Kiwi motoring team faces some of world's most dangerous roads to fundraise for charity
The event is an international car rally where teams are challenged to drive small-engined, often unreliable cars, about 16,000km across Europe and
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Otago Daily Times
2 hours ago
- Otago Daily Times
Paddon wary of the brothers Bates in Gippsl and round
Hayden Paddon. PHOTO: GETTY IMAGES New Zealand rally star Hayden Paddon and co-driver John Kennard are getting ready for another new experience this weekend. The pair are lining up their Hyundai i20 Rally 2 car for the Gippsland Rally, the fourth round of the Australian Rally Championship, in Victoria. The Kiwis lead their respective drivers' and co-drivers' championship standings with 256 points ahead of this event and two more to come. Paddon's closest competition are the Bates brothers, Lewis with 221 points and Harry with 192, and he is expecting plenty of pressure from both that pair and other top competitors. "Gippsland is another new event and new conditions for us to learn during testing and recce," Paddon said. ''From what we have seen, the stages look to be medium speed and grip, but a bit smoother than some of the previous events. I'm looking forward to it. "Unlike the first three ARC rounds, which were sprint events where you could earn points from your finishing position each day, this is an endurance round where your points are determined by your overall place across the two days — as happens in most rallies. ''This magnifies the importance of finishing the rally with no problems, with no second chance for points on this event. "At this point of the championship, it's important we protect our lead and keep scoring points. We are expecting a strong challenge from the Bates brothers again on stages they know well, so we will put our best foot forward to keep the pressure on.' A unique feature of the Gippsland Rally is the running of four night stages, the first time in over 10 years that an ARC event includes night forest competition. "I'm really looking forward to the night stages aspect of the rally. Night rallying is my favourite, and will be a key part of the rally.' The competition comprises 18 special stages and 216.6 competitive kilometres across two days on roads in Gippsland state forests. — Allied Media
NZ Autocar
5 days ago
- NZ Autocar
2025 GWM Haval H6 HEV Ultra vs KIA Sportage HEV Light AWD vs Toyota RAV4 GX Hybrid Review
Kiwis go gangbusters on medium SUVs. Here we compare a trio of them, all hybrids, all originating from a different country. One is a best seller, the others recent updates. The medium SUV area is groaning with entrants, many newcomers from China. And with hybrids on the ascendancy, the time for a comparison seemed ripe. The latest one we drove was the facelifted version of GWM's H6, a hybrid, the $45,990 Ultra being a front-driver. For the purposes of comparison, we chose another recent facelift out of Korea, Kia's Sportage Light HEV AWD, a model that costs $54,990. It is essentially the entry-level hybrid AWD Sportage. The same model can be had in 2WD guise for $49,990. And because it's the biggest seller in New Zealand for 2025 a RAV4 hybrid came along for the ride. In this case, a GX AWD (like all RAV4s) at $48,790 drive away. Not an exact like-for-like comparison but close enough. Medium SUVs are the workhorses of New Zealand families and with such huge ranges (literally and figuratively – each can roam for nearly 1000km to a tank), there's generally something for almost everyone. All three of these are worthy, there's no loser. But one has to come in at number three and it's the RAV4. Third: Old'un but a good'un The fifth-gen RAV4 has been around since 2019 and within a year will be replaced by the next generation. Up against two facelifted modern medium SUVs, the RAV4 looks a bit glum with its upside down grille and is also slightly smaller. It is 4600mm long by 1855mm wide and 1705kg in weight. The GWM is 4703×1886 and weighs 1720kg despite being front drive only. Meantime, the Kia is 4685x1865mm and weighs in at 1762kg. Step inside RAV4 and you're greeted with analogue instruments and a small central screen where the others have a full digital set-up. The RAV4 sports a gearstick too, where the others have a rotary dial or wand on the right side of the steering column. So far so not good for RAV4. But go for a drive, and it is so much better than its dated looks might have you think. It was an eye-opener when it arrived and it is still relevant now, AWD giving it confidence. It has the best ride here, absorptive, plush, quiet and those tall sidewalls also makes the road rumble over chipseal less obvious. Toyota mixes that fine ride with impressive handling creds. This is so predictable, sticks well in the bends and is most unlikely to get anyone into trouble. It has the most analogue steering too, a natural feel to the helm. Performance we'd rate as entirely adequate. They're actually all much of a muchness for straight-line speed. The Toyota has easily the biggest engine, a lean-burn 2.5L mill aided by a couple of electric motors for an overall output of 163kW. You're looking at 7.85sec to hit 100, an overtake dusted in 5.4sec. It's comfortably fast enough. RAV4 has the best brakes of the trio too, both for feel and performance (35m vs 40m for Haval, 37m for Kia). And it is also really decent on fuel use, despite that much bigger engine. Clearly you don't need a lithium-ion battery to achieve this; NiMH for this old timer. So fuel use (rightcar 5.3 overall) was as good as the others, often in the mid5s, a worst of 7.7 and occasionally in the high fours. In part you can put that down to its e-CVT. Sportier drivers moan about these. But most people really like the way they take off on a moderate throttle and then allow the engine to kick back and use less gas when cruising. They certainly have their place. You can EV on the flat in this for a bit too, not quite as much as with the others. On the luggage front this rates at 542L vs 560L for the H6 and 586L for the Kia, again similar. But rear seat legroom is a bit tighter in the RAV4. Because the central screen is for infotainment and reversing images, changing ADAS settings is done in the instrument cluster. Honestly, it's almost harder to do than in the others. That said, there's a button to turn off lane keeping which is simplicity itself. And this has an actual volume control, always welcome. Moreover, traffic sign recognition doesn't bong at you. So yes, we can see why this has been so popular and continues to be. It really only rates third here because of its age. Second: Value leader GWM H6 HEV This H6 HEV comes in second because it offers so much spec for the price. Moreover, you can spend $3k less and buy the Lux version at $42,990 if the budget's tight. This comes with powered, heated and vented seats, a Qi charger, wireless phone hook-up, an electric fifth door, a panoramic sunroof, full pleather upholstery, a 360-degree monitor and 19-inch alloys (the others are on 17s). There's even a head-up display and a heated steering wheel. Lots of surprise and delight features then. What you don't get, though, is all-wheel drive. If you really need that you will have to look to the H6 GT line-up which costs $10k more. However, that's also a PHEV. Some will think the extra is worth it. This really takes some time to learn how to run. The bleating of the traffic sign recognition means submenu delving at each start up. Not helping with familiarity are tiny icons on the steering wheel. And drive modes in the H6 are buried three submenus down. Activate or nix cruise control and the hired help informs you, which is so unnecessary. And then it leaves about five car lengths between you and the next vehicle for everyone to pile into. Two-step indicator action I find annoying. This H6 is a facelifted model with a carryover powertrain. It comprises a 130kW/300Nm motor allied to a 1.5T 110kW/230Nm engine, for overall system power of 179kW and 530Nm. Its hybrid battery is a 1.8kWh lithium ion unit. Overall fuel use is rated at 5.2 but rightcar says 5.8L/100km. Changes to the exterior include a new grille and lights, while the interior is more luxe than before, gaining a 14.6-inch multimedia screen. There's also a shifter up on the right side of the steering column, freeing up space in the centre console. This performs pretty well. It slurps fuel at the rightcar level of 5.8L/100km if you're on the motorway using cruise. It's of the 91 variety too. Later on it was resolutely in the sixes. Range is impressive, the DTE showing 1000km from a 61L tank. We drove it for a week and returned it with over half a tank left. Same for the other two actually. It goes pretty hard too, though at times the two power sources don't blend ideally. Blame turbo lag for that. But there's plenty of action when both are working together. However, regen is a bit undercooked, even on high, and ditto one-pedal driving. Moreover, a best emergency stop of 40.32m is not great. Ride and handling are pretty decent here, taking into account this is front-wheel drive versus the AWD status of the other two. It scrabbles a bit off the line as the torque of the motor kicks in, and pushes on into understeer earlier than the others. We noted occasional suspension thump-bump too, but its ride quality is good, at the slight expense of body control. Still, in a family cruiser an accommodating ride is appreciated. A few frustrations aside, most of which you get used to, the H6 HEV Ultra is a good machine. Both this and the RAV4, by the by, offer towing capacities of 750kg unbraked, 1500kg braked. The Kia manages 1900kg braked. RAV4 is the only one with a real spare, a full-sized one at that. First: Modern sensible Kia Sportage Sometimes you pay a bit more and reap the rewards. That's only partly the case here. Certainly the H6 HEV beats Sportage on the spec front. Kia doesn't call it the Light HEV for nothing. But this has modernity and style that almost eludes the others, along with sensibility and thoughtfulness. Little things matter, like siting the stop/start button where you can see it and having shortcuts to silence annoying chimes. In the facelift there's more interior space thanks to a wheelbase stretch. Figure on 586L of cargo space, quickly expanding to 1872 litres with middle seats locked away. There are now six hybrid models in the seven-strong Sportage range. All come with dual-zone climate control but our car had no heated seats, and no Qi charger. The pews are cloth covered and manually operated. So is the tailgate. For parking, just guidelines, no surround monitor. But the resolution from the 12.3-inch screen is brill. Powering most Sportage models is the Smartstream Hybrid offering output of 169kW and 350Nm. Its motor brings 44kW and an unspecified amount of torque to the party. On the wheel is a mode button. Along with Eco, Sport and Individual, there are various off-road settings. More useful are the paddles for different regen levels. Use these and you seldom need to brake. They regen the 1.5kWh battery pack. Safety systems include seven airbags, and Forward Collision Avoidance Assist with Junction View. It scans for vehicles at intersections. This also has adaptive cruise which works well, and camera images when indicating. Safe Exit Warning, self explanatory, is handy too. Upon entering, this is similar to the Tucson hybrid we drove a wee while ago, only there's way less spec. But the Tucson was $72k. This is $55k. In the Tucson you can turn off the overspeed warning quickly via a shortcut button. This is simpler still; just push and hold the mute button and traffic sign recognition merely flashes at you instead. Then there's just the chiming of lane keeping, easily nixed, and we left the single bleep indicating change of speed zone on. Afterwards, there's the low level thrum of the engine. A quiet car then, with not much road rumble. As it should be for a family conveyance. It's roomy too, though not clearly bigger than the H6. This handily takes three in the rear, like the Haval, while the boot is the biggest by a small amount. On the go, fuel use quickly falls to the low sixes, with 5.9 the claim (rightcar agrees). During everyday use in or out of town you'd expect fuel use in the fives and sixes. The default Eco mode is not only quite efficient but more than responsive enough. This EVs on almost all downhills, and often on the flat at speeds under 100km/h. On the performance front, a 0-100 is dispatched in 7.6sec, and an optimised overtake requires a little under 5sec. It's the quickest of this bunch, despite having a six-speed auto rather than a CVT. It seems to take off in EV mode each time, nice for a quiet early morning getaway. But like the others, that never lasts long. And the ride is typically Kia too, sufficiently controlling and amenably compliant. Handling is equally sorted, confident in that AWD way. Just right for Antipodean conditions then. The style does it for us too, the best of this trio. We're talking as much inside as out, the widescreen set-up well delivered. There are a few more hard plastics than expected but they're not so obvious. Some final thoughts Overall, the oldest (RAV) and best value (H6) were surprisingly impressive, and so too Sportage, despite being the most expensive and not the best specified. Certainly there are no losers; each brings something worthwhile to the table. And that just goes to show how competitive this class has become. To answer our original question though, currently it's Kia. GWM Haval H6 HEV Ultra $45,990 / 5.2L/100km / 120g/km 0-100 km/h 8.02s 80-120 km/h 5.31s (151m) 100-0 km/h 40.32m Speedo error 97 at an indicated 100km/h Ambient cabin noise 70.6dB@100km/h Engine 1499cc / IL4 / T / DI Max power 110kW@5500-6000rpm Max torque 230Nm@1500-4000rpm Motor output 130kW/300Nm Hybrid System Output 179kW / 530Nm Drivetrain 2-speed auto / FWD Front suspension Mac strrut/sway bar Rear suspension Multilink / sway bar Turning circle 11.9m (2.75 turns) Front brakes Ventilated discs Rear brakes Discs Stability systems ABS, ESP Safety AEB, ACC, BSM, LDW, RCTA, ALK, AHB Tyre size f/r-225/55R19 Wheelbase 2738mm L/W/H 4703 / 1886 / 1730mm Track f-1631mm r-1640mm Fuel capacity 61L Luggage capacity 560-1445L Tow rating 750kg (1500kg Braked) Service intervals 12 months / 15,000km Warranty 7yrs / unlimited km ANCAP rating ★★★★★ (2022) Weight (claimed) 1720kg Kia Sportage HEV Light AWD $54,990 / 5.9L/100km / 134g/km 0-100 km/h 7.53s 80-120 km/h 4.81s (134.7m) 100-0 km/h 37.3m Speedo error 96 at an indicated 100km/h Ambient cabin noise 70.6dB@100km/h Engine 1598cc / IL4 / T / DI Max power 132kW@5500rpm Max torque 265Nm@1500-4500rpm Motor output 44kW Hybrid System Output 109kW / 350Nm Drivetrain 6-speed auto / AWD Front suspension Mac strut / sway bar Rear suspension Multilink / sway bar Turning circle 11.76m (2.5 turns) Front brakes Ventilated discs Rear brakes Discs Stability systems ABS, ESP Safety AEB, ACC, BSM, LDW, RCTA, ALK, AHB Tyre size f/r-235/65R17 Wheelbase 2755mm L/W/H 4685 / 1865 / 1627mm Track f-1627mm r-1622mm Fuel capacity 52L Luggage capacity 586-1872L Tow rating 750kg (1900kg Braked) Service intervals 12 months / 15,000km Scheduled servicing 3yrs / 45,000km Warranty 7yrs / 150,000 ANCAP rating ★★★★★ (2022) Weight (claimed) 1762kg Toyota RAV4 GX Hybrid $48,790 / 5.3L/100km / 121g/km 0-100 km/h 7.85s 80-120 km/h 5.40s (156m) 100-0 km/h 35.02m Speedo error 97 at an indicated 100km/h Ambient cabin noise 69.8dB@100km/h Engine 2494cc / IL4 / DI Max power 131kW@5700rpm Max torque 221Nm@3600-5200rpm Motor output 88kW/202Nm 40kW/121Nm Hybrid System Output 163kW Drivetrain e-CVT / AWD Front suspension Mac strut / sway bar Rear suspension Wishbones / sway bar Turning circle 11.0m (2.7 turns) Front brakes Ventilated discs Rear brakes Discs Stability systems ABS, ESP Safety AEB, ACC, BSM, LDW, RCTA, ALK, AHB Tyre size f/r-225/65R17 Wheelbase 2690mm L/W/H 4600 / 1855 / 1685mm Track f-1605mm r-1625mm Fuel capacity 55L Luggage capacity 542-1690L Tow rating 750kg (1500kg Braked) Service intervals 12 months / 15,000km Warranty 5yrs / 150,000 km ANCAP rating ★★★★★ (2019) Weight (claimed) 1705kg
Otago Daily Times
12-08-2025
- Otago Daily Times
Will axing petrol tax be a game-changer?
Scrapping petrol tax may, or many not, be transformative, Angela Curl and Caroline Shaw write. The way we get around is unfair, and unhealthy. Some people travel a lot, creating disproportionate harms on people and the planet, such as pollution, injury risk and physical inactivity. Others cannot afford to travel enough, missing out on things that are important, such as catching up with loved ones or healthcare appointments, or end up having to forego expenditure on other important things, such as food. Replacing fuel excise duty (or petrol tax) with electronic road user charges for all vehicles — as announced by Transport Minister Chris Bishop last week — offers an opportunity to transform the way we fund and pay for our transport system in a way that works for people and the planet by reflecting the true costs imposed when we use the roads. Bishop said "it isn't fair to have Kiwis who drive less and can't afford a fuel-efficient car paying more than people who can afford one and drive more often." On the whole, we agree. We know that those households with the lowest income drive far less (about 100km a week less) but also have to spend a much greater proportion of their income on getting around (16% of income compared with 9% for higher-income households). Those on lower incomes are also far less likely to be able to afford an electric vehicle with cheaper running costs, instead paying the relatively more expensive petrol tax. However, Bishop's proposal represents a narrow view of the harms, or wider costs, of driving to society. It is largely based on the assumption all vehicles should contribute "fairly" (based on weight and distance travelled) towards road maintenance, operations and improvements. But a pricing structure that also accounts for the costs to our health system of injuries, pollution and physical inactivity caused by the transport system, might also include differential charging for different types of vehicles. For example, we know that SUVs cause more severe injuries to those outside of the vehicle, and while EVs reduce tailpipe emissions, they still contribute to congestion and injury risk. The proposal does suggest that weight, as well as distance travelled, will be factored into pricing; however, it should also consider the damage that heavier and larger vehicles do to people and the environment. A change in the way we are charged for using the roads offers a real opportunity to design a progressive charge that alleviates costs pressures for those already struggling to pay for the driving they need to do, while reducing levels of driving overall. One way to achieve this would be through increasing the rate per km, above a certain amount of kilometres driven. Given the costs involved in running and operating the scheme, and that this needs to be revenue-generating for government, it seems unlikely there will be a reduction in the cost of travel in real terms for everyone. However, if the government is committed to fairness, it needs to ensure costs do not escalate for those who can least afford it and who have few alternatives. The proposed changes to road user charges are most likely to be successful and acceptable if they are accompanied by investment in public transport, walking and cycling and alongside strategic urban planning that supports local access to the things we all need such as shops, schools and sports grounds. The most straightforward way to ensure that charging for using the roads does not force people into situations where they have to forego other essentials is to ensure that it is easy and safe to get around in other ways, or that we do not need to travel as much. For both fairness and health and wellbeing we need to continue to improve travel options other than driving. Bishop presented this as a new way to fund our roads, but we should be taking a more holistic view — this is an opportunity to think about how we fund our transport system. Using revenue raised to reduce the need to drive can make charging for driving more acceptable. Bishop said: "This is a once-in-a-generation change. It's the right thing to do, it's the fair thing to do, and it will future-proof how we fund our roads for decades to come." This policy has the potential to be truly transformative and be part of creating a transport system (not just roads) that is fairer, and healthier for everyone. It can be done. The question is, will it? — Newsroom • Dr Angela Curl is a senior lecturer in the University of Otago department of population health, Christchurch; Caroline Shaw is a lecturer and researcher in the department of public health, University of Otago, Wellington.
