Opinion

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.

Fuel prices are coming back down slightly at time of writing, but this whole Middle East conflict has been a massive wake-up call for all of us.Australia is as vulnerable as any country to changes in fuel supply and/or prices.But you can reduce your 4WD's fuel consumption – and thus cut your fuel costs – by better managing your driving style and your 4WD.Fuel consumption depends on many factors – including individual driving style, the conditions, the load – but there are myriad ways you can at least reduce your vehicle’s fuel consumption so that you’re ultimately forking out less at the service station.Improving fuel consumption boils down to reducing the stress on your vehicle’s engine: the less stress and strain on your engine, the better it will perform and therefore the less fuel it will use.Here are some tips to slash your fuel bills – and most of it is common sense, really.Read on.The lighter a vehicle is, generally speaking, the less fuel it should use.A whole lot of extra weight onboard your 4WD – whether that be people, gear, pets or a load of job-site tools and materials you’re actually not using on any given day – places far greater demands on the vehicle than if it was unladen, and that excess weight will result in increased fuel usage.If you use your 4WD as a daily driver or if you rarely go out bush in it any more, do away with the bullbar, winch, roof-top tent, tray canopy (if it’s easy enough to get on and off), heavy-duty spare-wheel carrier, MaxTrax (be honest: you’ve never used them), long-handled shovel etc. Delete anything and everything that adds extra bulk to your vehicle, for now at least.All of that gear adds extra weight to your vehicle and thus increases fuel consumption. Again, this is all common sense stuff.On bitumen, recommended tyre pressures on a 4WD will generally be from around 30 psi (pounds per square inch) and up but always check the tyre placard on your vehicle to make sure.Always check tyre pressure when your tyres are cold (i.e. the vehicle hasn't been driven for about three hours) and only use a tyre-pressure gauge from a reputable company, such as ARB or Ironman 4x4, to get an accurate reading to make sure you're running at recommended pressure.If your tyres are under-inflated, rolling resistance increases and so too does your 4WD’s fuel use, simple as that.For reference, Michelin’s in-house tyre experts have described rolling resistance as “the resistance experienced by your car tyre as it rolls over a surface. The main causes of this resistance are tyre deformation, wing drag, and friction with the ground. The higher the rolling resistance is, the more energy to overcome it is needed.“A 30 per cent increase in rolling resistance generates between 3 and 5% of fuel overconsumption.”Rolling resistance is decreased when a tyre’s pressure is increased.No specific PSI tyre pressure figure can be applied every time to every vehicle on every different type of terrain or in every different driving scenario. Your optimum tyre pressure will change according to the vehicle, the load onboard, the terrain your vehicle is traversing, the time of day, the amount of time you've been driving on those tyres on that day, the size and type of tyres you're using and myriad other variables.However, there are various approximate tyre-pressure ranges that work best on different terrain and if you operate within those parameters, you will be able to drive off-road sensibly and safely.Note: If you want to know how to deflate and inflate your tyres, read this yarn.Another thing to think about is unsprung weight (tyres) and rolling resistance. If you’re driving around on big heavy Mud Terrain tyres, then of course your fuel use is going to suffer, so it’s time to throw on a set of road-friendly SUV tyres or mild all-terrain tyres.Worth noting is the fact that larger wheel sizes generally decrease fuel economy due to increased the weight and rolling resistance. Steel wheels are heavier than alloys so swap those out for the time being if you want to further decrease your fuel consumption.Drive with supreme patience and consideration.This is easy to accomplish: simply delete your heavy right foot.No more hard acceleration, no stomping on the brakes – drive smoothly and safely.Unless you’re urgently delivering a heart in an esky to an awaiting transplant patient at a hospital, there’s no need to drive like your pants are on fire.As I tell my kids about driving: just imagine your job is to make sure that everyone on the road at the same time as you arrives at their destination safely – no matter how determined they appear to not want to arrive at all.As mentioned earlier, improving fuel consumption boils down to reducing the stress on your vehicle’s engine, and one of the ways to achieve this is to ensure that your vehicle is well maintained, in terms of all components, fluids, filters etc.The better your 4WD is running, the less fuel it should use.When you head out, bunch the things you have to do for the day together, so you’re doing one trip, instead a series of shorter trips, with the extra driving, stop-starting, parking etc involved in those. Common sense? Of course it is.A hybrid vehicle – one with a traditional fuel source (petrol or diesel) and electric power – is a cheaper alternative to an EV and it yields better fuel economy and less environmental impact than a standard petrol or diesel engine vehicle.Hybrids, right now, offer the best of all possible worlds; currently there are still simply so many variables involved with using an EV as your vehicle of choice in Australia – range anxiety, long distances, lack of charging stations, the actual time it takes to charge – that, outside of the city, it doesn’t make as much sense as a daily driver as a hybrid does.Hybrid powertrains are claimed to improve fuel efficiency, boost torque, improve responsiveness and overall output.Is it time you consider something like a BYD Shark 6? Yep, join the queue.

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.

For those of you who are looking to buy a new car but aren’t looking at an EV yet, we’ve put together a list of our top-five popular cars that run on the cheapest kind of petrol.Yep, there’s a lot of pressure right now to buy an electric car and avoid high petrol prices.But if you’re not ready for an EV and want to stick to petrol, there’s a way to still save money: buying a car which doesn’t need more expensive premium fuel.Premium fuel such as 95 RON or 98 RON is always more expensive than 91 RON, but with petrol prices so high right now any saving is good.At the time of writing, 91 RON was averaging 200c/litre, while 98 RON was 223c/litre. Filling up a 60L tank with 91 RON is currently $120 while 98 RON will set you back $133.80. So currently there’s about a $14 difference between 91 RON and 98 RON for an average-sized fuel tank. If you’re filling up once a week, that’s about $730 a year.For all we know, prices could go up more and depending on the situation and where our fuel is sourced from, so the gap between higher- and lower-grade fuels could expand.Yes, there’s 95 RON, but that is still more expensive than 91 RON.So, we’ve handpicked five of Australia's best-selling cars that don’t need premium unleaded and instead can run on a minimum of 91 RON. Hyundai’s Kona is a small SUV that comes in three variants – a pure petrol, a series-parallel hybrid and a fully electric. You’ll be happy to know both the pure petrol and hybrid petrol cars only need 91 RON.Fuel efficiency in the hybrid is excellent at 3.9L/100km over a combination of different driving conditions.The hybrid is offered across the entire range, which is great to see.The entry price into the Kona range is $33,700 plus on-road costs.GWM’s Haval Jolion is another small SUV, which is a little larger than the Hyundai Kona, but it also comes in pure petrol and series-parallel hybrid, both of which needing just 91 RON.The hybrid's combined fuel consumption is 5.1L/100km.It’s fantastic to see that the hybrid is offered right across the Jolion range.The entry grade in the Jolion range costs $26,990 drive-away.One of the original mid-size SUVs, the Nissan X-Trail in this latest generation is a superb family car that is offered in petrol and series hybrid variants.Now the pure petrol versions need only 91 RON. Nissan says the hybrids need a minimum of 91 RON, but 95 RON is recommended.Of course, you should follow the manufacturers advice here to ensure your X-Trail lives a long and happy life, but it’s good to know that 91 RON will do if you’re in a pickle.The other good news is that you really don’t need to step up to the more expensive hybrid to save fuel.The hybrid is fuel efficient at 6.0L/100km, but the regular petrol will use 6.1-6.5L/100km depending on the grade.  The entry grade of the Nissan X-Trail range lists for $38,140 plus on-road costs.The Mitsubishi Outlander is another mid-size SUV icon and comes in two variants – a pure petrol and a plug-in series-parallel hybrid (PHEV).Nissan says both the pure petrol version and PHEV need only 91 RON, which is a nice surprise.Fuel consumption in the PHEV is outrageously good at 1.5L/100km in combined driving conditions, but seriously you’ll have to charge it regularly to get this – and I mean every day.The combined consumption of the regular pure petrol Outlander ranges from 7.5-8.1L/100km depending on the grade.The entry grade in the Outlander range starts at a list price of $39,990 plus on-road costs.Chery’s little Tiggo 4 SUV is the smallest car in our selection (about a match-stick shorter than the Kona) and comes in both pure petrol and series-parallel hybrid form.The 1.5-litre turbo-petrol, however, isn’t as fuel efficient as you might think in this not-so-big SUV. The combined fuel consumption according to Chery is 7.4L/100km. But the hybrid variant is much better with 5.4L/100km .The entry price into the Tiggo 4 range is $23,990 drive-away. 

“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.

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.

It was not so long ago plug-in hybrids looked to have found the middle ground between electrified power and long driving range. PHEV power experienced more growth than any other powertrain type in 2025 - and by some significant margin. It was up by more than 130 per cent compared to 2024.Leading the charge for PHEV power is the BYD Shark 6 ute, one of the few utes to experience sales growth last year. Its 1.5-litre turbo-petrol engine and dual electric motors provided outstanding fuel economy (when the battery was charged) capturing attention despite modest towing and carrying capacity. Most other brands have also jumped on the PHEV pathway, especially in the SUV segment. However, it now looks like a change might be on the horizon, as fully-electric sales continue to rise and at an even faster rate.There is a combination of factors likely contributing to this new set of circumstances in the new car sales space.While PHEVs offer incredible fuel efficiency, EVs do not need any fuel and obviously have far superior electric-only driving range with electric-only driving range remaining one of the biggest selling points for PHEVs. This is becoming an increasingly relevant point for buyers due to the current scarcity and cost of fuel in Australia.One of the other key factors which could erode PHEV sales is the substantial improvement in driving range of electric cars. Most EVs now offer more than 400km before needing to be charged, and even then charging times have also rapidly improved, with most brands targeting a 30 minute-or-less fast charge time compared to an hour previously.Charging infrastructure has been seeing rapid investment in Australia in the past 12 months, with governments as well as major brands getting on board. Just this week, the New South Wales government announced $45 million of funding towards new public fast chargers as part of its ‘2026 NSW Electric Vehicle Strategy’, and this adds to the existing federal ARENA public funding for EV infrastructure.BYD has also confirmed it will bring its ‘Flash’ charging to Australia this year, removing barriers to charge speed usually imposed by the grid thanks to an inclusion of a high-voltage buffer battery.There is also the question of increasing accessibility to electric vehicles in Australia, with many becoming available at a more affordable price point. The BYD Atto 1, for example, is available from $23,990, before on-road costs, while the cheapest PHEV, also a BYD, the Sealion 5 is $10,000 more. This is more reflective of the types of vehicles in which PHEV set-ups are offered as opposed to electric cars. The most common PHEV car body type is SUVs, which targets family buyers and more car (size-wise, with two powertrains instead of one) costs you more money.And yet, the models surging the most in the sales charts are the fully electric Tesla Model Y and Zeekr 7X, which are both in that core mid-size family buyer segment.This combined with the early adopter phase for much of this technology ending and electrified cars becoming more mainstream will mean some buyers who don't have access to home charging, like those who live in units, might not be able to utilise the key benefits of a PHEV.Many of this wider-audience may value the range on offer from an EV, which will see them charge only once or twice a week as a benefit at such a competitive price-point, not having to worry about not being able to charge at home, and not needing to fuel up altogether. This is also an audience which predominantly buys small or mid-size SUVs.PHEVs then, may be destined to be relegated to only larger vehicles, like utes and three-row SUVs where battery electrics become less cost competitive.

If you haven’t bought an EV yet, how much more convincing do you need given what’s happening in the world right now?The fuel crisis has shown us just how ridiculous our traditional energy choices are and the urgent need to switch to electricity to power our cars.The choice to get an electric car used to be about them being better for our environment with zero tailpipe emissions reducing pollution in cities. And while that should absolutely be the core reason for the choice to buy an EV, the war in Iran has exposed another very real and urgent need to go electric - fuel security.Australia sources 90 per cent of its refined fuel from overseas, specifically from South Korea, Singapore and Malaysia. These countries get most of their crude oil from the Middle East and nearly all passes through the now infamous Strait of Hormuz, which as you know has been used by Iran as its one and only, but hugely powerful bargaining chip. Like a tap, Iran can turn nearly all of Australia’s petrol and diesel supply on and off.The situation is going to get worse. See, even if the Strait of Hormuz returns to normal operation again, because the ships carrying the oil move so slowly (30km/h max) and with there already being a hold up of more than a month, plus the backlog of waiting tankers, we’re going to experience a shortage unlike anything we’ve seen since the 1970s, or possibly ever.Again this will be temporary and the situation will right itself again… eventually. But it's a warning, to change our ways.In the meantime you need to commute to work, drop the kids at school, drive to doctors appointments — in other words, live your life normally. And freight needs to move around Australia normally. Food needs to get from the producers to storage, and from there to supermarkets. I’m putting it very simply here, but you know where this is heading.All of this will stop without petrol and diesel. Australia will be brought to its knees in a matter of months. The Australian government knows this and you’ll likely see another address by the Prime Minister announcing a move to Level 3 in its plan to manage fuel use. Level 3 in the government's plan is for targeted action and will focus on ensuring essential services have the fuel it needs while asking the public to limit its usage to preserve what’s left.If only there were cars that didn’t need petrol or diesel. Oh yeah… there’s hundreds of them. Well, there’s 110 different electric models to choose from and that number is growing every month, and so are the sales.March, 2026 saw the highest number of EVs sold in a month ever, with 15,839 finding a new home. That’s almost double the number sold in the same month the year before. The total number of petrol cars and SUVs for March this year totalled 34,694, down 20 per cent on March 2025.The argument that there isn’t a type of EV that suits your needs or lifestyle is becoming redundant. Looking for a small hatchback as an alternative to a Suzuki Swift or Toyota Yaris? There’s the BYD Atto 1. Oh, but you don’t get Atto 1 for the price of the Swift or Yaris. That’s right, Atto 1 costs less than the Swift and Yaris, and by thousands of dollars.Small SUVs instead of a Kia Seltos or Honda HR-V there’s the MG S5, BYD Atto 2, Hyundai Kona Electric. The Toyota RAV 4, Subaru Forester, Nissan X-Trail and Mitsubishi Outlander have long been the rulers of the mid-sized SUV world and while all offer hybrid powertrains, all still need petrol. There’s fully electric SUV choices galore. There’s BYD’s Atto 3 and Sealion 7, the Geely EX5, Leapmotor C10, Deepal S07 and the Skoda Elroq.Large electric SUV? There’s Kia EV9, Hyundai Ioniq 9, Deepal E07 and Polestar 3, with more models coming in the next 12 months.The choice for fully electric off-road vehicles, both utes and large SUVs, is limited currently, but they’re coming. Toyota’s electric Hilux ute arrives mid-2026 and will join a growing list of others including the LDV eTerron 9 and MG U9 EV.The numbers of new EVs coming to Australia especially from China will continue to grow, and the conflict in the Middle East and the fuel shortage will fast track the uptake of these vehicles. Is the infrastructure currently in place to cope with a huge uptake of EVs? Absolutely not. But if I’ve learnt anything about humans during my time on the planet we only do things if we have to and private enterprise is champing at the bit to take the lead here and install chargers on anything that doesn't move. Is the grid capable of handling the load? You ask a lot of questions. But that’s a good one. I’m no electrical grid expert but I can tell you charging a car at my place is the equivalent of running two air-conditioners all night. And going by the power outages caused by cooling homes over summer, then the answer is no. But the grid can be upgraded to be more robust — because it’ll have to be and can be. So that’s my rant done. If you live in the city and you drive less than 50km a day an EV is a must. Burning petrol or diesel to sit in traffic makes as much sense as a petrol-powered toaster.

You can almost feel the warmth, can’t you? You know, as Australia’s many thousands of EV owners bask in their collective smugness as fuel prices shoot skyward and the world continues its hell-in-a handbasket spiral.Sure, their smiles looked a little strained as the queues for public chargers grew and grew over the Easter break, but that aside, you’d have to declare the EV faithful the winners over the past couple of weeks.I spoke to someone from Tesla the other day who told me demand had been running hot, possibly hotter than ever before, since fuel costs began spiking. One of the Korean brands told me that almost all enquiry is focused on its EV models. And in March, EV sales were 86.2 per cent higher than they were in the same month last year.That staggering result inspired FCAI (the organisation that releases the monthly sales data) Chief Executive, Tony Weber, to ponder if “it is too early to determine whether this represents a structural shift in the market. More consumers are considering EVs due to the disruption to fuel supply caused by conflict in the Middle East, along with the review into the fringe benefits tax concession for EVs.”I can answer that for Mr Weber. It is permanent. And if for some reason it’s not, then Australian consumers need their heads read.My favourite question about EV take up (admittedly not one phrased by me) is to imagine a world where the EV came first, and then, some years later, some bright spark pitched a shift to internal combustion engines.“It will be amazing,” they would say. “We only need to replace the low-maintenance electric motor, with its handful of moving parts, with this engine, which has about 2000. Sure, the servicing needed will be much higher, we will need to fill it with oil, and we’ll need to turn fossils into a very expensive, volatile — and, as it turns out, very price sensitive — fuel source. But you will get a louder, slower, harsher and more annoying vehicle as a result. "And the best part is refuelling them. You know how you currently plug in at home, sometimes using nothing but sunshine? Well now you get to go to a petrol station and pay whatever extortionate number is on the board, and probably be muscled into buying two Kit Kats for a dollar by the person behind the counter."How do you honestly think that conversation would go?Now, I'm not suggesting each and every vehicle in Australia should be an EV. My magic wand would grant an exemption to most supercars, and to a handful of sportcars and hot hatches. Heavy trucking and regional areas would get a pass, too. As would anyone needing to do lots of heavy-duty towing. Some utes get a pass, too. But let's be honest, there are plenty of dual-cab owners who have never carried anything heavier than a bag of groceries.Everyone else? Electric works, believe me. If you drive a beige small car, an SUV of any size, live in a city (which is most of us), and especially if you have access to home charging, an EV is likely the right fit.And it's not just me that thinks so. Look at CarsGuide's Car of The Year awards. Best Small Car Under $50k? Kia EV3. Best Medium SUV Under $60k? Zeekr 7X. Best Medium SUV Under $130k? Hyundai Ioniq 5. Best Ute? The BYD Shark 6. All either electric or partly electric, and all among the very best vehicles in the country.So if you're not on board the EV train by now, the problem is very likely with you.

The new-generation Lexus ES sedan has been approved for sale in Australia ahead of its launch later this year.According to the Australian Government filing, only electric versions of the new 2026 Lexus ES have been approved for local sale thus far.Lexus has previously noted that the ES will initially launch in Australia with the ES500e flagship electric variant. It's powered by a dual-motor, all-wheel drive set-up with a total system output of 252kW.However, the Japanese carmaker has confirmed both electric and hybrid powertrains will eventually be offered in Australia.The only other ES variant that has been approved for local sale thus far is the ES350e which is powered by a single front-mounted electric motor with 170kW of power.Hybrid versions of the ES will likely be approved for local sale at a later point, indicating that they may launch after the electric versions.Globally there are two hybrid versions of the ES, the ES300h and ES350h. They are powered by either a 2.0-litre hybrid or 2.5-litre hybrid powertrain, respectively. Both are offered with either front- or all-wheel drive.Little other information about the ES is confirmed in the local approval filing.It measures in at 5145mm long, 1920mm wide and 1560mm tall, with a 2950mm wheelbase. This makes it around 170mm longer than the outgoing model and slightly larger than a BMW 5 Series.The tare mass is 2180kg in the single-motor version and 2280kg for the dual-motor version. Gross vehicle mass (GVM) is 2635kg or 2735kg, respectively.Either 19- or 21-inch alloy wheels will be offered. At this stage no other specification details have been confirmed, but there is a 12.3-inch digital instrument cluster and 14.0-inch multimedia touchscreen.This eighth generation of the Lexus ES was previewed by the 2023 LF-ZC concept and features an angular design with a fastback silhouette.