First Chinese Cars Entering Australia

[mafiastafcar]

Has anyone read the user manual for one of these? I've bought a lot of asian computer bits and the english instructions are hilarious!

I'm thinking there'll be things like this:

>In case of need stop, smash brakes

>Put feool in back hole to make car go

>Remember the green water the in the bottle so car keep the cool always. No water car it get offended

If you think that's exaggerating, trust me- it's typical and common! I've seen worse. For the sake of their image, I hope they have good translators!

[Falcon Coupe]

An Engrish workshop manual........ does not sound promising.

[Keepleft]

Well, BUNNINGS sell a quality Euro spec triangle for $9.90 now, might be just the job for one of these Great Walls. Might outlast it too if I believe some of you!

I am sure the owner handbook will be just fine.


(NB - I do NOT work for Bunnings).


http://www.nbntv.com.au/index.php/20...adside-safety/

Originally Posted by SB076

Ok so why are these utes allowed in without ABS, airbags or even high mounted stop lights?

2011, rem the "lead-in" time. Some exemptions currently apply. I'd have to see the specific vehicle model. Any issues go Trade Compliance.

Mildy OT - They have, according to their specs a 'rear fog', which is all well and good if so, because NSW GovCo has begun the task to negotiate through the usual national process to mandate them for most all ADR categories. This would mean an overturning of ADR13, Part 8.5.1 And 19 of same for heavy vehicles.

Failing national effort, NSW LAB and I have no doubt LIB would use our sovereign power in a test case on this particular matter.

RTA are upgrading ARR's re triangle placement too. We'll see moves here in two years. Consider this text 'a signal of future direction'.



OT - for you NT folk, not speed related:-
http://www.teacherswithintegrity.com...=93&Itemid=105

[mafiastafcar]

Originally Posted by ltd

Anyone else see the Geely rolls royce copy on top gear? What an absolute farce. Why do idiots elect governments hellbent on destruction for our industries in the name of supporting communists?

I had a peek, then saw a video of one of the trade reps at a motor show saying that it was totally their original design!

You could hear the agitation in his voice too, like he really wanted to tell the reporter some other choice words :p

[GS608]

Can Holden sue the Aussie arm of Great Wall? Since they're selling them here and the designs are breaching copyright laws, off to an Aussie court?

[Keepleft]

Originally Posted by XR-CHIEF

Can Holden sue the Aussie arm of Great Wall? Since they're selling them here and the designs are breaching copyright laws, off to an Aussie court?

Nah, Ateco are the importers not manufacturers. In any case, I'd be sure Great Wall have licensing/agreements up to date, IF a specific AUS model is of concern.

All an aside, and this is not the point; China is big enough to not give a stuff, really, about our system or our economic impact.

We owe them big dollars, our new Commonwealth debt for stimulus etc, but nowhere as much as the US which runs into trillions now.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NkEtA...layer_embedded

[vztrt]

Fiat to nobble Geely’s Panda moniker

http://www.goauto.com.au/mellor/mell...25761C00181CFB

Italian maker to prevent China’s Geely from using the Panda name in Australia

24 August 2009

By MARTON PETTENDY

A PLAN by Geely to export its 1.0-litre four-seater micro-car to Australia has been hit with a potential stumbling block from Fiat, which will attempt to prevent the Chinese brand from using the Panda name here because it is already used by the Italian maker in markets outside of Australia.

As we reported earlier this month, West Australian automotive magnate John Hughes plans to introduce the Geely brand in Australia early next year via the Toyota Corolla-sized 1.5-litre Geely MK sedan and hatch.

The MK, which will be among the first Chinese-branded passenger cars to be sold in Australia, will be followed about a year later by Geely’s 1.0-litre Panda light-car.

But Australian Fiat importer Ateco Automotive says the Italian giant will take action to prevent Geely from marketing the Panda name in Australia.

“We have forwarded details of this naming issue to Fiat in Italy and they will be taking up proceedings to protect the rights of what is a volume-selling model worldwide for Fiat,” Ateco spokesman Edward Rowe told GoAuto.

Mr Rowe said the entry-level Fiat Panda, which is not sold in Australia, is an important model for Fiat globally, and that the company was keen to prevent the same model nameplate being used by Geely outside of China.

[vztrt]

Well 274 'Geniuses' bought great walls. Also more models to coming.

http://www.caradvice.com.au/38997/gr...-expand-range/

Great Wall Motors to expand range

Australia’s first Chinese automotive importer, Great Wall Motors, certainly seem s to be building a sales foundation, and has announced plans to add three more vehicles to its range.

Two Great Wall twin cab utilities were launched onto the Australian and New Zealand markets in late June by local importer Ateco Automotive, and since then they have been selling as quickly as they can be supplied.

The entry level SA220 is priced at $19,990 while the up-market 2WD V240 is $23,990 on road, add $3000 to that if you want the 4WD version.

Official VFACTS industry figures show Great Wall achieved 274 retail sales in July, but a spokesman for Ateco Automotive, the importer of Great Wall, has advised that dealers actually took more than 300 new orders during their first full trading month.

Ateco says the existing imports will be supplemented in coming months by new models including a well-appointed mid-sized SUV, an economical small sedan and single cab versions of the current utilities.

All are expected to be on sale in Australia before the end of the year and further enhancements to the line-up including an eagerly awaited turbo diesel engine are also in the pipeline.

Great Wall launched with 43 dealers in Australia and six in New Zealand, but the dealer network is growing as Ateco works steadily through its appointment processes.

An Ateco spokesperson said the greatest short-term challenge facing existing Great Wall dealers is finding stock for their showrooms as they meet and exceed sales targets months ahead of expectations.

Great Wall availability is expected to improve soon as increased orders of freshly produced vehicles enter the country, while dealer willingness to embrace a forward ordering system has helped Ateco to better match supply to actual individual model demand.

According to Ateco’s Managing Director, Mr Ric Hull, “No one here is getting carried away at this early stage, but we are greatly encouraged by the initial success of Great Wall’s products and the enthusiasm of our dealer network.

[Keepleft]

HAD a look at the Great Wall SA220 and SA240 at my local @ Gosford; the 240 being the more premium if you will.

SA240 standard spec item not not mentioned to date in the flyers;
UNECE spec warning triangle; located behind the rear seat back, in its dedicated storage spot, not a junk item.


SA220 standard spec items not not mentioned to date in the flyers;
a) UNECE Spec warning triangle; located underneath the rear seat, also not a junk item.

b) Rear fogs exist, complete with bulbs; located behind/incorporated with the reflex reflector (lower portion of lamp assy), but has NO operational switch! (Has front fogs).

The two items are mandatory in the Chinese market, importers of course get to tick off what they want, and not.

Internal fit and finish; better than I expected to be honest, take a look and judge for yourselves if you get the chance. Did NOT drive either, no time.


ANCAP advise today they'll have domestic crash testing results up for these models in about three weeks from now:-
http://www.ancap.com.au/

[buickman]

Originally Posted by Crazed

Hmmm the Chinese make every type of car available yet they are going after the body on frame utes. Apart from the less stringent safety standards, it speaks volumes that the Chinese are targeting this segment, simply because the competition is not very good.
50 grand for a rubbish Ranger, Colorado, BT-50, come on! The existing players had this coming.

The existing players in the work ute's are over priced and I think the Great wall utes will sell Ok to small companies and people tight on coin.

Why would a struggling farmer on the land want a expensive ute to go through the paddocks and into town on rough dirt roads .
If these utes prove themselves on the land the Chinese will no doubt start bringing in other cars.

[vztrt]

So they ran one of these utes into a wall (and not just for fun).

Budget utes criticised after poor crash-test results

http://www.goauto.com.au/mellor/mell...25763F001D6457

Proton Jumbuck scores just one star from ANCAP while Great Wall utes get two stars

29 September 2009

By TERRY MARTIN

THE safety of cheap imported utilities was questioned again this week after the independent Australasian New Car Assessment Program (ANCAP) handed down a damning one-star-out-of-five crash-test result for the Proton Jumbuck and two stars for the Great Wall Motors SA220 and V240.

While the ageing Jumbuck’s rating was expected after Proton Cars Australia last month moved to head off criticism of the impending ANCAP result, announcing that a redesigned version of the Malaysian-built ute would be released in the first half of 2010, it was not anticipated that both new Chinese-built utilities from Great Wall Motors would score just two stars.

ANCAP program manager and RACV chief engineer Michael Case said this week he was concerned about the widening gap between Australian Design Rules (ADRs) – the minimum standards a vehicle must achieve to be sold in Australia – and ANCAP’s testing.

“Crash statistics show that occupants of one- or two-star vehicles have twice the risk of receiving life-threatening injuries in a crash, compared with four- or five-star vehicles, at a time when four- and five-star ratings are becoming increasingly available for new-car buyers,” Mr Case said.

“New vehicles that achieve only a one- or two-star ANCAP rating, while meeting the ADRs, are a cause for concern.”

Great Wall Motors importer Ateco Automotive emphasised to GoAuto this week – as it did at the vehicles’ launch in June – that life-saving features such as airbags and ABS brakes were not available from the Chinese manufacturer on the SA220.

Although Ateco has included that equipment on the V240, along with other important items such as a high-mounted stoplight, the overall ANCAP star rating has now proven to be no better than the model without airbags.

While Ateco described the V240’s two-star rating as a “solid outcome”, ANCAP chairman Lauchlan McIntosh said it was “disappointing”.

“What we’ve been saying at ANCAP for a long time is that people need to rely on the tests, not the equipment,” Mr McIntosh told GoAuto. “Just equipping a car with airbags doesn’t guarantee a good result. It should guarantee a better result, but it’s the structure and the whole system that’s really important – and that’s why we test the cars.

“My feeling is the ADRs are becoming redundant, and what we need to see is more recognition by fleet managers that they will only buy four- and five-star cars. That would be a much simpler way to go ahead with the issue than wait for what seems to be an eternity to lift the standards in the ADRs.”

The latest results are in stark contrast with the five-star result handed down recently to the Mercedes-Benz Vito – the first commercial vehicle to reach the mark in Australia – and a commendable four-star result for the South Korean-built Hyundai iLoad van.

ANCAP Council chairman and VicRoads manager of vehicle safety Ross McArthur said the Great Wall results were particularly disappointing given they were new models to the market.

“The SA220 and the Jumbuck lack airbags and other safety features that are expected as standard equipment by new-car buyers,” Mr McArthur said. “The V240 has dual airbags but these failed to protect the driver and passenger from injury in our crash tests.”

Victorian Transport Accident Commission (TAC) senior manager for road safety David Healy said all three vehicles performed poorly in the all-important frontal offset crash test.

“All experienced loss of cabin structural integrity, with poor head and leg protection at impact,” Mr Healy said. “There were high injury measurements for driver and passenger in all three vehicles.”

Proton Cars Australia managing director John Startari told GoAuto last month he was frustrated that ANCAP chose to test the soon-to-be-replaced Jumbuck ute and that the rating could stick to the nameplate long after the redesigned version was introduced.

“If someone goes on to the ANCAP website and types in ‘Proton’, the only model to come up will be the Jumbuck and that is not a true representation of our range,” Mr Startari said. “We hope they will test the new model Jumbuck as soon as possible.”

Mr McIntosh defended the test, arguing that government agencies, fleet owners and consumers had a right to know that the vehicle, which remains on sale in Proton showrooms, performed to a one-star standard. And he would not undertake to test the new-generation ute as soon as it was launched.

“It depends on the volume, and I guess the market generally and our resources,” he said. “It is up to Proton – they can encourage the test earlier – but we test to a regularly published schedule. Just because it’s a bad result now and they’re supposedly bringing out a new vehicle shortly, we’ll wait and see when that vehicle comes out.”

Meanwhile, Ateco Automotive spokesman Daniel Cotterill told GoAuto that a Great Wall Motors safety engineer attended one of the ANCAP tests and that the Chinese manufacturer was now analysing the data and considering changes to the V240.

He said that no safety improvements to the SA220 were expected because of its “mature design”.

“From our point of view, I would say that the V240 has scored a ‘high’ two-star result … which we feel here at Ateco is a pretty solid outcome,” Mr Cotterill said.

“I don’t intend to get into any sort of an argument or slanging match with ANCAP or anyone from there – and we’re not disagreeing with their result at all. There’s no quibbling about it, the umpire has had their say – but we do consider it to be a solid result for this type of vehicle.”

This week’s results follow concerns raised by a number of bodies since the arrival of Great Wall Motors in Australia, including the Victorian Automobile Chamber of Commence (VACC) and the Society of Automotive Engineers – Australasia (SAE-A).

Earlier this month, VACC executive director David Purchase stressed that a work vehicle provided by an employer was just as much a workplace as an office, factory or warehouse – and that employers must select vehicles with the best protection they can for their workers on the road.

“It is astonishing that there are still vehicles, in this day and age, that only qualify for a one-star ANCAP safety rating. One importer, Kia, has withdrawn its Pregio van from the Australian market due to its very low crash-test performance,” he said.

“Why should there have ever been a different standard of compliance and obligation for work vehicles in matters of safety and risk prevention, as opposed to fixed plant and equipment where there is zero tolerance for low standards of safety?”

Soon after the Chinese utes were launched, the SAE-A called on the federal government to make airbags and ABS brakes compulsory on all vehicles sold in Australia, and urged that forthcoming legislation mandating the fitment of electronic stability control (ESC) be broadened to include light-commercial vehicles.

In a broad reference to Great Wall Motors, the SAE-A said: “Some imported commercial vehicles include luxury fittings, such as air-conditioning, alloy wheels, electric windows and leather trim as standard, while key safety devices – airbags, ABS brakes and a single-mounted high stop light – are optional, or as in the case of a recently released imported vehicle, not available at all.

“As a minimum, SAE-A wants airbags and ABS to be fitted to vehicles sold in Australia today. Given the worldwide availability of these technologies at competitive prices, the society says it is difficult to imagine why any new vehicle would be allowed on the Australian market in 2009 without these features.”

Ateco Automotive managing director Ric Hull told GoAuto in June that the importer would like to see more safety equipment available on the SA220, but was not expecting this to occur in the near future.

“It wasn’t a conscious decision on our part to delete or not take them as an option, let’s put it that way,” he said. “They are just not available on the vehicle. We would like to see them, of course, but I am not sure that will be possible.

“That car will compete primarily in the used-car market, and none of its competitors would have those items either.”

The Indian-built Mahindra Pik-Up also achieved a poor two-star ANCAP rating when it was tested in 2008, but a recent upgrade brought the introduction of airbags and front seatbelt pretensioners and the standard fitment of ABS brakes.

Its Australian distributor Mahindra Automotive Australia now believes the vehicle would achieve four stars under ANCAP, based on its own in-house testing, although this is still to be verified.

In that 2008 round of testing done in both Australia and Europe, below-par three-star results were also handed down the Holden Rodeo, Nissan Navara (upgraded from one star with revised airbag software) and the Mazda BT-50, which is a mechanical twin with the Ford Ranger.

At the same time, Mitsubishi scored four stars with its Triton, and Holden the same number with its VE Ute – ratings that placed them alongside Ford’s FG Falcon Ute and the Toyota HiLux at the top of the class.

However, the recent Model Year 2010 update to the Holden Ute, which boosted its airbag count to six and added a steering column shroud to further improve driver protection in the event of a crash, has now made it eligible to become the first five-star utility sold in Australia.

All Holden Utes are fitted with ESC, traction control and ABS brakes with EBD and brake assist.

Ford Australia is also eligible to achieve a five-star rating for its Falcon Ute, despite offering side head/thorax airbags as options across the range and restricting standard ESC to XR6 level or higher. It could achieve the accolade if it made these items standard, or if it funded a side pole test to test its side-impact protection.

[vztrt]

Car advice article.

http://www.caradvice.com.au/42471/pr...ancap-results/

Proton Jumbuck, Great Wall SA220 & V240 ANCAP results

September 29, 2009 by Matt Brogan

Australia’s leading independent vehicle safety advocate, the Australasian New Car Assessment Program (ANCAP), has issued crash test results for three imported utes on the Australian market. All three scored poorly.

The highly anticipated Great Wall Motors SA220 and V240 utes from China received only two-stars out of a possible five, while the Malaysian Proton Jumbuck ute only rated a single star.

ANCAP Chair, Mr Lauchlan McIntosh, said the results were of great concern, particularly since commercial vehicles are now more commonly rating four- and even five-stars. Many passenger vehicles of course are five-star rated.

Mr McIntosh also expressed concern about the widening gap between Australian Design Rules (ADRs) and ANCAP’s safety testing.

“Crash statistics show that occupants of one- or two-stars vehicles have twice the risk of receiving life-threatening injuries in a crash, compared with four- or five-star vehicles, at a time when four- and five-star ratings are becoming increasingly available for new car buyers,” Mr McIntosh said.

“New vehicles that achieve only a one- or two-star ANCAP rating, while meeting the ADRs, are a cause for concern.

“The results for the Great Wall vehicles were particularly disappointing as these are new models to the market. The SA220 and the Jumbuck lack airbags and other safety features that are expected as standard equipment by new car buyers.

“The V240 has dual airbags but these failed to protect the driver and passenger from injury in our crash tests.”

The three utilities performed poorly in the ANCAP offset crash test – all experienced loss of cabin structural integrity, with poor head and leg protection at impact. There were high injury measurements for driver and passenger in all three vehicles.

For a full list of ANCAP’s vehicle safety ratings, including light commercial vehicles and utilities, and other vehicle safety information, click here.

With ANCAP

[Bossxr8]

No suprises there.

Scary that the importer claims the 2 star result is "a solid result" :

[naddis01]

I just saw the Proton crash test on the news. My god, there is no way I would buy one of those things. The Great Wall Motors utes werent as bad in comparison but I still wouldnt like to be in one.

[vztrt]

One thing to remember that the Proton tested is the outgoing model and not the new one that is coming in.

The great wall ute is not being updated for some time.

[Yellow_Festiva]

Originally Posted by vztrt

One thing to remember that the Proton tested is the outgoing model and not the new one that is coming in.

The great wall ute is not being updated for some time.

Exactly. The Jumbuck was released in 2003, based on a Proton Persona body and mechanicals, released in 1997.

The Jumbuck has a poor result, but that's to be expected, the 2 stars of the brand spanking new model is abysmal.

[deesun]

Originally Posted by Yellow_Festiva

Exactly. The Jumbuck was released in 2003, based on a Proton Persona body and mechanicals, released in 1997.

The Jumbuck has a poor result, but that's to be expected, the 2 stars of the brand spanking new model is abysmal.

Were the Persona mechanicals/platform the outgoing Lancer ones, or at least from another manufacturer making them probably close to 15 years old or more.

When Mr Joe Average walks into a new car showroom and sees a new car he expects the car to have reasonable safety and 2 stars isn't these days. For all intents and purposes the Jumbuck is a new car if it's in a new car showroom and when asking about the car what do you think the salesman is going to tell Joe. " Oh our Jumbuck is not very safe compared to others at the same price". I think not.
The add on TV for the Great Wall asks "why pay 36K for a ute when ours is only 28K or so. Well heres your answer. Also a minimum 3 stars should be mandated for any company buying for employees as a duty of care.

[ltd]

Originally Posted by deesun

Were the Persona mechanicals/platform the outgoing Lancer ones, or at least from another manufacturer making them probably close to 15 years old or more.

When Mr Joe Average walks into a new car showroom and sees a new car he expects the car to have reasonable safety and 2 stars isn't these days. For all intents and purposes the Jumbuck is a new car if it's in a new car showroom and when asking about the car what do you think the salesman is going to tell Joe. " Oh our Jumbuck is not very safe compared to others at the same price". I think not.
The add on TV for the Great Wall asks "why pay 36K for a ute when ours is only 28K or so. Well heres your answer. Also a minimum 3 stars should be mandated for any company buying for employees as a duty of care.

I agree 100%.
Although, I'd add that we should mandate safety minimums in Australia; if your car fails to reach 3.5-4 stars minimum in the ANCAP rating it is not able to sold. That's one sure fire way to have an impact on the road toll, and it would have more of a result than the whole "speed kills" farce.

[DJR-351]

I can honestly say i have never bought a car on the grounds of a so called safety star rating, and i dont know anyone who has, it has always been about looks and price.....i like it, i can afford it, i buy it....

Go and ask 10 perfect strangers what the ANCAP rating is on their car, the majority will give you a blank look....

The overall majority of the public are driven by the cost of their purchases and nothing else, thats why these sorts of vehicals will always find a home....

[Kryton]

If anyone is interested, there are 2 Great Wall cars sitting at Pickles in the damaged section.
Although at this point the pictures arent up, i believe these are the crash test cars.
http://www.pickles.com.au/damaged/li...CTION&x=34&y=8

Should be interesting to see.

[FalconXV]

Not everyone crashes their cars , so I can understand that safety isn't a priority to the minority. I still hope whoever buys them knows , Does anybody know if it's as bad as the Jiangling Landwind/ Brilliance BS6 crashes a few years ago?

[ltd]

Originally Posted by DJR-351

I can honestly say i have never bought a car on the grounds of a so called safety star rating, and i dont know anyone who has, it has always been about looks and price.....i like it, i can afford it, i buy it....

Go and ask 10 perfect strangers what the ANCAP rating is on their car, the majority will give you a blank look....

The overall majority of the public are driven by the cost of their purchases and nothing else, thats why these sorts of vehicals will always find a home....

Mate I agree entirely with you but, as they are introducing legislation to make DSC compulsory on all new vehicles sold, I would have thought minimum crash protection would also be favourable.

[Glow_Mouse]

y'reckon the chinese have no sense of street style? Or you think they just like being embarrassed?

God that thing's front end is hell ugly. Where's the bullbar and spotties? God...Change the front end then we'll talk.

[DJR-351]

Originally Posted by ltd

Mate I agree entirely with you but, as they are introducing legislation to make DSC compulsory on all new vehicles sold, I would have thought minimum crash protection would also be favourable.

I hear ya, but what i was getting at is until this future legislation is passed, companies/countries that supply these vehicals will continue to exploit the current laws knowing full well their is a market for them.....

It will be interesting see how far the legislation goes as far as China is concerned, after all they are one of our biggest trading partners and i am not sure if our gov has it in them to p*** them of to much, time will tell....

[burnz]

maybe about time the OH&S committee mandate 4 star cars in the work place.
whether they be trade or rep cars.

[Kryton]

Originally Posted by davway

If anyone is interested, there are 2 Great Wall cars sitting at Pickles in the damaged section.
Although at this point the pictures arent up, i believe these are the crash test cars.
http://www.pickles.com.au/damaged/li...CTION&x=34&y=8

Should be interesting to see.

Pics are up and these 2 dont appear to be the 2 crash test vehicles after all.

[vztrt]

Originally Posted by DJR-351

I can honestly say i have never bought a car on the grounds of a so called safety star rating, and i dont know anyone who has, it has always been about looks and price.....i like it, i can afford it, i buy it....

Go and ask 10 perfect strangers what the ANCAP rating is on their car, the majority will give you a blank look....

The overall majority of the public are driven by the cost of their purchases and nothing else, thats why these sorts of vehicals will always find a home....

Apparently it is starting to pop up on peoples list of requirements, but not as much as other requirements.

Personally I still say that minimum safety requirements should be brought in, if the state/federal government was interested in reducing the road toll then this would be done. DCS wont help you when a another car hits you.

[mik]

in this day and age i think minimum crash test should be at least 2 stars before they`re even let into the country, whoever is in charge of this stuff is letting us down imo, cheap car or not.

[Yellow_Festiva]

Originally Posted by mik

in this day and age i think minimum crash test should be at least 2 stars before they`re even let into the country, whoever is in charge of this stuff is letting us down imo, cheap car or not.

The problem with that is many of the cars imported here are built by and for markets that have a far lower emphasis on safety.

Some of those markets are HUGE. They will not be willing to pay a premium for a safer car, so if a car is built to a price, that price needs to be a compromise of safety over price.

Eg, The Great Wall and Mahindra pickups are in their very low 20's and have low ratings. Anything similar with a higher rating is 7-20 grand more.

If a Great Wall or Mahindra was 27-30 grand and had 4 stars, it would prob not sell as well, because people will know that a few grand more will get a mainstream pickup.

On a GLOBAL scale, what small car sells better, 2-3 star cars for $13-16 grand or 5 star cars that start at $18 grand?

The good thing is, 3-4 stars is getting pretty typical now. The only difference between a 2 star car and a 4 star car is the engineering and design work in the structural components.

I'm thinking that soon the rating will go to 6 and 7 stars, 5 stars is a lot more common now compared to even a few years ago.

Cheers,

Jason.

[mik]

if they can`t build them to minimum standard they should`nt be registerable imo, abs brakes 2 airbags and a cabin that does`nt cave in at 60k`s should be minimum standard for new cars imo, the add with the ute and crash test was appalling.