fuel economy if hybrids aren’t your thing.

4) Chery Tiggo 7 and Honda ZR-V VTi X: 7.0L/100km

2

Price: From $29,990 driveaway (Tiggo 7); from $39,900 drive away (ZR-V)
Drivetrain: 1.5-litre four-cylinder turbo-petrol, 108kW/210Nm, six-speed dual-clutch, front-wheel drive (Tiggo 7); 1.5-litre four-cylinder turbo-petrol, 131kW/240Nm, CVT automatic, front-wheel drive (ZR-V)
Fuel type: 91 RON regular unleaded

While there’s a plug-in hybrid ‘Super Hybrid’ variant of the Chery Tiggo 7 range that gets all the fanfare, the petrol models use a 1.5-litre turbo-petrol engine making 108kW of power and mated to a six-speed dual-clutch transmission. It’s a reasonable performer with good low end torque, though the same-sized engine in the ZR-V makes 23kW/30Nm more grunt, yet is rated at the same 7.0L/100km rating. Like the CR-V, the ZR-V was recently updated and there’s now only one model available with the petrol engine – every other model is hybridised, but the petrol engine is still capable of good efficiency.

3) MG HS: 6.9L/100km

1

Price: From $33,990 driveaway
Drivetrain: 1.5-litre four-cylinder turbo-petrol, 119kW/275Nm, seven-speed dual-clutch, front-wheel drive
Fuel type: 95 RON premium unleaded

Like the Tiggo 7 above, the MG HS is another medium SUV whose petrol engine option is overshadowed by hybrid models, in this case both the Hybrid+ and the plug-in hybrid Super Hybrid. But as its 6.9L/100km combined rating shows, the 119kW/275Nm 1.5-litre turbo-petrol engine that sits as the entry-level engine in the HS range is capable of good fuel efficiency.

2) Skoda Karoq 110TSI: 6.6L/100km

1

Price: From $40,990 driveaway
Drivetrain: 1.4-litre four-cylinder turbo-petrol, 110kW/250Nm, eight-speed automatic, front-wheel drive
Fuel type: 95 RON premium unleaded

The Volkswagen Group was one of the first brands to shun larger naturally aspirated engines for smaller, turbocharged replacements with both superior fuel economy and more low-end torque and the Skoda Karoq 110TSI is a great example of that as it’s the second most fuel efficient non-electrified medium SUV on the Australian new car market. Making reasonable 110kW/250Nm outputs and using an eight-speed torque converter automatic transmission, the Karoq 110TSI uses just 6.6L/100km on the combined cycle but can also launch to 100km/h in under nine seconds.

1) Kia Sportage diesel: 6.3L/100km

1

Price: From $43,890 plus on-road costs
Drivetrain: 2.0-litre four-cylinder turbo-diesel, 137kW/416Nm, eight-speed automatic, all-wheel drive
Fuel type: Diesel

At number one for the most fuel efficient medium SUV with no electrification is the diesel-powered Kia Sportage. One of the few diesel offerings left on the market, and the only diesel on this list, the Sportage’s punchy 137kW/416Nm outputs use just 6.3L/100km on the combined cycle and doing lots of highway driving will reduce that even further. Diesel power doesn’t suit everybody, but particularly for those in country areas not doing start-stop traffic driving, it can still make a lot of sense. Both hybrid (from 4.7L/100km) and pure petrol (8.1L/100km) variants also exist in the Sportage range, but we think that the diesel provides a unique option for medium SUV buyers not wanting electrification.

There’s no doubt Kia no offers one of the broadest product ranges of any car manufacturer in the Australian market, an achievement it’s now adding to with the launch of the all-electric Kia PV5 van.

It’s an ambitious introduction in a segment that hasn’t yet made a big impact on the commercial van sales charts. But according to Kia Australia CEO Dennis Piccoli, it’s another example of the South Korean manufacturer’s ability to offer the right product at the right time, while at the same time, broadening the showroom portfolio.

“When you talk about the tipping point (of too many brands or market saturation) and the new entrants in the market, what’s occurred with fuel prices in recent months has propelled a couple of brands more than others, that’s the first thing there…” Piccoli told WhichCar by Wheels.

1

Piccoli agreed that Australians are looking at price more forensically than perhaps they have before. And that the breadth of choice in the Australian new car market is something legacy brands have to be aware of.

“How do we tackle it? Well, it’s by virtue of the models that we’ve got and the variants that we have, which give us the ability to go after all the various segments,” Piccoli said. “That’s what’s delivering the growth for us. It doesn’t matter whether it’s an EV, or whether its internal combustion, or whether it’s a hybrid, we’ve got a car for pretty much everybody.”

Piccoli’s point is that Kia believes its diverse offering will allow it to continue to stay strong in a fracturing market.

“It really does mitigate our risk where perhaps some of the other legacy brands have probably got a little it of an issue,” Piccoli said. “For us, [it’s] our strength moving forward.”

1

That growth continues with the launch of the all-electric PV5 – into a segment that is quite small, and as such Kia has conservative expectations for how many it can sell. To put things into perspective, Toyota sold 11,073 HiAce vans in 2025 for 46 per cent market share, while the top-selling electric van, the ID Buzz Cargo saw only 190 leave dealerships. Electric vans as a wholevmade up just two per cent of all commercial van sales in 2025.

“Now with the van we’re entering into another segment, and it will be incremental volume,” Piccoli said. “So we think we’re in a pretty good space, but it is an interesting marketplace at this point in time.”

Mazda’s CX-5 really needs no introduction to WhichCar by Wheels readers. The boss of Mazda Australia is unequivocal when he says, “this is the most significant vehicle in our brand’s line-up’, and it’s fair to say Australians have loved the CX-5 since it was first released. Since its initial launch, more than 330,000 CX-5’s have left dealerships in the hands of Australian buyers. And Mazda’s internal data indicates that more than 20,000 current owners have bought more than one CX-5.

With more than five million sales globally, it’s just as popular around the world as it is here in Australia, also. Making up around 25 percent of all Mazda sales in Australia, the CX-5 has been the manufacturer’s most popular vehicle in this market for seven years running.

Key points for this third-generation version are a larger body, new technology and all- wheel drive as standard across the range.

1

How much does the Mazda CX-5 cost to buy?

Mazda’s sharp pricing is noteworthy, too, even the entry to the range Pure, which starts from $39,990 before on-road costs, feels like a well-executed medium SUV. Standard equipment on the base model includes 17-inch alloy wheels, dusk-sensing LED headlights, 12.9-inch infotainment touchscreen, 10.25-inch digital driver’s display, black cloth trim, dual-zone climate control, wired smartphone connectivity, autonomous emergency braking in forward and reverse, adaptive cruise control with stop and go, lane-keep assist, blind-spot monitoring, parking sensors front and rear, and a rear-view camera.

Our standard specification list below, details that entry point to the range, with standard equipment increasing as you spend more money. Step up through the model grades and you will spend $42,990 for the Evolve, $47,490 for the Touring, $51,990 for the GT SP and $54,990 for the Akera. All prices listed are before on-road costs are factored in.

The most crucial question to be answered, and time will tell as the sales figures start to roll in, is whether the CX-5 can endure in this market, when all of its main competitors feature hybrid technology of some kind. At the time of the CX-5 launching, only Renault Koleos, Skoda Karoq and Mahindra XUV700 are not available with either hybrid or plug-in hybrid drivetrains.

For Mazda’s part, it says a hybrid CX-5 is on the way, and that vehicle must feel and respond like a Mazda from behind the wheel, rather than simply trumpet a headline efficiency number. As relevant as that may be to buyers, it’s also fair to say that plenty of buyers in this segment value efficiency as much as, if not more than, anything else. There is a response in the way that the CX-5 behaves on the road though, that not all SUVs can match. Certainly not at this competitive price point.

3

How powerful is the Mazda CX-5?

Significant to this revision of the lineup is the rationalisation of the previous engine options, with the range now powered by one engine only – Mazda’s 2.5-litre, naturally aspirated four-cylinder ‘G25’ petrol variant.

For 2026, both power and torque have been lowered – to meet stricter emissions standards – now 132kW and 242Nm (-8kW/10Nm). It’s fair to say that the CX-5 doesn’t have the punch it might with a more powerful engine, a larger engine, or a hybrid drivetrain, certainly off the mark when you nail the throttle. That said, it doesn’t feel slow either, with more than enough urge to do what the target buyer will need it to do day-to-day. And as noted, this engine was the most popular among Australian buyers.

On the subject of the engine note, nail the throttle and it’s evident there’s a naturally aspirated four-cylinder working away beneath the bonnet. While it doesn’t sound or feel like it’s being pushed beyond its comfort zone, the sound its making means its more noticeable than it would be if there was hybrid – or turbo – technology at play. Again, the CX-5 doesn’t feel slow, as you might fear looking at the spec sheet. The power and torque figures won’t cause your eyes to water, but they do allow the CX-5 to do what buyers will need it to do.

On typical country roads, the CX-5 is a fun SUV to drive, whether it’s on the 17s of the base model or the 19-inch tyres further up the grade walk. If you live in an area with particularly poor roads, the 17-inch wheels and tyres will serve you well, but even on 19s, the CX-5 manages to neatly deal with and insulate the worst surfaces beneath it. The balance between handling prowess and ride quality is something Mazda engineers have nailed for this segment, the way WhichCar by Wheels sees it.

4

The six-speed automatic is another part of the CX-5 equation that works well across various driving disciplines. At a time when a CVT or a 10-speed automatic is common, there’s a lot to like about the simplicity and precision of Mazda’s six-speed, which doesn’t hunt through multiple ratios at city speeds, something that can grate with other transmissions. Whether you’re in town or on the highway, the Mazda automatic works nicely.

Step out of the base model into the more expensive, higher grade Akera variant and there’s a requisite step forward in terms of luxury, amenity and features. The 15.6-inch infotainment screen is a whopper, and the panoramic sunroof adds a light, airy feel to the cabin. Steering wheel paddle shifters lift the sporty aspiration a little, too. In real terms it’s no more fun to drive than the more austere base model, but it’s a more luxurious way to undertake the same road trip.

How fuel efficient is the Mazda CX-5?

The G25 can run on regular unleaded fuel and uses a claimed 7.4L/100km on the combined cycle. Interestingly, according to Mazda, the majority of buyers in 2025 – of the outgoing model – opted for the G25 engine, making the decision to switch the range to one engine, easier to understand.

Mated to the G25 across the range, is Mazda’s familiar six-speed automatic and all-wheel drive, and the good news is that while it’s not as efficient as the raft of hybrids on offer in the segment, it’s still comfortable below the 10.0L/100km mark in the real world. With the understanding that launch drives are tailored to suit the vehicle, we saw a live reading below the 7.4L/100km claim while cruising, while stop/start city driving saw it climb into the high 8 range. We’ll report back with a more accurate fuel use figure post launch.

Is the Mazda CX-5 practical?

Mazda is predicting a full five-star ANCAP safety rating to match the five-star Euro NCAP rating the CX-5 already has. Other key changes beyond those noted above include an overall length increase of 115mm, 70mm of which goes into a deeper second row door aperture, 15mm added to the width, and a boot increase to 466 litres with the second row in use. Fold that row down and available space is up 254 litres to 1594 litres.

The extra length in the wheelbase, with 70mm added to the rear door apertures, means getting into and out of the CX-5 is easier than it was previously, and the doors open almost square, too. There’s room in the second row for adults, but keep in mind you need to step up to Evolve (second in the range) to get rear air vents. Mazda touts the ability to fold the second row flat, reverse the headrests in the seat backs, and create a flat space to recline for occupants up to 185cm in height. If you’re into star gazing through the panoramic glass roof of the Akera variant, it’s a handy feature.

2

There is some hard plastic trim on the dash and door tops in the base Pure, but that aside, it features a quality cabin that is nicely insulated when you’re on the move. Tyre and wind noise is kept to a minimum, and while the engine note is noticeable as revs increase, it lends a sporty feel to the experience, which plenty of Mazda buyers like. Crucially, the most affordable CX-5 doesn’t feel like its built down to a price, which is a tangible benefit for those buyers on a tight budget.

What warranty covers the Mazda CX-5?

The CX-5 is, as all Mazdas are, covered by the brand’s five-year, unlimited kilometre warranty. Servicing is required every 12 months of 15,000km, whichever comes first, and cost $369, $556, $434, $556 and $369 respectively, for a five-year total of $2284 up to 75,000km.

Should I buy the Mazda CX-5?

The revised Mazda CX-5 is a high-quality medium SUV. There’s no doubt that even in its most affordable guise it’s quiet, refined, well-appointed and engaging to drive. There’s a line in the sand that separates the way in which a CX-5 behaves on a twisty road compared to most other medium SUVs and it certainly engages the driver in a way that others don’t. Is that enough to ensure it remains as popular as it has always been, while buyers wait for the launch of a hybrid? Time will tell.

1

Mazda CX-5 standard equipment

• 17-inch alloy wheels with space-saver spare 
• 12.9-inch infotainment touchscreen
• Mazda Connected Services
• Wired Apple CarPlay and Android Auto
• Eight-speaker audio system
• Basic voice control
• FM/AM/DAB+ radio
• 10.25-inch full-digital instrument cluster
• Dual-zone climate control
• Rain-sensing wipers
• LED daytime running lights
• Black cloth seat upholstery
• Leather-wrapped steering wheel and gear shifter
• Eight-way manual driver’s seat adjustment
• Front and rear parking sensors
• Autonomous emergency braking
• Lane-keep assist
• Lane departure warning
• Blind-spot monitoring
• Front and rear cross-traffic alerts
• Adaptive cruise control
• Traffic jam assist

1

Mazda CX-5 Pure specs

The first teaser for a compact electric car to kick off MG’s EV range has been revealed.

The new small car will make its first appearance in concept guise at the Goodwood Festival of Speed. A somewhat unusual choice for a car that won’t be particularly focused on performance.

The production version of the new model, which looks set to adopt the MG2 name, will join a wave of new compact Chinese rivals like the BYD Atto 1, GAC Aion UT, and Geely EX2.

The first teaser images reveal a front end that doesn’t stray too far from the soft curves and friendly face motifs of its Geely and GAC rivals. In concept form, the MG2 features a new LED lighting signature for the brand, and pixel-like main headlights.

The rear shows a largely conventional hatchback shape with a large rear spoiler and a curved taillight form that, again, lines up with the organic forms found on its Chinese rivals. The new hatch also carries an MG badge on its C-pillar.

1

The concept will serve as a near-production-ready preview of a production model that is already under development, adding an electric alternative to sell alongside the existing MG3 petrol and hybrid range.

In an interview with the UK’s Auto Express, MG’s global design president, Jozef Kaban, suggested that the design for the new compact hatch was the work of MG’s UK-based design team. “Even when we are talking about an international brand with international design teams in different places, here we know that we want to deliver something that is not just global, but maybe a bit more British,” he said.

Rather than taking cues from the sharper design of models like the MG4 and S6 EV, with their pointed headlights and angular front intakes, the MG2 appears to be an evolution of the softer design language from the MG4 Urban (below).

Kaban referred to the new model as “the cute baby in the family.”

Specifications for the new model are as yet unknown, but it’s likely to utilise a downsized version of the front-wheel-drive ‘E3’ architecture from the MG4 Urban, equipped with a torsion beam rear end.

1

The small end of the EV market in Europe has seen a rush of activity with cars like the Renault 5 and its related Nissan Micra sibling, and new models on the horizon, including the Volkswagen ID. Polo and Cupra Raval.

The MG2 concept will debut at the Goodwood Festival of Speed in July, alongside another ‘electric design vision’ concept from the brand, and is expected to reach production by early 2027.

A recall for 1.3 million Jeep Wranglers and Gladiators has been announced overseas, owing to a risk of fire.

While not yet officially recognised as a recall in Australia, overseas owners of the Jeep Wrangler and Jeep Gladiator have been advised to park their vehicles outside, away from buildings, owing to the risk of fire.

Of the 1.3 million vehicles involved in the recall globally, over 1 million are located within the USA.

Documents filed with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) reveal that an electrical connector used in the electric-hydraulic power steering system may be loose, leading to the connector overheating, melting, and potentially igniting surrounding materials.

The fire risk may present itself even with vehicles switched off.

1

Jeep’s parent company, Stellantis, has identified 125,000 vehicles that may be affected outside of the USA, Canada, and Mexico. The recall affects vehicles produced between Model Year 2021 and 2025 – In Australia, Model Year 2021 Wranglers and Gladiators were available from the third quarter (July to September) of 2020.

According to US records, 72 vehicle fires have been linked to the vehicle fault, with one reported injury.

The NHTSA began an investigation into the fire risk in 2023 and 2024, but Stellantis closed the investigation due to a low rate of fires. The investigation was relaunched in August 2024 after an increase in reported incidents.

Stellatis said in a statement that overseas rectification would involve inspecting affected vehicles and potentially repairing or replacing parts of the vehicle wiring harness or the electric-hydraulic power steering pump. Parts to furnish the recall are expected by July.

A spokesperson for Stellantis in Australia told Which Car, “We are aware of a recall announced in the United States relating to 2021 to 2025 Jeep Wrangler and Gladiator.

“At this stage, no recall has been issued in Australia. Safety is our top priority, and we are working with our parent company to understand any local impact and next steps. We will provide updates as more information becomes available and will contact any affected customers directly.”

GWM Australia has announced that its new Ora 5 electric small SUV has arrived in Australia ahead of imminent deliveries. Priced from just $33,990 driveaway, the Ora 5 is one of the cheapest electric small SUVs and also one of the cheapest electric vehicles available on the new car market.

According to GWM, deliveries of the Ora 5 to GWM dealer showrooms across all states are expected within the coming days, meaning that prospective buyers can now book a test drive with their local dealer and get their first behind-the-wheel experience of the highly anticipated new model.

The Ora 5 originally debuted for the Australian market at the Melbourne Motor Show in April and since then, has received nearly 3,000 expressions of interest.

4

The Ora 5 uses a 58.2kWh LFP battery and is rated at 430km for range on the WLTC cycle. It can be DC fast charged at up to 120kW for a claimed 30 to 80 per cent charge time of approximately 20 minutes, while vehicle-to-load functionality up to 6kW is standard. A 150kW/260Nm front-mounted motor drives the Ora 5 and it hits 100km/h in 8.0 seconds.

2026 GWM Ora 5 pricing (driveaway):

Ora 5 Lux standard features:

• 18-inch alloy wheels with a space saver spare tyre
• Automatic LED headlights
• Automatic wipers
• Roof rails
• Smart keyless access
• Rear privacy glass
• Synthetic leather steering wheel
• Synthetic leather upholstery
• Six-way electric driver’s seat
• Single-zone climate control with rear vents
• 10.25-inch driver’s display
• 14.6-inch touchscreen with live services
• Wireless Apple CarPlay and Android Auto
• DAB+ digital radio
• Six-speaker audio system
• Standard, eco, city, sport and auto driving modes
• 7x airbags
• Autonomous emergency braking with cyclist, pedestrian and junction assist
• Lane keeping assistance
• Adaptive cruise control with traffic jam assist
• Blind-spot monitoring
• Driver attention monitoring
• Traffic sign recognition
• Rear collision warning
• Rear cross-traffic alert with braking
• 360-degree camera

5

Ora 5 Ultra model adds to Lux:

• Electric tailgate
• Panoramic glass roof with sunshade
• Heated mirrors with auto-folding functionality
• Dual-zone automatic climate control
• Heated steering wheel
• Heated and ventilated front seats
• Memory for the driver’s seat
• Four-way electric front passenger seat
• Wireless phone charger
• 64-colour ambient lighting
• Nine-speaker audio system

The Geely Emgrand i-HEV sedan is about to launch with not one record efficiency figure, but two.

Geely claims the Emgrand i-HEV sets a record for thermal efficiency, a measure of how effectively it turns fuel into energy, rather than losing it to heat.

According to Geely’s calculations, the new hybrid system has a thermal efficiency of 48.41 per cent. In the Chinese fight for technological superiority, thermal efficiency is now a key recognisable metric.

Geely’s latest claim surpasses Dongfeng’s claimed 48.09 per cent for its 1.5-litre turbo revealed in December 2025, and beats Geely’s own 46.5 per cent claim for Chinese market versions of the Starray EM-i, known as the Starship 7.

The Emgrand i-HEV sedan uses a development of the Starship 7’s 11-in-1 hybrid drive system, with a dual-motor powertrain that Geely claims delivers up to 230kW on electric power alone, compared to the 100kW electric peak from a Toyota Camry hybrid, or 135kW from the electric drive side of the Honda Accord hybrid.

The hybrid system can operate in pure electric, hybrid parallel, or direct drive modes, depending on driving conditions.

1

Geely also claims its new hybrid sedan sets a new fuel efficiency record, based on WLTC testing protocols, resulting in highway cycle fuel consumption as low as 2.22L/100km, 12 per cent more efficient than a Toyota Prius under similar conditions.

Mixed-cycle fuel consumption is rated at 3.83L/100km. By comparison, the Camry and Accord are rated 4.0L/100km and 4.3L/100km in Australian mixed-cycle testing.

The Emgrand hybrid uses an AI-powered drive control system to adapt to changes in temperature, humidity, altitude, and road gradient in real time. Geely says the electric drive system can power the vehicle in up to 80 per cent of driving situations, some 27 per cent higher than comparable hybrid drivetrains.

The Emgrand i-HEV hybrid will go on sale in China later this month, joining the 1.5-litre turbo patrol already on sale. In April this year, Geely displayed an earlier version of the plug-in hybrid Emgrand at the Melbourne Motor Show to gauge public reaction, but the model is yet to be confirmed for Australia.

The Federal Government’s Luxury Car Tax (LCT) is set to undergo the biggest restructure since its 1999 introduction next year, in line with changes proposed under a new Australia-European Union Free Trade Agreement.

Rather than an across-the-board change, European-sourced vehicles would no longer be subject to import duties, and the LCT threshold for zero-emissions vehicles from the region would be subject to a much higher $120,000 threshold.

The proposal could see dozens of prestige European-built electric vehicles drop in price, and could result in automakers shifting their pricing strategies to best fit with the LCT changes.

Right now, the changes are tabled as a proposal, and yet to be officially adopted, however Federal Government documents point to an expected July 1st, 2027, introduction for the new regime.

1

Current LCT thresholds are set to increase from July this year, in line with annual indexing linked to the Consumer Price Index as an indicator of inflation. LCT is calculated across two categories, with fuel-efficient vehicles (those that use under 3.5L/100km of fuel) and non-fuel-efficient vehicles calculated at a different rate.

LCT is charged at 33 per cent on the value above the respective threshold. In the current 2025-2026 financial year, non-fuel-efficient vehicles are taxed on their value above $80,567. For fuel-efficient vehicles, the threshold kicks in above $91,387.

From July 1, 2026, those thresholds will rise by $242 for non-efficient vehicles to $80,809. Fuel-efficient vehicles have a $274 higher threshold, starting from $91,661.

The revised thresholds increase by only $82.20 and $72.60 respectively, making them the smallest annual adjustments to the fuel-efficient and standard caps since 2016 and 2008.

As part of the newly proposed European Free Trade Agreement, the higher threshold from 2027 would not be applied to luxury vehicles universally, and creates a third category for LCT calculations.

The change means that zero-emission vehicles from Europe will have a rate separate from low-emission vehicles (those which use up to 3.5L/100km), essentially separating EVs and PHEVs into different categories. Vehicles sourced from regions like China, Japan, the USA, or other areas outside of the European Union will be subject to next year’s regular LCT adjustments, with no distinction between zero- and low-emission vehicles for taxation purposes.

Automakers are yet to reveal how they plan to integrate the LCT change into their pricing structures of applicable vehicles, with the final pricing adjustments and potential savings calculations to be calculated based on next year’s regular LCT indexing.

For a small subset of buyers, however, the change will be significant enough that sales are likely to be impacted on applicable models in the lead-up to the changeover.