Car industry scandal hits soccer kids | exclusive
Has Jeep just kicked an own goal? The US car giant has pulled its support from...
Who was greenest, and why?
Why did a V8-powered Ute, the dirtiest car in the rally in terms of carbon dioxide emissions, win and why did the most fuel efficient vehicle finish 10th?
The answer is in the way the rally was judged — not on best fuel consumption but best fuel improvement. The 3136km Challenge from Darwin to Adelaide was supposed to give car buyers a guide as to which new or about to be launched vehicles are the most fuel efficient. The event, the second time it has been held and run in conjunction with the world solar car challenge, was well supported this year by manufacturers and importers.
Seeking bragging rights as to who is the most clean and green were Ford with two entries, Holden and HSV, one each, Mini with three, Hyundai and Kia two each and Suzuki with a single entry. And there was a mix of power from the Suzuki Alto's three cylinder petrol hatch and the HSV Maloo Ute with its V8 to a strong fielding of diesels from the Korean all-wheel drives and from Mini. They all reportedly paid $10,000 per car to enter, most seeing it as a valuable marketing exercise to promote their green credentials.
Missing in action were a couple of notable brands. Volvo — who missed the start because its two cars were stuck on a boat from Europe — and Toyota, which decided not to enter its latest generation Prius. The event was won by the team which showed the greatest gain, measured as a percentage, over its official fuel rating. The smart money was on entries with big capacity engines which had the potential to offer the largest gain by being driven sedately.
The fuel improvement was measured against a vehicle's combined fuel rating — a mix of city and highway driving. The 3136km route however was largely done on the highway with limited urban cycles in both Darwin (25km) and Adelaide (90km).
No official referees were placed in any of the entries and teams were free to use fuel saving measures like driving with air conditioning switched off, despite 40 degree temperatures. Most did the trip at average speeds of 75km/h which is well under the normal speed for the Stuart Highway of 130km/h in the Northern Territory and 100km/h in South Australia. Cars were not permitted to fold back door mirrors and fuel tanks were sealed.
Right from Day One questions were asked as to why the 6.2-litre V8 Maloo did so well. The team said its 64 per cent improvement (averaging just 5.4l/100km against its official rating of 15.1l/100km) on the first day was probably due to an error by organisers when fuelling the ute or when recording its distance travelled.
By the halfway mark at Alice Springs, and after a fuel spill with a Ford entry, the organisers met with all team managers and agreed to modify the rules so all entries covered the same distance and that team managers were made responsible for fuelling, under supervision. A compulsory rest break was also enforced to give drivers a 15-minute stop on stages over six hours. The longest stage a was nine and a quarter hours.
Teams had to complete the day's stages within a set time and averages speeds of 75km/h to prevent them from dawdling. The rally turned out to be three battles in one. In the small car class fleet of three Mini Ds took on Ford's new Fiesta ECOnetic, with Suzuki's Alto also in the mix.
Korean sister brands Hyundai and Kia took on each other with the new Santa Fe and Sorento all-wheel drive wagons which share the same R-Series 2.2-litre diesel engine and six-speed transmissions.
In the big car field, the Maloo fought it out with Holden's Sportwagon with its new SIDI 3-litre six cylinder motor and Ford's six-cylinder XR6 turbo Falcon while Skoda added some prestige to the event with its new 2-litre diesel Superb. In the end, HSV proved its critics wrong by winning every stage and the event. The Maloo finished the rally sipping and average of just 7.74l/100km or a 48.7 per cent gain over its official fuel rating.
The Falcon XR6 was second (7.04l/100km or 39.8 per cent improvement), the Skoda third (4.59l/100km, 33.5 per cent) and the Sportwagon fourth (6.48l/100km, 30.3 per cent). Hyundai's Santa Fe finished first and fourth in its class, sandwiching the Kia Sorentos. The leading Santa Fe averaged a meagre 5.1l/10km for the journey.
Suzuki's Alto, which recorded a remarkable 2l/100km in the Adelaide urban section, won the small car class with an 18.5 per cent improvement, but Ford's Fiesta ECOnetic was the most fuel efficient car ahead of the Mini Ds. The Fiesta did the Darwin to Adelaide run using an average 3.13l/10km. All of the small car entrants returned fuel consumption figures better than 3.5l/100km.
What the Global Green Challenged proved was that you can make substantial savings to your fuel bill if you drive smoothly and sensibly. Even dropping your speed on the highway from 100 to 90km/h can make a huge difference in fuel consumption.
WAYS TO SAVE
Drive smoothly. Don't rush up to traffic lights and brake hard. And don't accelerate away under full throttle when they turn green.
Weight means everything. Get rid of all the junk in the boot and remove roof rack and tow hitch if not being used. The lighter the car the less fuel it will use.
Use air conditioning sparingly and keep windows up to reduce drag
Use your car's cruise control on long flat sections of highway. Turn it off when the road starts getting hilly. When reaching the top of a hill back off the accelerator and trying coasting downhill, if you can do so safely, but never switch your ignition off because it can lock the steering.
Get into high gear as soon as possible but don't let the engine labour. All engines have a sweet spot where they perform best. It's a balance of torque against power.
Keep your car in tune
Reduce highway speeds even by 10km/h. It will save you money
Keep tyre pressures at the manufacturers maximum unladen recommended pressure to reduce rolling resistance.
THE WINNERS
On fuel efficiency improvement: 1 HSV Maloo 48.7 per cent improvement, 7.74l/100km average, official fuel rating 15.1l/100km; 2 Ford XR6 turbo Falcon 39.8%, 7.04l/100km, 11.7l/10km; 3 Skoda Superb 33.5%, 4.59l/100km, 6.9l/100km
On actual fuel consumption: 1 Ford Fiesta ECOnetic 3.13l/100km, 2 Mini D 3.42l/100km, 3 Mini D 3.49l/100km.
On CO2 emissions: 1 Ford Fiesta ECOnetic 84.4g/km, 2 Suzuki Alto 89.9g/km, 3 Mini D 92.3g/km.
THE LOSERS
Co2 emissions: HSV Maloo 177.9g/km, Ford Falcon XR6 turbo 161.9g/km, Holden Sportwagon 149.0g/km
Comments