drive.com.au COTY

[Wretched]

In 2013 the Australian automotive landscape was dominated by the sad confirmation of the closure of the local manufacturing industry.

But, as the old saying goes, after the rain has passed the sun will shine again and in 2014 Australian new car buyers have been spoiled for choice.

There has been a glut of high quality new models on the market this year and our annual Drive Car of the Year awards is proof of that.

Amongst our 13 categories only four carryover champions retained their crowns as a new breed of machines impressed the judges.

But two in particular stood out, and for almost opposite reasons.

The Mercedes-Benz C200 was unquestionably a favourite going into the testing process thanks to its blend of cutting edge style, technology, handling, safety, efficiency and value. In fact, there weren't too many weak points in the C200's arsenal.

Despite competing in one of the most competitive segments in the marketplace – against the likes of the BMW 3-Series, Audi A4 and Lexus IS – the new C200 raises the bar in every respect.

Starting at $60,900 (plus on-road costs) the C200 is loaded with all the usual gear (reversing camera, dual-zone climate control, keyless ignition, Bluetooth, digital radio, artificial leather trim and 18-inch alloy wheels) you expect in a luxury car.

But Mercedes didn't stop there, adding nine airbags, blindspot warning, automated parking and autonomous emergency braking as standard equipment to set new benchmarks in both the safety and value.

Under the bonnet is a 2.0-litre four-cylinder turbo petrol engine that produces 135kW of power and 300Nm of torque, channelled to the rear wheels via a seven-speed automatic transmission.

The combination is capable of propelling the C200 from 0-100km/h in 7.3 seconds but also capable of using just 6.0-litres per 100km of premium unleaded.

So well equipped and capable is the C200 one judge questioned why you'd bother spending any more money on the C250.

But the C200 didn't win unanimously. It faced stiff competition from an unlikely rival – the Tesla Model S P85+.

The American sedan made history by becoming the first fully electric car to be a Drive Car of the Year finalist and then promptly took a unanimous victory in the Luxury Car Over $80,000 category.

The Model S impressed the judges on many fronts. The 285kW/600Nm electric motor is enough to launch the five-seater from 0-100km/h in 4.4seconds (the second fastest time of any of the 42 finalists). The batteries are capable of a theoretical range of 502km, and a realistic range of more than 400km. The steering is well sorted, the brakes bite hard and the ride is comfortable and controlled. The interior blends luxury and technology unlike any other car on the market.

But what really impressed the judges was the way all these strengths came together to form one harmonious car.

Here is an electric car that doesn't work well for 'an electric car' but rather works well for any car, internal combustion, electricity or otherwise.

"This makes every other EV look at least a generation behind," was how one judge summed it up.

There was intense debate amongst the judges about these final two, because the Tesla is a revolutionary step forward not just in its class but for the whole industry.

But while all the judges agreed it is a brilliant car and would have made a worthy overall champion there are some major question marks hanging over its near-term future.

The biggest of course being recharging infrastructure. Because while you can jump in the C200 anytime and drive from Sydney to Melbourne in a day, the same cannot be said for the Model S.

As impressive as its range is, and practical enough for most peoples' daily needs, ultimately the majority of judges felt that the lack of automotive freedom could hold the car back in some circumstances.

Tesla, however, has announced plans to try and solve this problem by rolling out a network of public 'superchargers' – fast recharge stations – at various locations along the Australian eastern seaboard. When finished it will allow Tesla owners to recharge for free and make long distance travel a viable option. But those plans will take at least two years from fruition and will still exclude large parts of the country so can't be factored into the judging process.

Ultimately the majority of judges felt that while the C200 isn't a revolution like the Tesla, it represents a significant leap forward for its category. It is a car that is not only brilliant to drive and own but will also force its competitors to improve their rival offerings.

But the Mercedes and Tesla weren't the only finalists - with so many new winners there were plenty of strong contenders to choose from.

The judges voted on all nine new winners and narrowed the list to the final four with the Mazda2 Maxx and Mazda3 Maxx capping the Japanese brand's strong year (five category wins).

The Volkswagen Golf R also earned two votes to be a final contender but that wasn't enough to better the Mazda pair.

While neither Mazda won the overall award both were strong contenders. The Mazda2 impressed with its strong driving dynamics, value and styling while the Mazda3 won the judges over with its strong on-road manners, efficient engine and well presented interior.

Ultimately though the judges felt neither car represented the same leap forward that the Mercedes and Tesla did, relegating them to third and fourth positions.

So after the dark days of the past year, Drive Car of the Year 2014 proves that the best could be ahead for the Australian car market.

Finalists

Mercedes-Benz C200 -

Tesla Model S P85+

Mazda2 Maxx

Mazda3 Maxx

The Testing Process

Drive's Car of the Year is one of the most comprehensive motoring awards in the country. So, deciding our 13 category winners and overall Car of the Year champion is not an overnight task.

Firstly, wrangling our 13 carryover champions begins in August with the 29 finalists chosen by the beginning of November. To be eligible, the finalists must be available to consumers in Australian showrooms before December 1, 2014.

The cars are then shipped to Goulburn's Wakefield Park for an entire week, where our six expert judges assess all 42 cars in real-world circumstances, and over a variety of conditions - from highways to suburban back roads.

The judges also put each vehicle through a series of controlled tests on the circuit - a simulated emergency avoidance, high-speed braking and dynamic slalom - to ascertain their dynamic prowess in certain situations.

Each car is assessed under a strict critera that is based around five pillars; performance, how it drives, value/quality, comfort/practicality and safety.

At the end of four days of testing, the judges are then required to vote in a silent ballot their order for each category with the vehicle scoring the lowest number taking victory in the category.

For the outright Drive Car of the Year, the judges pick their four finalists from the new category champions and then, through another silent ballot, the winner is crowned.

Drive Car of the Year honour roll

2006 Audi TT

2007 BMW M3

2008 Honda Accord V6

2009 Volkswagen Golf 118TSI

2010 Volkswagen Polo 77TSI

2011 Mercedes-Benz C250 CDI

2012 Toyota86 GT

2013 Mazda6 Sport

2014 Mercedes-Benz C200

Drive Car of the Year: By the Numbers

Cheapest finalist: MItsubishi MIrage ES - $13,985

Most expensive finalist: Mercedes-Benz S400L - $246,655

Most fuel efficient finalist: Tesla Model S - zero emissions

Least fuel efficient finalist: HSV GTS Maloo: 15.7L/100km

Slowest to 100km/h: Mitsubishi MIrage ES - 14.5 seconds

Fastest to 100km/h: HSV GTS Maloo - 4.3 seconds

Cheapest car to service: Hyundai Genesis - $0 over five years

Highest retained value: Porsche Macan S Diesel and Toyota 86 GT - 63%

Country of origin most represented: Germany - 15

Country of original least represented: Australia, France, Britain - 1

Video footage recorded: 24 hours 34 minutes

Hours of testing: 474

Judges: 6

Crew: 8

http://www.drive.com.au/car-of-the-y...09-122w62.html

[2011G6E]

Just goes to show that these days there's no such thing really as "a bad car"...just varying degrees of how good you want to have it. Even lower models from big makers can mix it with the "traditional" quality makers from Europe these days.

Good times indeed...

[Wretched]

I am very impressed by the Model S. It would have been my pick.
Seen a few here in Melbourne but a lot in the USA.
We just need to get the infrastructure available.

[1TUFFUTE]

Originally Posted by tempted

Gosh, that is absolutely excruciating.


With all the hype over the new C class going around at the moment, I just cannot bring myself to like it. After seeing a number of them in the flesh now imo they have gone backwards in styling. It looks extremely awkward from certain angles and gives the impression of being shaped like a banana.
Ill take the outgoing model thanks. This one has definitely been hit with the ugly stick.

My thoughts on styling exactly........and that Mitsubishi .......surely a car that slow fills a "dangerous" profile somehow. it's not the 90s.....

[EB#]

Post deleted. Wrong thread.

[flooded one]

Originally Posted by tempted

Finally something we can agree on.

The Mirage imo is dangerous by 1990's standards and bordering on illegal by todays standards. If it is that slow in a test with only a driver on a flat road, imagine what it would be like loaded up with passengers with the a/c on and attempting to merge onto a freeway on an uphill onramp? A recipe for disaster really.

I'd be more worry about overtaking with it on a single lane highway!!! I'm sure the older Mirages weren't that slow?? (not that they where really quick)

[FordACE]

Originally Posted by wildrider

I'd be more worry about overtaking with it on a single lane highway!!! I'm sure the older Mirages weren't that slow?? (not that they where really quick)

Our other car is a 1997 Mitsubishi Mirage and it was just a bit slower to 100km/hr as my ED falcon. After that it got hosed of course.

[Yellow_Festiva]

I have both Mirages.

The new one is just fine for a cheap runabout. When it's on the move on the freeway it has no issue overtaking at speed, the CVT does a superb job at moving the car along with the rest of the traffic.

It would be our car of choice if we went on any long distance drive and no the climate control air con does not kill performance like you would expect.

Being light and nimble they are actually fun to drive.

They are a light, economy car. If you want more performance there are other cars to choose from.

[Falcon Coupe]

Originally Posted by tempted

Finally something we can agree on.

The Mirage imo is dangerous by 1990's standards and bordering on illegal by todays standards. If it is that slow in a test with only a driver on a flat road, imagine what it would be like loaded up with passengers with the a/c on and attempting to merge onto a freeway on an uphill onramp? A recipe for disaster really.

I'd say no slower than the 90% of new cars that merge from a downhill ramp at 70 to 80 anyway..unless there is a Mirage up front of the line every time and I didn't notice

[2011G6E]

Originally Posted by Falcon Coupe

I'd say no slower than the 90% of new cars that merge from a downhill ramp at 70 to 80 anyway..unless there is a Mirage up front of the line every time and I didn't notice

Yes, I had a few interesting "moments" when riding my bike down to Brisbane where people were merging...can't just say "It's little slow hatchbacks"...it was all sorts of cars, big and small. Hell, we're from the bush and even I know you have to give it the berries and match speeds with traffic before merging.

0-100 is, in my opinion, a useless concept to include these days in cars tests, only really valid as an academic figure of little interest. This is because people in normal everyday driving don't bury the foot in the floor from a standing start all the time and go from a standstill at full throttle to 100kph.
Some magazines used to include the "80 to 100/110 figures", which was much more pertinent for overtaking/merging on a freeway. The real world isn't a dragstrip...

[LoudPipes]

Additionally most of us in the city are usually not overtaking, just hoping to be first in line at the next set of traffic lights.

[mik]

i would love to see them do a criteria for general maintenance parts, also costs for doing stuff that most definitely will need to be done in the cars life time like timing belt service, idler pulleys, tensioners ,etc,

also a common one that people send their car in for , the good old clutch repair, and these days on the foreign cars , the dual mass flywheels........some people put their nice little economy car in for a clutch and after the job and paying the bill come out crying .
We can add to that the extra diesel costs, any extra filters, particulate filters, etc ,etc.
electric cars too no doubt will have parts that need to be replaced, despite the electric dealers touting how wonderful they are, they will eventually need batteries, heavy duty relays i spose ? they still have suspension , drive shafts , wheel bearings , fans to cool electricals and batteries.
if you have a stone chucked up and break a head light or the missus backs the limo into the wall and breaks a tail light ?

People buy these different cars more often than not with out a clue what the true cost will be owning that car over the life time, once upon a time they used to mention a bit of this in wheels magazine i think ?

surely if we buy a car of the year that is touted good value car of the year and then 2 years down the track have to spend 6k on a clutch and $1800 for a headlight that broke from a stone chucked up on the highway, then that sort of diminishes the good value part ?.

[Citric GT]

Originally Posted by mik

i would love to see them do a criteria for general maintenance parts, also costs for doing stuff that most definitely will need to be done in the cars life time like timing belt service, idler pulleys, tensioners ,etc,

also a common one that people send their car in for , the good old clutch repair, and these days on the foreign cars , the dual mass flywheels........some people put their nice little economy car in for a clutch and after the job and paying the bill come out crying .
We can add to that the extra diesel costs, any extra filters, particulate filters, etc ,etc.
electric cars too no doubt will have parts that need to be replaced, despite the electric dealers touting how wonderful they are, they will eventually need batteries, heavy duty relays i spose ? they still have suspension , drive shafts , wheel bearings , fans to cool electricals and batteries.
if you have a stone chucked up and break a head light or the missus backs the limo into the wall and breaks a tail light ?

People buy these different cars more often than not with out a clue what the true cost will be owning that car over the life time, once upon a time they used to mention a bit of this in wheels magazine i think ?

surely if we buy a car of the year that is touted good value car of the year and then 2 years down the track have to spend 6k on a clutch and $1800 for a headlight that broke from a stone chucked up on the highway, then that sort of diminishes the good value part ?.

Spot on.

This is where the Holdens & Falcons of old came into their own. Then again, we are a throw away society now...

[GasoLane]

Originally Posted by tempted

Finally something we can agree on.

The Mirage imo is dangerous by 1990's standards and bordering on illegal by todays standards. If it is that slow in a test with only a driver on a flat road, imagine what it would be like loaded up with passengers with the a/c on and attempting to merge onto a freeway on an uphill onramp? A recipe for disaster really.

Strangely enough not everyone is into traffic light drags.
Of course if it's considered illegal then so is every Truck, Bus and old VW.

I didn't notice a merging time in the article, but it wouldn't matter if they do it correctly, there should only be something like a 10-20kmh difference.

[Windsor220]

The Mirage sounds slow but in the real world its not that bad. People aren't taking off at full acceleration all the time. 15 year old automatic Falcons could only manage just under 10s at best.

[flooded one]

Originally Posted by tempted

Finally something we can agree on.

The Mirage imo is dangerous by 1990's standards and bordering on illegal by todays standards. If it is that slow in a test with only a driver on a flat road, imagine what it would be like loaded up with passengers with the a/c on and attempting to merge onto a freeway on an uphill onramp? A recipe for disaster really.

only to wusses like you who cant judge speed

[M&Ms]

"Tesla Model S - zero emissions"

Ummm, people need to realise where the electricity comes from to recharge these electric cars. Coal fired power stations do not produce zero emissions.....

[Yellow_Festiva]

Originally Posted by M&Ms

"Tesla Model S - zero emissions"

Ummm, people need to realise where the electricity comes from to recharge these electric cars. Coal fired power stations do not produce zero emissions.....

In the 'States, or the UK they actually give EV's a consumption figure similar to a petrol L/100 km that is based on the electricity used.

[NX74205]

Originally Posted by Windsor220

The Mirage sounds slow but in the real world its not that bad. People aren't taking off at full acceleration all the time. 15 year old automatic Falcons could only manage just under 10s at best.

Precisely. I don't know who drives at full throttle all of the time. When I'm not pushing my 0-100 time is probably closer to 12 seconds. That's enough to merge onto the freeway at 100kph.

You probably would need to drive the Mirage closer to full throttle to merge onto the freeway at somewhere close to 100kph, though. Then again, however, Perth freeways do have ridiculously long on and off-ramps, so there's really no excuse for not getting up to speed when merging.

[2011G6E]

I seem to remember car reviews that included a "basket of common parts" included...was it the RACQ magazine or one of the bigger car mags like Motor or something? They used to have a list of parts commonly needed such as filters, mufflers, indicators/taillights, etc...stuff you could be expected to need over a few years of average ownership.
Made for some interesting reading and comparison of what a particular car might be like to actually own when looked at directly against a similar one from a different maker.

It would be more relevant nowadays too where the staggeringly big majority of car buyers are "badge blind"...no longer do they feel they "must" buy a Holden or a Falcon or whatever simply because daddy had one and his daddy had one...something that Australian makers have, sadly, not realized, just trusting people to keep on buying simply because of the badge on the back, rather than the car itself.
They're better informed too because of the internet. Now most people, when looking at a new or second hand car, will jump straight on Google and put in something like "(Insert brand and model name) long term test" or "test drive" and whatever they're looking at, and get dozens of reports on what cars are like before going near a dealership.

And a better informed buying public who demands more from the makers only improves the breed. Car makers cannot afford to get lazy and rely on repeat customers who will just keep buying whatever they wheel out. That is good for all of us.

[Polyal]

So are we putting bets on the Mustang winning 2015's?

[Wretched]

Originally Posted by M&Ms

"Tesla Model S - zero emissions"

Ummm, people need to realise where the electricity comes from to recharge these electric cars. Coal fired power stations do not produce zero emissions.....

But the car itself doesn't emit any emissions hence the sentence.

[Whitey-AMG]

Originally Posted by M&Ms

"Tesla Model S - zero emissions"

Ummm, people need to realise where the electricity comes from to recharge these electric cars. Coal fired power stations do not produce zero emissions.....

True, but with the increasing use of domestic solar panel tech, the impacts are getting less and less. What we need is next gen tech with capacitors to store the energy that can then be used anytime day or night to recharge your car. Only emissions would then be from the manufacturing process.

[sexyxe]

Originally Posted by M&Ms

"Tesla Model S - zero emissions"

Ummm, people need to realise where the electricity comes from to recharge these electric cars. Coal fired power stations do not produce zero emissions.....

The car produces zero emissions. If you wanted to compare apples to apples you could include the emissions of running a petrol station and the emissions for trucking fuel around etc.

[Maka]

Originally Posted by Windsor220

The Mirage sounds slow but in the real world its not that bad. People aren't taking off at full acceleration all the time. 15 year old automatic Falcons could only manage just under 10s at best.

Yeah, ok!

On topic, i like that C 200 Merc, pretty good buying!

cheers, Maka

[2011G6E]

Originally Posted by Bluey-GT

True, but with the increasing use of domestic solar panel tech, the impacts are getting less and less. What we need is next gen tech with capacitors to store the energy that can then be used anytime day or night to recharge your car. Only emissions would then be from the manufacturing process.

Given the massive power requirement of a Tesla to be recharged which was talked about recently, there's no damn way in the world you could ever have enough cells or storage at home to keep it charged up. Plus solar doesn't address the awkward problem of "base load power"...when everyone comes home and turns on all their appliances all at once. Plenty of formerly advanced places around the world who have gone to "clean green" energy like wind and solar are now facing brown-outs and power supply fluctuations because of this.


Mustang for COTY...? Don't really think so...it's not revolutionary enough a new model. Doesn't the car have to be completely new and a big change over the previous one? Just because a car is "interesting" doesn't mean it's automatically the "best"...

[Windsor220]

Originally Posted by Maka

Yeah, ok!

Ford Falcon AU (1998-)
Acceleration
0-60 km/h 4.5 seconds
0-80 6.5
0-100 9.3
0-400 m. 16.7
Flexibility
60-100 km/h 5.9
80-120 7.1
Fuel Consumption
Overall 11.5 L/100 km
Variation N/A
Fuel Tank Capacity 68 L
Braking
Stopping distance from 100 km/h 46.3 m

[Whitey-AMG]

Originally Posted by 2011G6E

Given the massive power requirement of a Tesla to be recharged which was talked about recently, there's no damn way in the world you could ever have enough cells or storage at home to keep it charged up. Plus solar doesn't address the awkward problem of "base load power"...when everyone comes home and turns on all their appliances all at once. Plenty of formerly advanced places around the world who have gone to "clean green" energy like wind and solar are now facing brown-outs and power supply fluctuations because of this.

..

Best you read this then. The tech is available and in time will get exponentially better. As it does in a commercial sense, it will invariably "trickle" down to domestic applications, particularly if it has political backing....
http://www.teslamotors.com/supercharger

So whilst its not available right now in homes, doesn't mean its not possible and won't be the "norm" in 5 years time. There is a considerable environmental and political push for these sorts of solutions. It will be here sooner rather than later.

[Maka]

Originally Posted by Windsor220

Ford Falcon AU (1998-)
Acceleration
0-60 km/h 4.5 seconds
0-80 6.5
0-100 9.3
0-400 m. 16.7
Flexibility
60-100 km/h 5.9
80-120 7.1
Fuel Consumption
Overall 11.5 L/100 km
Variation N/A
Fuel Tank Capacity 68 L
Braking
Stopping distance from 100 km/h 46.3 m

9.3 is just under tens, ok! Those figures are from where, racv or nrma. Probably they're el times that havent been updated?

Wheels test two up afaik & were way under that -

http://www.fordforums.com.au/photos/...hp?photo=60729

check the fifth page please.

Oh yeah, the Tesla is certainly very nice - what i'd love to know if there's any servicing to be done by the home mechanic?

cheers, Maka