Wheels car of the year

[69.NIX]

My one point in all of this:

Toyota Aurion: Standard aircon across the range

VE Commodore: 2k extra on base model (Osmega)

*need i say more*

we live in Australia, Aircon in cars built here SHOULD be a standand. If fact, I think you find it hard to spot any current model Toyota that DOESN'T have aircon as standard equipment. Even a bsae model Yaris has it!

case closed

"Hi I'm Heywood Jakillme! I'm a Wheels magazine reviewer and well, I didn't like the Sportivo Corolla. Why? Well, I just can't drive it properly because I'm an inept retarded monkey with the motor skills of a potato. I'm sure you understand!'

Thanks BB ^^

[DANZZT231]

Celica don't have standard air-con, which is shocking because its a $40,000 car.

But that was the past.

[omn1potent]

[Post Removed]

I have had enough arguring with mindless morons that don't have a clue about cars, and only know of badges and bling.

Edited February 5, 2007 by omn1potent

[aussie_camry]

My personal opinion, if I want to purchase a large car with power, it would be the Commodore SS, If I would want a 6cyl, it would be a Ford Falcon (Taxi's can't be wrong racking up thousands of klms), be it I would buy a dedicated LPG version. If I wanted a cheap car, I would go for the Mitsubishi, and refinement, I would go for the Aurion.

Well Id go the Aurion. With your choices, I agree the SS is nice.... but 20L per 100km, that is going to cost you a FORTUNE to run. The falcon, just because taxi's use them doesnt mean anything, Camrys of the past have a proven track record for lasting in excess of 300,000kms when properly maintained, but werent used for taxi's. While the similar year Falcons etc didnt last that long - they use the Falcon then sell them before any major problems show up, consumers dont have this luxury for the most part. The Aurion has refinement, more power then you practically need, the best fuel consumption in its class (I dont want LPG = Slower car) and if previous Toyotas are anything to go by, will be a dependable car. Just my opinion.

EDIT: And as for the fuel consumption figures, Ive read other reviews which say the Aurion does get under 10L... its not suprising Wheels would discredit the Aurion, its more then obvious the affliliation they have with Holden.

Edited February 4, 2007 by aussie_camry

[Dead]

My personal opinion, if I want to purchase a large car with power, it would be the Commodore SS, If I would want a 6cyl, it would be a Ford Falcon (Taxi's can't be wrong racking up thousands of klms), be it I would buy a dedicated LPG version. If I wanted a cheap car, I would go for the Mitsubishi, and refinement, I would go for the Aurion.

Well Id go the Aurion. With your choices, I agree the SS is nice.... but 20L per 100km, that is going to cost you a FORTUNE to run. The falcon, just because taxi's use them doesnt mean anything, Camrys of the past have a proven track record for lasting in excess of 300,000kms when properly maintained, but werent used for taxi's. While the similar year Falcons etc didnt last that long - they use the Falcon then sell them before any major problems show up, consumers dont have this luxury for the most part. The Aurion has refinement, more power then you practically need, the best fuel consumption in its class (I dont want LPG = Slower car) and if previous Toyotas are anything to go by, will be a dependable car. Just my opinion.

EDIT: And as for the fuel consumption figures, Ive read other reviews which say the Aurion does get under 10L... its not suprising Wheels would discredit the Aurion, its more then obvious the affliliation they have with Holden.

The 250 based block has always been a winner when it comes to durability in Falcons. They are exceptional when it comes to durability (rest of the car aside lol). It is also important to note that the cold is the main killer of motors. Taxis are running nearly constantly all day etc etc, 800,000km's later they are still fine (these are falcons based in the Canberra Cab Company, my mate is a bus. analyst for them). I try and not turn off my car unless I absolutley have to most of the time.

It is definently no suprise with Wheels and their opinion of the Aurion. Toyota didn't empty copious amounts of funding into their little piggy pank.

[omn1potent]

[Post Removed]

I have had enough arguring with mindless morons that don't have a clue about cars, and only know of badges and bling.

Edited February 5, 2007 by omn1potent

[CAP]

My opinion is, these people drive all manner of cars for a living. Not just drive, but test the limits of the cars. All day, every day.

So I think they may know a thing or two about the things and may know what's good and what's bad.

So I would trust their opinions over anyone elses.

Some of you are just sore that the 'bogans' car won. But read the article and you will see why the Commodore range won over the Aurion range.

[aussie_camry]

20L per 100klm on the SS? Not that much dude. People in Melbourne have seen the VY II SS that I just sold. 6sp Manual, CSV enhanced and I got 9L/100klm on freeway and 12L/100klm on city. Thrashing it, at most 15L/100klm, pumping 306kw at the wheels.

Well Im gonna go off a trusted review on this one, rather then what you say which seems very unlikely "The auto SS will use 10-12 litres/100 km on the highway. Around town, expect 17-18 litres/100 km if you´re careful; mid twenties of you´re not" - http://www.mynrma.com.au/cps/rde/xchg/SID-...ommodore_SS.htm. FYI I cant see a manual doing alot less, certainly NOT only 12L in the city... that is what alot of V6's get mate!

Some of you are just sore that the 'bogans' car won. But read the article and you will see why the Commodore range won over the Aurion range.

You are wrong on about twenty counts. For starters, the VE Commodore SS won... it wasnt the VE range, as Holden is now marketing, if they had entered say the SV6, it wouldnt have even made the cut off let alone top 3. Secondly, I have said the SS is a good car, but in most categories the Aurion is equal with it, I can see only one major area where they differ (and it isnt power.... the SS is like 1sec quicker to 100km/h - remember its got 70kw more, but also 300kg extra to pull around), fuel consumption. And in todays climate, I find it very hard to believe that a gass guzzler which consumes fuel no better then cars 10 years ago can be our car of the year

One word, two syllables, eight letters long, starts with B.......

Explain how? Taxi companies have been using Holdens and Fords for as long as I can remember.... are you telling me they have all been reliable models? Last time I checked, they aernt exactly known for reliability, Toyotas are though. The point? You can hardly say because Taxi's use them they are reliable! I would say that other factors such as larger occupant space, larger dissplacement engines (more pulling power under load) and image (Australian cars) have a larger impact then the reliablity of Fords and Holdens, or lack there of it.

and less torque.

Lol true... but I have a V6 Camry with 260Nm of torque... under normal driving conditions it has plenty of pulling power... and the Aurion has alot more. The only time it becomes unstuck is under heavy load, and I dont mean it struggles, but the engine does work alot harder then my friends Commodore when packed with people. So if your looking for a car based on when you drive a full load of people once a year or tow a 2000kg boat.... yes the Aurion isnt really an option lol.

Edited February 5, 2007 by aussie_camry

[CAP]

Some of you are just sore that the 'bogans' car won. But read the article and you will see why the Commodore range won over the Aurion range.

You are wrong on about twenty counts. For starters, the VE Commodore SS won... it wasnt the VE range, as Holden is now marketing, if they had entered say the SV6, it wouldnt have even made the cut off let alone top 3. Secondly, I have said the SS is a good car, but in most categories the Aurion is equal with it, I can see only one major area where they differ (and it isnt power.... the SS is like 1sec quicker to 100km/h - remember its got 70kw more, but also 300kg extra to pull around), fuel consumption. And in todays climate, I find it very hard to believe that a gass guzzler which consumes fuel no better then cars 10 years ago can be our car of the year

No You're wrong. Read the article

The Wheels Car of the Year award tests an Entire Range of a model!!! So the award went to the VE Commodore SWB range covering all variants - Omega, Berlina, SV6, SS, SSV, Calais, CalaisV & HSV's.

So it wasn't the SS that won, It was the VE Commodore range.

[aussie_camry]

^

It was my understanding from watching a current affair... that Holden entered the SS. Im sure people that watched it could back this up... they even mentioned in their story how fuel consumption is an issue to be considered. My MISTAKE!

With this in mind, then lol the COTY awards are truly rorted... every review I have read doesnt cast a great light onto the VE (no a/c standard, rough drivetrain, the omega has a 4 speed trans LMAO my 93 Camry has that), they do for the Aurion though. A good short article on it as well - http://www.caradvice.com.au/1410/wheels-na...ar-of-the-year/

EDIT: Interesting little fact, since COTY awards started, The Holden Commodore has won the most times, being 5. Prity much every design has won - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wheels_Car_of_the_Year. Hard to believe...esp the VR, Ive driven that and my 93 V6 Camry, that car is a total POS in every aspect (like power....1L more then the camry, yet 10kw less power.... its like History repeated, better Aurion beaten by crapper Commodore). That has sealed it for me, obviously something isnt on the level between Wheels and Holden

Edited February 5, 2007 by aussie_camry

[CAP]

With this in mind, then lol the COTY awards are truly rorted... every review I have read doesnt cast a great light onto the VE (no a/c standard, rough drivetrain, the omega has a 4 speed trans LMAO my 93 Camry has that), they do for the Aurion though. A good short article on it as well - http://www.caradvice.com.au/1410/wheels-na...ar-of-the-year/

But in the article, they do state these things such as crappy engine noise from v6, no aircon in base omega, etc etc. It's not all praise, But the car did score highly on the basis that it does very well in areas such as design, safety, ride/handling, performance, fulfillment of intended function/design and Value. All the judges (Both Male and Female) all get to vote on the set criteria for each car.

The car that scores the most wins.

[aussie_camry]

^

Fair enough... but I still disagree with it, forget the name of the other award, but the Aurion was voted best large car, the VE Commodore was 3rd, its a somewhat amazing turn around from being last in a small category to the best out of every car (Albeit with more VE variants included in test) - http://www.theage.com.au/news/National/Toy...5080998654.html

Does it also not seem the slightest bit coincidental that the Commodore has been winning these awards for quite some time now? Their newest car is by far the best (Although I still think the competition is better), how the hell did the other models win previously!?!? Like the VR for example, that is one big POS from my experiences driving it! Im sure many of the other models could fall into the same category.

Edited February 5, 2007 by aussie_camry

[CAP]

Just remember all awards have different testing, criteria and different categories. So they're not all equal.

Also remember that in terms of new advances in Australian built cars - The humble Commodore had lead the way with every All new model they introduced.

In the case of the VR, it was the first Aussie built car to feature front airbags, pretentioning belts etc, so it was a big advance in safety.

Likewise the VE brings advances for Aust built family cars.

[KaZe-]

My two cents on this...

BEAST!!! (HSV Commodore)

VS

CAR!!! (Aurion Sportivo)

imagine the aurion with normal headlights cuz those headlights obviously doesnt come lyk that but if they didi that would be sweet

U DECIDE!!!

Ok.... this really is one of the dumbest comparisons I have ever seen. A $70,000 6L V8 compared against a $40,000 3.5L V6 (Not to mention you use the crappiest pic of the Sportivo possible). Geez Id want the HSV to be better in just about every aspect. Get the pics of the HSV and compare that to the Aurion sports concept (prity much TRD Aurion which is its competitor)... and then see which one wins

why the **** is this dumb???

ppl say the aurion is better the the ve and im saying the ve is better i didint say how much it cost or wateva but im saying the ve will **** on the aurion and also the aurion pics on google arent that much cuz its not popular and the ve came up 10 times as much better pics and u wanna compare the HSV to a car thats not even released or even going to be released TRD AURION SPORTS *CONCEPT*

even when the trd aurion comes out id still say that the ve would munch it ive already seen pics of the trd aurion but i doubt that it will come out here looking like that. . . lyk 19 inch gunmetal rims dual square xorst it looks really nice but i'd still pick the ve cuz its already OUT here and its not gonna get tweaked down lyk the trd aurion is gonna be

[aussie_camry]

Just remember all awards have different testing, criteria and different categories. So they're not all equal.

Also remember that in terms of new advances in Australian built cars - The humble Commodore had lead the way with every All new model they introduced.

In the case of the VR, it was the first Aussie built car to feature front airbags, pretentioning belts etc, so it was a big advance in safety.

Likewise the VE brings advances for Aust built family cars.

Yes but this isnt the 'Best Australian built car of the year award'... while the Commodore had these, every other manufacturer had them for years. And we talk about their advancements in safety, what about their engines? The VR and even more recent Commodores which won were still using crappy pushrod, and putting less power down the cars with alot less dissplacement. What about quality? Its a well known fact Commodore dont exactly excel in this area. I could go on... but I dont see how them being the leader in Australian built cars has anything to do with the the car of the year awards (And the Aurion is Australian built not to mention... and has more little 'gadgets' then the Commodores and a far more technologically advanced engine etc, so I should really say the previous leader in Australian built cars).

why the **** is this dumb???

ppl say the aurion is better the the ve and im saying the ve is better i didint say how much it cost or wateva but im saying the ve will **** on the aurion and also the aurion pics on google arent that much cuz its not popular and the ve came up 10 times as much better pics and u wanna compare the HSV to a car thats not even released or even going to be released TRD AURION SPORTS *CONCEPT*

Lol you put a pic up of a $70k+ car and compare it against a $40k car... and worse yet, you choose the crappiest pic eva of the Sportivo. You wanna compare looks, you get two comparable models m8, not completely different ones. As for your argument that no pics are around, then you obviously didnt try hard enough, I found some in 2mins, now here is a PROPER comparison between manufacterers:

Sportivo:

SV6

FYI the VE in base form looks like a POS. Without a spoiler, twin mufflers and sports suspension, it looks totally out of proportion. Yes all cars dont look great in this form, but the Aurion looks acceptable at least, the VE looks embaressing. Going up in the range, comparing the best Aurion (Sportivo) v equivalent VE (SV6) its each unto their own, personally I prefer the Aurion (And those pics above flatter the SS tbh while the Aurions dont - crappy lighting). As for your last sentence, at the very least you could have compared the Sportivo against an SS, but you didnt, your just trying to discredit the Aurion. And no comparing the GTS with the sports concept is not stupid, its far better then your attempt at a comparison, and its widely known it will prity much be what the TRD Aurion is gonna look like (which is coming out, it is not a rumour any longer), with only slight differences so its practical on your avg road.

even when the trd aurion comes out id still say that the ve would munch it ive already seen pics of the trd aurion but i doubt that it will come out here looking like that. . . lyk 19 inch gunmetal rims dual square xorst it looks really nice but i'd still pick the ve cuz its already OUT here and its not gonna get tweaked down lyk the trd aurion is gonna be

Each unto their own... although I dont know what your talking about the TRD version being tweaked down. Its already been stated that it will have at least 230kw.... doesnt sound like much compared to say the GTS at 307kw.... but it weighs a good 300kg less, so it will be fast. And yes it wont have 20inch rims like the ones shown, but it will look similar to that car, which is very nice.... which you would expect for $50k+.

Edited February 5, 2007 by aussie_camry

[Dead]

I think I just found something heaps better than any of the contenders previously mentioned.

Very low running costs, and some models even run off a 2 stroke Briggs and Stratton motor. As if it isn't dead sexy as well. I could picture having a bit of a pound in the back with the seats down.

[DANZZT231]

I gotta say, the Aurion does look good. The VE, looks good too, but i don't find it as interesting as the Aurion.

Actually, I think Camry Sportivo looks the biz. The Aurion should've used the Camry body instead.

[aussie_camry]

^

Yeah I agree although I like the Aurion, the Camry looks better, esp the front with its more aggressive looking headlights etc. Just a pity its gutless under the bonnet.

[KaZe-]

even with those 2 pics i still choose the ve. . . i love the toyotas i drive one but still i would pick the sv6 over the aurion and we will just have to wait for the TRD aurion to come out then we can do a real comparison

[DANZZT231]

One thing I think camry/aurion need some flair is the interior. Its very conservative. Reminded me of German car where everythign is simple and ergonomics.

When it comes to interior, I believe none can beat the Italian car makers.

[Mikey]

comparing hsv to aurion? hahaha what a joke! the thing cost almost twice as much and they aren't even in the same class.

however, i completely agree with you aussie_camry. whats so special about the ve sv6 besides its looks? ive been lucky enough to drive the aurion (from melb to adelaide) and sit inside a ve omega. you know what? i'll take the aurion over the ve sv6 anyday. but like people said, each to their own.

people shouldn't talk if they haven't had the experience for themself and just make assumptions based on the cars looks. makes them sound awfully clueless and retarded.

One thing I think camry/aurion need some flair is the interior. Its very conservative. Reminded me of German car where everythign is simple and ergonomics.

When it comes to interior, I believe none can beat the Italian car makers.

what do u expect dude. its toyota. conservative is their secret.

[MT]

what do u expect dude. its toyota. conservative is their secret.

competitive advantage

[KaZe-]

well in the end the topic is that the holden ve commodore is the wheels car of the year :)

[Dead]

well in the end the topic is that the holden ve commodore is the wheels car of the year :)

Bingo. And the Yugo is the ultimate shagpoke mobile!

[omn1potent]

[Post Removed]

I have had enough arguring with mindless morons that don't have a clue about cars, and only know of badges and bling.

Edited February 5, 2007 by omn1potent