Wheels COTY

[Ives]

I was rooting for the A4 to win it.. :/

[351capri]

who buys wheels? i would assume car enthusiasts! anyone with half a brain and any automotive knowledge will see right through this years so called COTY. the fact that the fg didnt win is not the issue, the fact that it didnt even make the final cut just shows the bias of the magazine and its so called judges. you would think that they would show a little more respect for a well engineered and built vehicle. (built in our country by our people who need their jobs). As far as Mrs L Tander being a judge : : : : :

[needaXYGT]

Just a reminder, its 'WHEELS MAGAZINE' we're talking aout here!

[dishpig]

I don't get what everyones saying about the steering wheels, I'm 192cm or something tall and have never had an issue with it, same with my dad in his BA (about 185cm).

Back on topic bought the magazine today could barely tell it was the COTY edition cause the only part that suggests it is a banner at the top saying how the falcon didn't get it.

[vztrt]

Originally Posted by dishpig

I don't get what everyones saying about the steering wheels, I'm 192cm or something tall and have never had an issue with it, same with my dad in his BA (about 185cm).

Back on topic bought the magazine today could barely tell it was the COTY edition cause the only part that suggests it is a banner at the top saying how the falcon didn't get it.

It seems to be an issue with the FG. I noticed it too when I was checking one out which actually worried me (as I want a manual). I'm 187cm btw.

[mik]

i think the safe distance the air bag is to your head has some bearing on how much travel the steering wheel has.

[uranium_death]

How does every model of the Commodore win the award with a consistently inferior product?

[The Stylist]

Originally Posted by vztrt

It seems to be an issue with the FG. I noticed it too when I was checking one out which actually worried me (as I want a manual). I'm 187cm btw.

I must admit, I think this is one area that Ford have stuffed up. It's annoying that the wheel doesn't have enough hight adjustment - fortunately the G-Series has power adjustable pedals to help get comfortable.

As for Falcon not winning COTY, well I thought that the lack of ESC on Egas would have been the major stumbling block.

[ehast13]

QUOTE: How does every model of the Commodore win the award with a consistently inferior product?


The commies are usually class of the field in the year they are released. 79, 88, 93, 97, 06. Falcon launches in bad years

88 - lost to vn
94 - lost to liberty
98 - lost to liberty again
2002 - won won won won
2008 - lowest finish since XD

[sleekism]

Originally Posted by ehast13

QUOTE: How does every model of the Commodore win the award with a consistently inferior product?


The commies are usually class of the field in the year they are released. 79, 88, 93, 97, 06. Falcon launches in bad years

88 - lost to vn
94 - lost to liberty
98 - lost to liberty again
2002 - won won won won
2008 - lowest finish since XD

That can't explain it all EVERY new Commodore has won WCOTY (VB,VN,VT,VE) and every new one has turned out to be a lemon.

I was suprised they didn't give it to the XD in 1979 given the enormous innovation and development behind it but they gave it to NOBODY.

The VB was an Opel with a carryover engine and used more fuel than a Falcon. The VN was a stretched VL with an engine that even Holden admits was poorly developed. The VT was SLOWER and LESS ECONOMICAL than it's predecessor as was the VE.

WCOTY is a joke.

[ehast13]

What you fail to understand is that COTY is for cars released that year. The VB commodore only faced off against starfire powered coronas and and datsun stanzas and other also rans.

The VN was a good car in 88. If ford hadn't rushed the ea though with SPI, 3.2 litre base model engine, 3 speed auto etc then perhaps the VN wouldn't have won. The VN engine wasn't well developed but Ford presented even worse base model engines. If the falcon had the 3.9mpi engine standard and a 4sp auto then who knows?

The VR faced no reasonable competition at all in 93.

The VT's strongest competition was the Porshe Boxster. It only lost out in one category - value for money. At that stage it was still just a 2.5 six with 150kw. If it was the 3.2 or even the 2.7 then maybe VT would have been second.

The VE strongest opponent was Aurion.

Holden wasn't even allowed in 2002 COTY becasue the vy wasn't good enough.

The HQ lost to the charger.

HR lost to XP

It is not that much of a conspiracy.

Wheels has made it clear that FG is better than VE in most models. VE was good in 06. If FG was released in 2006 then we would have won and we could all spooge ourselves in delight but 2008 presented too many competent cars.

78, 88, 93, 97 and 06 did not.

[imugli]

Originally Posted by ehast13

Holden wasn't even allowed in 2002 COTY becasue the vy wasn't good enough.

Not quite correct. The VY was still VT under the skin, thus did not pass the "New or Substantially New" requirement...

[ehast13]

yeah. Although as wheels put it "Even though the VY may have new body and engineering developments, it does not advance the cause of the Australian family car as the BA has. While it may be argued the BA too is a facelift of the AU series, the VY has not made the same leap as the big Ford"

If the commie went from vx to vz it would probably qualify (new engines/gearboxes). The underlying reason was that it couldn't cut it in 2002.

[FordFella]

Posted by me on Wheels website (almost completely irrelevant to the discussion, so will probably get deleted on the site, but it sums up everything I think about Wheels and it's Holden infatuation):

(in response with guy who tells me that the XR6T was beaten by the SS in the Wheels Yearbook) Um, to the guy who hasn't given his name, I haven't read the yearbook, and obviously have no intention of buying it. Now, seriously how on earth did the SS beat the XR6T? Really shows something is wrong. I doubt that even an informed SS owner would agree with that, and would cite his personal preference of the naturally aspirated engine over forced induction - not on the actual drive. See, the theory I have is that Wheels has now got a much larger audience, and a much larger proportion of it is Holden owners. Therefore, I believe that to continue to both solidify the existing customers and expand onwards to more enthusiasts (the majority of which are Holden owners, no doubt), Wheel's will continue favoritism for years to come (and not just over Falcon's but over every make). Business is business people, and that's the only excuse I can think of other than inexcusable bias (which I'm sure that Wheels' Q&A well and truly has sorted out. Just look at all of the magazines, with completely stupid speculation. Of this months issue, a Torana is being heralded on a platform that I can only see as being FWD - complete and utter imagination. And look, the magazine continues to act like GM isn't in several dozen billion dollars in debt - in a recession, there is no chance that ANY of the American companies will survive. But only a little mention of it after the Detroit show, like all is well. The problem extends much further than any motoring magazine will say - for real, truthful (that is, not optimistic) facts look to the NYSE or the business section of your cities' paper. And don't think that this is only in this issue - in my opinion the magazine is sinking. Not having a go, but expressing MY opinion. Whether or not it is valid is up to the readers of it.

3 years ago when I bought my first Wheel's magazine, I (and still do) feel more of a degree of honesty towards the reader, much less edited than today. My subscription has led me through the VE launch (which I must say was fantastic, very in depth) and agreed with opinions presented in comparison to BF and VE. In fact I believed that they were being rather kind on the rough old B series, particularly in the comparison between the VE and BF base model's (a fantastic review by Robbo I must say) However, My issues started appearing at the cover page of the FPV GT vs SSV vs 300C - something like "SS Burns V8 Heavy Hitters" What confused me was that the conclusion of the review was already on the front of the magazine - well, really what's the point of that then? It sounded like Wheels was advertising the SS's victory. But I put that down to marketing and extended my subscription the following year due to some fantastic reviews by several writers. 2007 was a good year, but the lingering front cover's of HSV and Holden's well past mid-year was troubling me. Nonetheless, those same writer's were still traveling the world and providing fantastic reviews - mainly supercars. Now, me being a bit of a Ford fan (at the time, not so much a car nut any more to be honest) obviously renewed my subscription for what I thought would be a VE equaling FG magazine. However, when it came I was greeted with one-page summaries of each area and Ford press photos. Now wheels will claim this is a result of Holden letting them into the design process earlier - what does that say. It's no wonder that Ford can be standoffish when in past years Wheels had Holden Head of Design Leo Preneau (not my own source, so don't criticize me on this) Apparently he commented on how inferior the Lexus LS400 looked to a statesman, and how the Mercedes E-Class lost in looks in comparison with a VS. And look at Holden's 10 WCOTYs. By that count Holden would have to be the best car company in Australia, wouldn't it? If COTY is as valuable as it is said to be, surely it can be a valid comparison of car companies by using their count of the award. See, this also demonstrates some inconsistencies in the point of COTY.

Back on topic, as VE vs FG reivews rolled on in, the conclusion was in most cases FG (with the exemption of the GT vs GTS, which I agree with, aside from the looks thing). But what was truly annoying was the little "buts" that started emerging. For one, the F6 was not (unlike the SS) advertised for being "dollar for dollar, the best sports sedan in the world" - it was still up in the air. Now surely that's a more significant feat than beating a four-year-old Ford and a ten-year-old E-Class. Also what annoyed me was that while the SS was immediately put up against the FPV, the XR6-Turbo - the fastest car in Australia at the time - had no chance to take it up to the HSV's. Another example that annoyed me was the G6 vs Berlina vs Accord V6 vs Aurion. While the FG won, the writer simply stated that the result was irrelevant anyway because no-one cares about large cars anymore. Which is basically was the same as saying that the G6s' win was meaningless. And yet, the W427 and the like continued to grace the covers of the magazine, stating it was the fastest production Australian car (invalid in both acceleration and top speed, it is speed limited and is outclassed by Elfins in 0-100). The value of my subscription was beginning to wane, and the WCOTY - that I thought the FG should win based on conclusions drawn about the VE compared to the 3-Series, which is an utterly FANTASTIC car - simply destroyed the deal. The article was overtly negative, with the high points harped on about every other review reduced to mere mentions with a "but" afterword, such as Robbo commenting on the FG's ride, then destroying that praise by (not Robbo saying this however) saying how terrible the noise was, while defined as others within the magazine (demonstrating the inconsistency of writers)as being "a class above the commodore". Now, this may demonstrate a quality control issue, but that leads us to another issue with COTY - quality control. Suppose the the Honda Accord Euro was replaced by one of the lemons described by various people on this site - would that have affected the result? More than likely, yes, and demonstrates how easily conclusions can be drawn (and exasperated, in the FG article) based on would could be a "dud" example. Also, the comment on the DSC being poor in the FG XT is stupid - it's software, and it either works or it doesn't work at all. There are no "works sort of" - if there was a quality issue in the XT it would not have worked at all.

So, I hoped that provides valuable insight into what I (keyword I = opinion) see as the ending of my subscription

PS - I know this is rather off-topic and irrelevant to the discussion in some ways, but the core focus of it is epitomized in the COTY magazine. Also, this topic seems to have the most traffic.

[MITCHAY]

Why do you guys even bother reading these things? All that ever eventuates is a crap load of whinging when things don't go Fords way.

We all know the FG is an awesome, good value car plus the general public couldn't care less about these awards anyway :

[OZQUAD44]

Didn't manage to read through the whole thread but judging by the hits I'm guessing most are pretty ****ed about the whole deal.

I made a decision never to buy wheels magazine again a few months back! You know what, my life is much richer for the decision.

FG Falcon range. Very nice cars.

What the hell is a Honda Euro?

[MITCHAY]

The Euro is the luxo version of the Accord mate. Very nice car I must say.

[OZQUAD44]

I know what it is mate I was being a bit sarki...

[Bossxr8]

After reading it it seems to me like Wheels had an agenda to not give the FG the award. They looked for an tiny little excuse they could find to diss the Falcon. The XT was a little noisey for example. It has the same insulation package as most of the Falcon range, and they had never mentioned in previous tests that it was noisey, quite the opposite. Previously they raved about how finely tuned the DSC is.

Wheels obviously had it in for the FG, and any excuses they could come up with was enough.

[Steve]

Originally Posted by ehast13

The FG has some shortcomings.

It's better than a VE but Honda builds some pretty tight machines (at an R & D cost of over 2 billion dollars) that are highly regarded all over the world.

Was surprised to see Tiguan (1600+kg 'small' suv) in final. Yeah, right. Very efficient.

Not according to Wheels. They claim that it isn't as good as the 2006 winner except in the interior dept.

I agree with the general sentiment here that Wheels got it totally wrong but I understand the FG was up against stiff competition. What realy bugs me is that in the COTY issue the winning car isn't even on the cover, rather they put some half arsed concept of a car that may or may not even be. But of course, it's a Holden so it HAS to be on the cover.
These guys are a joke. They're not getting my dollars any more. Then again, they get enough from Holden so they don't need mine.

[whynot]

Yep, I posted this on Wheels site as well. It will be buried and forgotten in the next five minutes.


I think Ford and Mazda can feel a bit miffed at the result; Mazda for not winning WCOTY and Ford for not getting into the final four.

Firstly, compare and contrast Wheels justification for knocking out the Falcon and the Mazda 6 against what they have previously written about both vehicles. Unless I am reading more into previous Wheels’ scribbling, they previously placed the FG ahead of the VE and the Mazda 6 ahead of the Euro. I buy twelve magazines a year, not just one. So, somewhere, Wheels are being inconsistent evaluators across time.

Secondly, the panel appears to discriminate against vehicles with a breadth of range. Wheels nitpicked issues at will from across the FG range (eg the XR8 being too nose heavy). Likewise, the diesel option for the Mazda 6 appeared to have instigated point deductions. Both Ford and Mazda do the right thing by their customers by offering a selection of fuel sources. It is almost as if Wheels are evaluating on lowest common denominator instead of its highest common factor. Memo to manufactures, if you want a WCOTY, only offer one engine choice.

Thirdly, it is a sad day when any magazine, which aspires to appeal to automotive drivers, places more emphasis on interior noise levels than vehicle dynamics. I must admit that I have never found interior noise to be a pressing issue in either the Mazda 3 or 6. Sure, noise is easily controlled. Just put in softer bushings and you end up with a quieter car, but with the dynamics of a Toyota Camry. Mazda engineers are doing the right thing by auto motoring enthusiasts by placing vehicle dynamics and tactility in the controls ahead of noise suppression.

Judging by the results, maybe it is time I get Robbo a set of senior plates for his next birthday.

[IDT]

All threads that mention Wheels Magazine should be banned. They only serve to annoy sane people

[Wretched]

I have attached the review of the FG.







Points I picked up from the article were:

- G6ET a stunner
- XR8 too nose heavy
- XT with steering rattle, ESP tune not up to scratch and a fair amount of suspension and tyre noise
- driving position poor, lack of steering adjustment for tall drivers (I am only 5ft10 and i still felt I was sitting on the F6 rather than in it).
- no standard curtain airbags on all but G6ET model
- XR6T eats the XR8 alive, is the V8 worth it anymore?
- not enough differentiation from the FPV models to justify the extra $$.

All in all I found it a fair criticism. They praise the G6ET and so they should, it is a fantastic car. The impression is Ford concentrated on the G6ET and when it came time to the rest kind of rushed it.

I am sorry but I find all the anti-Wheels drivel on here very childish. Some of you act like kids who don't get their way in the shops. They did not bag the Falcon at all but gave a good review. Simply put the range isn't good enough, two cars really standout, the G6ET and the XR6T, the rest need a re think as does the V8 and this is obviously showing in sales. Too many here are blinded by the local products not seeing the opportunities missed.

Where is the diesel for the Terry and even the Falcon?
Where is the updated LPG system?
Where are the Xeons and LED's?
Where are the standard safety features?

Holden is getting the jump on Ford consistently. What do Ford do? They introduce a car that is on par with the VE on average not wanting to completely better it. If Ford don't want to do it properly then why bother in the first place? They wonder why no one is buying the cars. Not everyone can afford a G6ET. Ford need to introduce a car like they did with the BA where effort was actually put into the whole range. Sure it had a lot of issues but the car was a set up from anything else offered by the locals and deserved the WCOTY win as did the Territory, now they seem to be just riding on the success of the BA and adding small improvements here and there while the compeition makes big changes and improves.
Without constructive criticism and compeition we're going to be dealt the same vehicles all the time. Thank god for the AU, without it we'd never have the BA.

[Auslandau]

Originally Posted by Wretched

I have attached the review of the FG ...... etc
.

Dont agree with you .....so I suppose I dont agree with Wheels then? Some of the criticism you .... and your buddys listed, in both what I have read and experienced is nit picking at best. Sure there are some things that will be bettered on Series 11 but I think ...... and many others ..... have done a damn good job on the ENTIRE range.

Just on one point ...... who cares that the Turbo is quicker than the V8? Isnt that a good thing? Does everyone drive to beat everyone else at the lights or just drive for a bit of pleasure? I and others obviously would buy the V8 because I enjoy it more than the Turbo? Option? Offer what the VE offer .... no turbo or just dull it down a bit.

Just another point ...... this model car is no way on par with VE. I spent a week in a Calais week or so ago! The drive, interior (especially the interior) and tackiness compared to the G6E is worlds apart! I mean worlds apart.

Just another ...... The differences between std and the FPV are far enough apart in my eyes. So many here bag the looks of the FPV and want it to look like the XR models ..... I dont get it. If it did, they would be upset it doesnt look far enough apart. As far as the drive and interior goes .... its based on an XT and does a good job.

Where is the STD Saftey features? Yes I agree, they should have gone for 6 stars!



| [/url] |

[mcnews]

While I generally defend motoring journos as they have a similar job to I, I really do struggle to understand that anything with Holden's V6 in it could get any award unless it was for the most horrible motor ever fitted to a car in this century.

[Wretched]

Originally Posted by auslandau

Dont agree with you .....so I suppose I dont agree with Wheels then? Some of the criticism you .... and your buddys listed, in both what I have read and experienced is nit picking at best. Sure there are some things that will be bettered on Series 11 but I think ...... and many others ..... have done a damn good job on the ENTIRE range.

I don't care if you don't agree, that's your opinion and it has the same weight on here as mine does. All I did was simply highlight the reasons for Wheels' decision and I didn't think it was unreasonable.

Just on one point ...... who cares that the Turbo is quicker than the V8? Isnt that a good thing? Does everyone drive to beat everyone else at the lights or just drive for a bit of pleasure? I and others obviously would buy the V8 because I enjoy it more than the Turbo? Option? Offer what the VE offer .... no turbo or just dull it down a bit.

I didn't say the Turbo was quicker, I said it ate the V8 alive, I have driven both and the turbo is not only quicker, but it handles better and is better on fuel (not that should matter anyway). If I was after a V8, Holden would get my $$.

Just another point ...... this model car is no way on par with VE. I spent a week in a Calais week or so ago! The drive, interior (especially the interior) and tackiness compared to the G6E is worlds apart! I mean worlds apart.

Fair enough, I can't comment, haven't spent time in either. Although I would say from every review I have read that the G6ET is a far better car.

Just another ...... The differences between std and the FPV are far enough apart in my eyes. So many here bag the looks of the FPV and want it to look like the XR models ..... I dont get it. If it did, they would be upset it doesnt look far enough apart. As far as the drive and interior goes .... its based on an XT and does a good job.

Again, not what I was indicating, looks are not everything. 20k more on a car (Xr6T to F6) for me should include all bells and whistles with nothing held back. This goes for Ford and Holden.

Where is the STD Saftey features? Yes I agree, they should have gone for 6 stars!

Yeah good one, if you'd only realise the whole range didn't get the 5 stars.
:togo:

[Falcon Coupe]

Originally Posted by Wretched

I don't care if you don't agree, that's your opinion and it has the same weight on here as mine does.

You would do well to remember what you posted above when commenting on others point of view:

Originally Posted by Wretched

I am sorry but I find all the anti-Wheels drivel on here very childish. Some of you act like kids who don't get their way in the shops.

[AUXRVIII]

Originally Posted by auslandau

Dont agree with you .....so I suppose I dont agree with Wheels then? Some of the criticism you .... and your buddys listed, in both what I have read and experienced is nit picking at best. Sure there are some things that will be bettered on Series 11 but I think ...... and many others ..... have done a damn good job on the ENTIRE range.

Just on one point ...... who cares that the Turbo is quicker than the V8? Isnt that a good thing? Does everyone drive to beat everyone else at the lights or just drive for a bit of pleasure? I and others obviously would buy the V8 because I enjoy it more than the Turbo? Option? Offer what the VE offer .... no turbo or just dull it down a bit.

Just another point ...... this model car is no way on par with VE. I spent a week in a Calais week or so ago! The drive, interior (especially the interior) and tackiness compared to the G6E is worlds apart! I mean worlds apart.

Just another ...... The differences between std and the FPV are far enough apart in my eyes. So many here bag the looks of the FPV and want it to look like the XR models ..... I dont get it. If it did, they would be upset it doesnt look far enough apart. As far as the drive and interior goes .... its based on an XT and does a good job.

Where is the STD Saftey features? Yes I agree, they should have gone for 6 stars!

WCOTY does come down to nitpicking, the car industry is so competitive it will require nitpicking to separate the winners from losers. The fine details are important, be a fly on the wall in the service department at a dealer and listen to what customers complain about and also look on this forum to see that it is important.

Who cares that the turbo is faster than the V8? I think anyone who uses the term "there's no substitute for cubic inches" cares.

When the ICC, electric window switches, steering wheel with "Ford" on it, general presentation of the interior and areas of the body have visible poor paint coverage, the FPV is very similar if not the same as an XT.

[Auslandau]

Originally Posted by Wretched

Yeah good one, if you'd only realise the whole range didn't get the 5 stars.
:togo:

Yes I do know that and thanks for pointing it out. If you are considering the E-Gas range only receiving 4 stars ...... ? How does that compare to the others availabe? Not good actually as I cant think of another Aust manufactuerer .... or other .... that offers this? Deisel option? Not doing wonders in the Aust market compared to OS except in the light truck/true 4WD market.

How dare Ford to offer so many variants within the one model line up. Put the G6E & G6ET into there own category and they do a damn good job. How many variants are available in the final 4 .... combined? Its like comparing the total line up of one manufacturer to only one model from another.

Originally Posted by Wretched

I am sorry but I find all the anti-Wheels drivel on here very childish. Some of you act like kids who don't get their way in the shops.

This comment is only only reason I entered into this debate as you are correct ..... everyone else is childish because they have a different opinion to you?



| [/url] |

[Swordsman88]

Originally Posted by Wretched

Points I picked up from the article were:

- G6ET a stunner
- XR8 too nose heavy
- XT with steering rattle, ESP tune not up to scratch and a fair amount of suspension and tyre noise
- driving position poor, lack of steering adjustment for tall drivers (I am only 5ft10 and i still felt I was sitting on the F6 rather than in it).
- no standard curtain airbags on all but G6ET model
- XR6T eats the XR8 alive, is the V8 worth it anymore?
- not enough differentiation from the FPV models to justify the extra $$.

All in all I found it a fair criticism. They praise the G6ET and so they should, it is a fantastic car. The impression is Ford concentrated on the G6ET and when it came time to the rest kind of rushed it.

I am sorry but I find all the anti-Wheels drivel on here very childish. Some of you act like kids who don't get their way in the shops. They did not bag the Falcon at all but gave a good review. Simply put the range isn't good enough, two cars really standout, the G6ET and the XR6T, the rest need a re think as does the V8 and this is obviously showing in sales. Too many here are blinded by the local products not seeing the opportunities missed.

Where is the diesel for the Terry and even the Falcon?
Where is the updated LPG system?
Where are the Xeons and LED's?
Where are the standard safety features?

Holden is getting the jump on Ford consistently. What do Ford do? They introduce a car that is on par with the VE on average not wanting to completely better it. If Ford don't want to do it properly then why bother in the first place? They wonder why no one is buying the cars. Not everyone can afford a G6ET. Ford need to introduce a car like they did with the BA where effort was actually put into the whole range. Sure it had a lot of issues but the car was a set up from anything else offered by the locals and deserved the WCOTY win as did the Territory, now they seem to be just riding on the success of the BA and adding small improvements here and there while the compeition makes big changes and improves.
Without constructive criticism and compeition we're going to be dealt the same vehicles all the time. Thank god for the AU, without it we'd never have the BA.

Since as you say we are all entitled to our opinions, mine is that you are wrong wretched..... Ah, just kidding.

In all seriousness i generally have not major problem with wheels. Sure they festoon the covers with Holden drivel (it sells magazines) and i don't agree with every review but they are better at what they do than many other so called motoring media.

As i noted in my earlier post however, while their issues with FG (as you sumarised) may be valid, and certainly prevent it from getting COTY, the tone of the COTY award is all wrong. Robbo noted at one point that no cars were 'game changers', so the bit about the FG not moving the game forward enough is drivel, pure and simple. As if a Euro moves the game significantly forward from the Mondeo (finalist last year) or that it is much better than a mazda 6.... If features and standard safety hobbled FG, so be it, but don't give me some rubbish about local products not moving the game forward enough. I've driven EF, AU, BA, BF, FG in the last 6 months off and on and the progress is astounding when you consider the falcon is global orphan sold at basement prices. Progress made is at least equal to that by honda over the same period.

More importantly, i've driven VE too, and to suggest the FG, as you put it, it is 'on par' with VE is ludicrous IMO. In virtually every model, FG is quicker, quieter, more fuel efficient, better to drive, rides better, safer, better built, and vasty better interior. Every journo in the country has said that 'on par', as you put it, the FG wipes the floor with the VE, including the supposedly 'poor XT'. Do you think a mondeo vs Euro would expose such graphic differences?

As others have also noted, its not about COTY, its about TOTY, transport of the year. Its A to B stuff, and while the Euro is a great car its a top spec camry, an accountants car. It also lacks the extensive range of body/drivetrains its competitors have (which surely is worth some credit) and is far from 'aspirational'. Now this might not make it a bad car, but it makes it a pretty poor COTY IMO. Now i will take my 'childish' views with me.....