Articles by Stephen Ottley

Electric cars are finally having their moment. As petrol and diesel prices soar, it appears everyone on the fence about buying an electric vehicle (EV) have taken the plunge.Having steadily hovered around the 10 per cent total market share for the past 18 months, EVs accounted for more than 16 per cent in April. That means approximately one-in-six cars sold last month were battery-powered.But perhaps even more interesting than just the total number of EVs sold, was who was selling them. The days of Tesla dominating the electric market appear to be over, with several new names emerging as popular options for Australians.Here are five of the most in-demand EVs in 2026.BYD Sealion 7For all the hype around BYD’s Shark 6 ute and cut-price Atto 1, the real star for the brand is its mid-size SUV. The Sealion 7 isn’t just a popular EV, it’s also one of the most popular SUVs on the market and was the seventh best-selling vehicle in April.Sales are up 342.2% year-to-date, but it isn’t just a sudden surge in the wake of the fuel crisis. The Sealion 7 has been a popular choice almost since it arrived. It was the eighth most popular SUV in its segment in 2025, behind some of the biggest names in the market - Toyota RAV4, Mitsubishi Outlander, Kia Sportage and Subaru Forester.So regardless of what happens with fuel prices in the coming months, the Sealion 7 looks set to remain a popular choice for anyone looking for a mid-size SUV, electric or otherwise.Geely EX5 If there is a biggest winner of the current surge in EV sales it is the Geely’s EX5. Sales are up 415.4% year-to-date, peaking with 1202 in April alone. That’s up from an average of just 328 sales per month in 2025 and its jump demonstrates that it is genuine demand in EVs, not simply availability, that is driving this current boom. The EX5 was already one of the most affordable EVs on the market, starting at just $41,990, so if it was simply price and choice creating this sales increase in electric options there’s no reason it wouldn’t have started last year.Instead, Geely is taking advantage of its appealing price and benefiting as Australian buyers look for a way to beat the pain at the pump.Zeekr 7X While it doesn’t have the sheer volume of others on this list, selling only 2698 examples so far in 2026, the 7X is proving to be consistently popular while growing in sales.It’s not surprising that it isn’t selling in bigger volumes like the BYD and Geely, as it is positioned as a more premium offering with a starting price of $57,900  that stretches to $72,900 for the flagship Performance AWD model.But averaging nearly 675 sales per month to start 2026, with a spike of 973 sales in April, it’s clear that the 7X is an EV with a growing following.Kia EV3 You may have noticed a theme with the previously mentioned models, as the newer Chinese brands have claimed the role of EV leaders. But one of the established brands holding its own is Kia.Not all of its EVs are proving a sales hit, with the larger EV6 and EV9 still returning relatively modest sales numbers, but the smaller EV3 is doing well. Sales are up 150.2 per cent year-to-date, helping it become the most popular small electric SUV in its price range.The EV3 has garnered critical acclaim and has been slowly building a customer base, likely appealing to those looking to make the electric switch with a brand they know and trust.Sales of the larger EV5 are also up in 2026, but nowhere near to the same level, increasing only 28.7 per cent as it competes directly against the Sealion 7, EX5 and even the 7X.Toyota bZ4XCompared to the other cars on this list the total 2026 sales of just 1323 looks a bit poor, but when you consider how the bZ4X has performed previously it is having a breakout moment.Toyota’s first EV averaged less than 87 sales per month in 2025 but in 2026 it is averaging 330 sales per month so far; peaking at 483 sales in April.This is likely thanks to a renewed marketing push from Toyota, the RAV4 changeover and the high petrol prices leading Australian buyers to give it another look. How long this continues remains to be seen, but given the struggle Toyota has had with this model so far, this is a definite bright spot for the bZ4X.

A few weeks ago we looked at the wrong cars that arrived at the wrong time.The likes of the Holden Commodore ZB, Range Rover Evoque Convertible and Tesla Cybertruck that flopped and were always destined to flop.This time around we’re being more positive and taking a look at those cars that have arrived at precisely the right moment. We’ve also kept it more relevant, with several recent arrivals making our list - plus a few old favourites.Let us know in the comments or on social media if we got it right or if you think we missed some obvious examples of the right car at the right time.MG4 UrbanFew cars have launched at such an optimum time as MG’s latest. This small hatch costs less than a Toyota Corolla Hybrid but is all-electric, meaning you’re saving money on the purchase price and then (in theory) on the running costs.Hitting Australian roads the same month petrol prices started to spike and interest in electric vehicles (EVs) surged, MG may have given Australian customers exactly what they want.It’s too early to tell if it will be a sales success or not, so we may end up looking wrong in hindsight, but all signs point to it being a prime example of the right car at the right time.BYD Shark 6To many observers the idea of a plug-in hybrid dual-cab ute was a foolish one. The ute market is dominated by diesels and BYD’s radical concept was going to fall flat on its face.It turns out those observers were dead wrong. The Shark 6 has proven to be an immediate sales success, as ute buyers have embraced its combination of electric and turbocharged petrol power.Its early success was helped by fringe benefit tax breaks, but its on-going popularity suggests there has been a shift in the buying habits of Australian ute customers.Chery Tiggo 4 ProWe didn’t say this was a list of the ‘best cars’, because the Tiggo 4 Pro has its flaws, but it is another prime example of a car brand filling a gap in the market at precisely the right moment.The diminutive SUV has become a runaway sales hit for the Chinese brand for one key reason - value. It may not be perfect, but with a starting price of $23,990 drive-away it is one of the most-affordable new cars you can buy.At that price it doesn’t have to be flawless, and Chery has had no trouble finding buyers that have been priced out by the likes of Toyota, Hyundai and Ford, looking for their first new car.Holden Commodore VBRising oil prices driving petrol prices to new heights and creating a surge in demand for smaller, more efficient models - sounds familiar, right? I’m not talking about 2026, I’m talking about the 1979 energy crisis and the arrival of the then-new Holden Commodore.Smaller and more fuel-efficient than the Kingswood it replaced, the Commodore was just what Australian buyers were looking for at that point. The original VB Commodore became an almost-immediate sales leader for Holden, setting the legacy that continued for more than four decades.Ford Ranger (T6)When Ford launched the new, Australian-developed Ranger in 2011 the sales charts were dominated by small cars. The Mazda3 was the best-seller that year and the Toyota Corolla, Holden Cruze and Hyundai i30 were all amongst the top six.We didn’t know it then, but the T6 Ranger was about to radically alter the Australian automotive landscape. By 2013 it was inside the top 10 sellers and within five years it was locked into the top five most popular models.It has since gone on to topple the beloved Toyota HiLux, not only as Australia’s favourite ute, but as Australia’s favourite new vehicle.Whether Ford predicted it or not, the more refined, family-friendly Ranger was just what people were looking for. The Ranger effectively replaced the Falcon in Ford Australia’s line-up (and likely in plenty of driveways) as the ute evolved from workhorse to family favourite.

Has Hyundai turned its 'ugly duckling' into a beautiful swan? The all-new Hyundai Ioniq 6 N gives the brand's polarising electric sedan a high-powered makeover. Featuring supercar levels of performance and a raft of groundbreaking technology, the Ioniq 6 N is a technical masterpiece. But is it an exciting and engaging performance car to drive? We test it on road and track to find out.

They say going to the movies has declined since the rise of larger home televisions. It seems if Mercedes-Benz has its way, we will soon be watching movies in the car instead.At least if the all-new C-Class EV interior is any guide to the brand’s future. While it’s still an optional choice, the new 39.1-inch MBUX Hyperscreen is one of the largest screens I’ve ever seen in a car. And it might be one of the worst design decisions I’ve ever seen Mercedes-Benz make.It shouldn’t come as a surprise that Mercedes has gone down this path. The German giant’s design leader, Gordon Wagener, is on the record with both his love of a large screen and his dislike of rival brands.In a rare on-the-record assessment of his rivals, Wagener told the UK’s Top Gear magazine at the 2025 Munich motor show that the new Audi Concept C interior had “too little tech” and looked like “it was designed in 1995” – which is a pretty generous critique of 1995-era technology and design.In the same interview he explained his decision to introduce larger and larger screens into new Mercedes models, because he believes that owners might want to “watch a movie and stuff like that.”The problem I have with this is two-fold. Firstly, it's not good design. I know that design is subjective, but objectively speaking, the new C-Class EV loses so much about what made Mercedes look and feel luxurious. The difference between Mercedes and mainstream brands was the quality and presentation inside the cabin. I haven’t sat in the just-revealed C-Class EV yet, but looking at the images it feels like it could be something produced by any of the new Chinese premium brands.Yes, there are still some nice premium trims and I’m sure it looks impressive, but for me it doesn’t immediately project a sense of class and sophistication that Mercedes is known for. Mercedes’ arch-rivals at BMW have taken a slightly different approach, its ‘neue klasse’ 3 Series and iX3 feature a combination of large multimedia touchscreen, in a conventional sense, with a narrower screen wrapping around almost the entire base of the windscreen. It’s a different kind of big, but it’s still big. Not to sound like an old person, but… back when I was younger and obsessed with cars, whenever I sat in a Mercedes, BMW or Audi, you could tangibly see and feel the difference between them and their competition. But that differentiation is getting harder to feel these days, as new brands without the heritage of Mercedes and company can simply go inch-for-inch in terms of screens.If you look at luxury houses, they do not fill every room with a huge television or make every room feel like a movie theatre. Good design is about moderation and restraint as much as anything. Secondly, and more importantly, we shouldn’t be ‘watching movies and stuff’ in the car. If you want to watch a movie, stay at home – or heck, go and watch it on an actual ‘big screen’ at the local cinema.Cars are for driving and safety should always remain both the car makers and the driver’s top priority. In case any of these designers have forgotten, cars are approximately two-tonnes of metal and glass that typically travel up to 100km/h. This isn’t an entertainment device, it’s transport. If you can’t go one car ride without watching a movie or having a screen in front of you, maybe you should see a doctor, not your local car dealer.Also, just a reminder in case anyone has forgotten, it is very much illegal to touch your smartphone with its 6-plus-inch screen, so why do the lawmakers not have any problem with these absurdly large screens that are becoming increasingly common – and increasingly distracting?To be fair to Mercedes, the German brand is alone in introducing ridiculously large screens. Instead, I blame Tesla.The American EV brand really kicked off this trend when it realised it could save costs – sorry, I mean create a minimalist interior design – by getting rid of as many buttons as possible and replacing them with a touchscreen.Rival brands saw the acceptance of this technology by consumers and didn’t need any more excuses to save money on buttons and dials. And, of course, like anything in the car industry, it soon became a… measuring competition… between the brands. And thus we find ourselves now in the era of the hyperscreen.The saviour, somewhat ironically, may actually be the Chinese government, which is mandating that car makers do include physical controls for key functionality, which is forcing a rethink from not just Chinese car makers but anyone who wants to sell cars in the world’s biggest market.While this won’t mean the end of the large screen, hopefully it will restrain future designs and reprioritise design, usability and safety.

Enough is enough – serious questions have to be raised about Australia’s independent crash testing authority.The Australasian New Car Assessment Program, better known as ANCAP, has been a beacon of safety for the past three decades.And while it has no doubt been a driving force in ensuring Australians and New Zealanders drive safer cars, in recent years I have noticed some troubling, confusing decisions that have raised concerns in my journalistic head.And the latest example is perhaps the most troubling of all – ANCAP’s decision to not independently crash test Australia’s most popular passenger car, despite the car maker acknowledging it is missing key safety technology required to get ANCAP’s maximum five-star safety rating.I’m talking about the new Toyota RAV4, which the Japanese giant admits is missing key safety elements required for a five-star rating under the new-for-2026 testing protocols.This is because the RAV4 was meant to launch in late 2025 and Toyota designed it only to meet the previous testing protocols.While you can certainly question Toyota’s ‘just in time’ approach, and the fact that if Toyota had met those requirements it would have received a five-star rating that it could use for the the majority of the new RAV4’s showroom life, even as other new SUVs launched from now onwards would require a higher standard of safety (but that is an ongoing problem for ANCAP and not unique to this situation).Importantly, Toyota has said updates are coming to ensure the RAV4 meets the new five-star standard, but hasn’t made it clear precisely when that will happen or what those changes are.What is most troubling is that ANCAP has not publicly stated when, or even if, the RAV4 will be crash-tested by ANCAP or its sister organisation, Euro NCAP.A statement provided by ANCAP and attributed to Chief Executive Officer Carla Hoorweg on said: “As with any new model entering the Australian or New Zealand market, the Toyota RAV4 is a potential candidate for ANCAP assessment.“Details of models scheduled for testing and rating are not publicly released until assessments are complete.“We are aware of Toyota’s planned update to the RAV4 later this year. Until independent safety testing has been conducted, the updated model will remain unrated.“Given the RAV4’s popularity, ANCAP encourages fleets and consumers to consider the availability of an independent safety rating when making purchasing decisions.”That’s sound advice, people should definitely consider the safety of an unrated car.But it doesn’t answer the question of why ANCAP won’t simply crash test the RAV4 now.It was the biggest selling passenger vehicle in Australia in 2025, so it is an obvious choice for families.ANCAP is funded by governments, motoring clubs and other industry bodies, but it does not have infinite resources to crash test every new model that comes into the market – especially as each test requires between six and seven cars to be written-off as part of the process.Therefore, the majority of the testing is carried out on cars supplied by the car brands.It’s a mutually beneficial relationship – the car brand (hopefully) gets a five-star rating to advertise, while ANCAP gets another crash test to promote and consumers get an independent assessment of the safety of what cars they are buying. It’s a win-win-win situation.Except in this case, because Toyota is, understandably, not about to submit a car it knows won’t pass all the tests with flying colours. And ANCAP is seemingly happy to wait until that time.As time in crash labs is in-demand and usually booked months or even years in advance, CarsGuide understands Toyota has already arranged for the updated RAV4 to be crashed by Euro NCAP later in 2026.But why wait? Why is ANCAP happy to give Toyota this time to sell an unrated version of the RAV4? This is fundamentally a bad thing for you – the Australian consumer (and taxpayer).Without knowing specifically when the updated RAV4 will arrive in Australia, let's use an example of six months. In 2025 Toyota sold 24,034 examples of its mid-size SUV in that span.That means, if it takes six months for Toyota to update the car and get it into showrooms, potentially more than 20,000 Australians will be buying an unrated car.I completely understand ANCAP’s budgetary limitations, it simply cannot afford to go out and buy six or seven examples of every unrated vehicle.But surely, if it is going to spend its own money on crash testing specific models, surely you start at the top of the sales charts and work your way down?Some of the cars that ANCAP has self-funded crash tests for in the past include the Hyundai Palisade, Hyundai i30 Sedan and Suzuki Swift.Combined, those three models sold 12,303 examples in 2025, compared to 51,947 RAV4.Far be it for me to tell ANCAP how to run its business, but it would seem like, from a return-on-investment perspective, it should be looking to help the greatest number of people for its direct funding, and crash testing the best-selling models would seem like the best way to do that.To be clear, I’m not accusing ANCAP and Toyota of collusion or favouritism, but this is simply a very strange situation and a very hard ‘square to circle’, so to speak.As the organisation states on its own website: “ANCAP plays a vital role not only informing consumers of the differences in safety performance of new vehicles entering the Australian and New Zealand vehicle fleets.”Also stating: “ANCAP is Australia and New Zealand's independent voice on vehicle safety.“We crash test cars and conduct on-track and on-road performance assessments on safety features and technologies then publish a simple star rating or grading to indicate relative safety performance.“Over the last three decades we have published independent safety ratings for thousands of new vehicle makes, models and variants. These independent safety ratings and gradings are used to compare the relative safety between vehicles of similar size and have become a critical factor in vehicle selection for private consumers and fleet buyers.”Except in this case, where one of the best-selling vehicles in the country has been given extra time to prepare and leaves thousands of customers set to miss out on safety features that ANCAP itself has deemed important (hence the updated 2026 protocols).What is most troubling to me is, what message does this send to the industry and to consumers?Can a car maker launch a less-well-equipped model with an attention-grabbing initial price, sell it for a few months (or longer) and then add safety and submit it for ANCAP testing? That would be a dangerous precedent to set, in my opinion, but in the future car brands will be able to point to this situation and claim that it is simply following past form.Again, to be crystal clear, I’m not accusing Toyota of deliberately deploying this as a tactic, it seems like a genuine production-related issue.But ANCAP, as the independent safety body that it is, should step in and crash test the RAV4 that is on sale today to give consumers a clearer choice.

Kia's evolution from affordable outsider to mainstream brand is complete, but can it now become a genuine premium offering? The new EV9 GT pushes the brand in terms of performance, luxury and price. We drive this new, opulent, six-seat SUV to find out how it stacks up as both an electric vehicle and a luxury brand alternative.

“If we keep waiting for perfection, we will never start.”I read that quote somewhere years ago – apologies to whoever said it – and the moment I heard it I thought about electric cars.There’s been a lot of talk about electric cars for a long time, but for obvious reasons interest has been higher in recent months.The ongoing global oil crisis has driven petrol and diesel prices higher, and as a knock-on effect electric vehicle (EV) sales surged to nearly 15 per cent of the total Australia new-car market in March. That was an almost five per cent improvement on where the local EV sales share had seemingly settled for well over a year. And yet the majority of the market remains powered by some form of internal-combustion engine and there remains a number of vocal critics of EVs.The oil crisis has highlighted previous government decisions to gradually reduce our energy independence with fossil fuels and focus instead on renewable energy.This is another area where critics love to bash EVs and question their long-term suitability.But it makes me wonder if there were people so vehemently anti-automobile over 100 years ago?There were almost certainly people questioning the commonsense of switching to a horseless carriage that is powered, effectively, by a series of small explosions, and fuelled by a highly flammable liquid that would need to be dug out of the ground, refined and then transported and sold across national networks.Why not just stick with a horse that can eat grass?Or why replace the telegram with a telephone.How on earth would you create an interconnected network of telephone lines across nations, with each house having their own handset?Surely that would have been considered a greedy play by the newly formed telephone industry back in the day.Obviously I’m being a bit facetious, although I’m sure there was pushback on cars and telephones, like there is with so many things in life.Part of what pushes us forward as a species in challenging ourselves and others to always do better.Take the, very reasonable, claim from the anti-EV crowd that many of the rare earth materials used in batteries are damaging for the environment in both who it is produced and used.Cobalt is a prime example and is a troubling material, with serious question marks over how it is mined. Which is why more and more battery manufacturers are switching to lithium iron phosphate (LFP) batteries, as they contain no cobalt. It’s just one of a number of evolutionary changes manufacturers are making to improve EVs.And make no mistake, EVs will only get better and better. Less harmful production methods, smaller, more efficient batteries, more range and even better public charging infrastructure.The recent NASA Artemis II mission to go back to the room is another reminder of humankind’s ability to evolve technology at a rapid rate.Looking back at the computers used in the Apollo missions had a tiny fraction of the computing power that your mobile phone has.I’m old enough to have used five-inch floppy disks with computers that could only store 360kB of data, and now my children have access to tiny USB flash drives capable of holding 2TB of data.Electric cars have only become a mainstream alternative in the last 15 years. Think about how fast smartphone technology has moved in that time.Electric vehicles are not perfect now, and anyone who claims they are a faultless solution is kidding themselves, but there is no reason why they will simply not get better and better over time.To be clear, I am not saying everyone needs to drive an EV as soon as possible. Or even that EVs are the one-size-fits-all solution.To borrow a line from Toyota, I genuinely believe the future is a ‘mutli-pathway solution’ that mixes technologies including EVs, carbon neutral fuels and hybrids.But we must use this current crisis as a moment to make a definitive and long-lasting change.If you’ve been sitting on the fence about an EV, now is the time to reassess your decision. Because if you’re waiting for the perfect time, we will never get there.

The demise of the Ford F-150 Lightning, the electric version of America’s favourite pick-up truck, is a painful lesson not just for the Blue Oval, but the entire automotive industry.When it was first announced the Lightning made a lot of sense. Ford knew it wasn’t going to convince F-150 buyers to swap into a compact electric SUV, so the company would just make their truck electric.Except, as Ford would find out the hard way, the American market wasn’t ready to shift to electric vehicles (EVs) in the majority, and certainly not the pick-up truck buyers.So the news that the Ford F-150 Lightning would be disappearing from both US and Australian roads was not really a surprise. But it’s the latest demonstration that multiple carmakers may have fallen into the same trap and could pay a similar price to Ford.What is that trap? That would be to build large electric vehicles.“The American consumer is speaking clearly and they want the benefits of electrification like instant torque and mobile power," explained Andrew Frick, President of Ford model e, the brand’s  electric division, about the decision to drop the Lightning.“But they also demand affordability… rather than spending billions more on large EVs that now have no path to profitability, we are allocating that money into higher-returning areas.”It seemed like the right idea only a few short years ago as EVs became more accepted as a concept, but sales were still relatively small due to a lack of choice.Go back five years and most of the EVs on sale were either small cars or SUVs, like the Tesla Model 3 and Model Y, with the rest of the market segments largely ignored. It was a logical move, as a smaller car is more efficient (on average) than a larger one.The problem is that left so much of the new-car market without an EV choice. What would someone looking for an electric ute or electric family-sized SUV do? So, being driven by the need to fit consumer tastes, carmakers tried to cater to them.And thus we had the likes of the F-150 Lightning, Mercedes-Benz EQE SUV, Audi e-tron, Kia EV9 and, more recently, the Hyundai Ioniq 9 all arrive to cater to the audience that wants a ‘big EV’.The problem is, and where this became a trap, is that building a larger EV means a larger asking price, and there simply aren't enough people willing to pay big bucks for an EV. At least not now, especially as the current fuel price drives more demand in EVs.The people have voted with their wallets and it's easy to see where the core EV buyers are spending their money. BYD has already sold 1481 Atto 2s in the first three months of 2026, with another 1082 Atto 1s. The mid-sized BYD Sealion 7 has managed 4468 sales, the Zeekr 7X a healthy 1725 and the Geely EX5 1437.Kia is perhaps the best demonstrator of this trend, the small EV3 has managed 861 sales so far this year, while the mid-sized EV5 has found 1148 buyers. But the bigger EV6 has notched just 77 sales and the huge EV9 has managed to move just 18 units in 2026.And that’s not because Australians don’t want big SUVs, the new plug-in hybrid Denza B8 has already out-sold the EV9 with 75 sales since arriving, while the aging Nissan Patrol is still going strong (1383 sales) and the Toyota LandCruiser shows no signs of slowing down (2857 sales).And this isn’t driven simply by the ongoing fuel crisis. Looking back at the 2025 data it shows the same pattern, Australian motorists looking for an EV are looking for smaller, more affordable models rather than the big ones. In 2025 Kia sold 4787 EV5s and 2597 EV3s but just 348 EV6s and only 269 EV9s.The solution, or so it seems at this point, is the plug-in hybrid (PHEV). Buyers looking for a bigger vehicle but still looking to cut their fuel bill are tending towards PHEVs and other hybrids, such as the BYD Shark 6, BYD Sealion 8 and Chery Tiggo 9.Obviously there will still be more large EVs coming our way, the most high-profile being the new electric Toyota HiLux, but all current signs indicate that this is a small percentage of the market and unlikely to change in the near future.

Sometimes car companies just get it wrong.Despite all the market research, focus groups, design studies and marketing programs, some cars just don’t sell. Sometimes it’s a case of being the right car at the wrong time, arriving ahead of the curve or after the boom. We looked at that recently with the Holden Volt, a plug-in hybrid that arrived too soon (and for too much money) to be successful, even if the concept was right.But then there are some cars that are just a complete miss, arriving as an undesirable product. They are, to be blunt, the wrong car at the wrong time.Here are some examples of what happens when carmakers get it wrong.The decision to end local manufacturing for Holden cannot have been an easy one for General Motors management, but it was probably an inevitable one. The decision they did not have to make was to destroy the brand equity, not to mention the national pride and love, in the Commodore badge.While most of the cars on this list are obviously bad choices with the benefit of hindsight, the ZB Commodore was an obviously bad choice at the time. It was meant to soften the blow of the departure of the brilliant and beloved VF Commodore, but it only served to rub salt into the wounds.To the nice folks at Opel, GM’s German division, who developed the car (which was known as the Insignia in Europe) this was like having your glass of beer taken away and replaced with water from a muddy puddle with ‘beer’ written on the glass.It wasn’t a ‘Commodore’ in any way, shape or form, despite what Holden PR tried to spin at the time. Holden and GM should have followed the example Ford set with the Falcon and retired the name with dignity rather than slapping it on a sub-par import.Sometimes in life you’re faced with a 50-50 decision to make and the difference it makes in the long run can be enormous, or even catastrophic. That’s the case with Ford Australia and the Territory Turbo.The Territory was an inspired decision, a great example of delivering the right car at the right time. Ford managed to get in on the SUV craze just as it started to rise in the early 2000s, offering buyers who were starting to look for something taller than a Falcon an in-house alternative.The problem was, in 2006 they decided to expand the line-up and made the wrong call on that 50-50 decision. Legend has it that Ford Australia only had the funds to develop a Territory Turbo OR a Territory diesel, but not both at the same time.In the words of the Knight at the end of that Indiana Jones movie: “They chose poorly.”Thankfully they didn’t shrivel up and die in an instant, like the Indiana Jones’ nemesis, but it was a decision that didn’t help the future of Ford’s local models.By the time the Territory diesel did arrive in 2011, along with a facelift, Ford had lost too much ground to imported rivals and by the end of 2016, the Territory was done. While Ford’s decision to add the turbocharged ‘Barra’ engine to the Territory seemed logical, given the high demand for that engine in the Falcon XR6 Turbo, it highlighted the difference between the Falcon and Territory buyer.In the same way a diesel Falcon would have been a terrible idea in 2006, so too did the Territory Turbo prove a costly mistake.The Evoque was a brilliant addition to Range Rovers’ line-up, another demonstration of reading the market to perfection and adding a smaller model when that’s what luxury SUV customers were looking for.Unfortunately, the Evoque Convertible was as bad an idea as the Evoque was a good one. And this was one of those ideas that you really could tell wasn’t brilliant at the time.Sure, the SUV market was rapidly changing at that point and there were some unlikely sales hits, namely Audi’s turbo-diesel SQ5. If a diesel SUV can be a popular performance car, surely a convertible would be appealing, right?Wrong. Very, very wrong.Introduced in mid-2016, the final Evoque drop-top rolled off the production line in 2018. A footnote in the history of Range Rover, and one they’d probably like to forget.As Mazda prepares to launch its second and third EVs, the sharply-priced 6e and CX-6e, it can be easy to forget its first attempt. And they might prefer you did.The MX-30 was a bolder-than-average design, with ‘suicide doors’ that were actually more like ‘choke the front seat occupants if you opened the rear doors’, but it fit nicely into the popular Mazda line-up.The problem was what was powering the MX-30. For starters, Mazda hedged its bets, offering its much-hyped EV with a mild-hybrid powertrain option, just to confuse the issue. Which was needed because the EV only had a small battery and a theoretical driving range of only 200km, but a big price tag of over $66k.While EV sales were starting to increase at this point, so seemingly the time was right, Mazda was behind the times in terms of both capability and cost. It was destined to fail and that’s what it did, quietly pulled from sale after only three years.The American brand’s attempt to crack the lucrative ute (or ‘truck’ if you’re American) market was over before it began. On the one hand you have to give credit to Tesla for not trying to take on Ford, Chevrolet and Ram head on. But, on the other hand, what the heck were they thinking?The Cybertruck was always going to be a niche offering, with Tesla frontman Elon Musk's 250,000 annual sales claim being wildly optimistic (to put it very delicately). As the flop of the F-150 Lightning demonstrated, there is simply not a market for electric utes, whether they look like a traditional ute or something created by the work experience kid after a lot of caffeine.Where Musk and the rest of Tesla management thought they’d find 250,000 people who wanted to look like they just drove out of a 1990s computer game remains a mystery to equal the lost city of Atlantis.Electric utes may seem like a good idea, but their time has simply not come year, but certainly the Cybertruck is not what people want.

Have high fuel prices saved Tesla?The American electric brand has been in a sales decline in recent times, with a nearly 25 per cent drop in 2025 despite electric vehicle sales remaining steady overall. But the latest sales data, which includes March when petrol prices spiked, shows a major improvement for Tesla.The Model Y, which recorded only a 4.6 per cent sales increase in ‘25 despite the arrival of a major update, was the third best-selling vehicle in March. It finished behind only the ever-popular Ford Ranger and Toyota HiLux, making it not only the best-selling EV (almost doubling the next best BYD Sealion 7's sales) but the best-selling passenger vehicle.A total of 2818 Model Y buyers were found in March, a massive 63.4 per cent increase on March ‘25 and nearly double what the brand had averaged in the first two months of ‘26.The rise in fuel costs has seen a massive spike in EV interest over the past month. Searches on CarsGuide for EVs rose 230 per cent since petrol prices spiked, while Autotrader is reporting a 631 per cent jump in people searching for a new EV to buy.Tesla was clearly one of the best-placed brands to cash in on this sudden surge in interest. Despite a rocky time in recent years, the brand is still synonymous with EVs and would likely be on the consideration list for anyone looking to move away from an internal combustion engine vehicle for the first time.The challenge for Tesla remains the same — maintaining interest in what is a relatively static line-up. The brand introduced a six-seat variant of the Model Y, and that may have also contributed to the renewed interest in the SUV, but it is otherwise unchanged since its 2025 facelift.The Model 3 mid-size sedan didn’t enjoy a sales boost like its stablemate, with only 667 sales in March, a 33 per cent decline on the same period last year. So clearly the interest remains, unsurprisingly with the SUV variant.It should also be noted Tesla sales have historically varied month-to-month due to delivery schedules, with orders carrying over from previous months as new owners await the arrival of their new car from the Chinese factories.Tesla will clearly be hoping this renewed interest in EVs remains high when the conflict in the Middle East has stopped and oil prices potentially drop. Economists have warned that even a sudden stop to the conflict won’t instantly solve the bottlenecks in the global supply chain and it could take months for oil prices (and therefore fuel prices) to start to decline to the levels seen earlier this year.Until then, Tesla will remain in the box seat to take advantage of motorists looking to ditch petrol and diesel power in favour of going electric. Seeing how the Model Y fares in the April sales charts will be very telling for how the brand’s 2026 sales fortunes will pan out…