The ute war: GWM fires shot at BYD
In the battle of the beasts, GWM is positioning its new plug-in hybrid Cannon Alpha as the apex predator.
During an exclusive roundtable briefing, GWM Australia marketing chief Steve Maciver laid it out clearly: It's hunting down the BYD Shark 6.
'BYD has done a great job launching that car and got some good volume out of it very, very quickly, but we feel now is our time,' he said.
'We feel hand on heart looking you in the eye, we do have a better vehicle.'
The BYD Shark 6 is the first PHEV ute to launch into the Australian market and has so far been successful.
It is currently the fourth-best selling 4×4 dual cab in Australia behind only the Ford Ranger, Toyota HiLux and Isuzu D-Max.
So it's no surprise rivals feel threatened by the Shark.
But it's not usual for companies to boldly target a competitor but GWM didn't hold back.
'We're second to the market, but we're not second best,' a GWM spokesperson said.
'We feel now is our time. We've got to absolutely take the fight to BYD Shark and the full range of [PHEV] utes.'
GWM claimed the Shark 6's lower towing capacity, limited off-road capability and design compromises is the result of the company building a 'plug-in hybrid system' first.
Unlike the Cannon Alpha which was engineered as a 'ute first, EV second', specifically for Australian conditions.
'They've just got a system and then built a ute around it,' a GWM spokesperson said.
'We understand our customers.'
BYD's Shark is rated to tow 2.5 tonnes and the Cannon Alpha is 3.5 tonnes – a number GWM said was non-negotiable after receiving customer feedback.
'It would be remiss of us not to bring three and a half tonne, regardless of what the powertrain is,' a GWM spokesperson said.
TESTED: Kia's new Tasman ute
So how do the predators stack up?
Well in terms of battery, the Cannon wins points as it carries a 37.1kWh pack (split into A/B cells), the largest currently available in any PHEV ute.
GWM claims a class-leading 115km pure electric range and 1060 km combined. BYD lists 100km EV range and 840km combined, while the Ranger (arriving mid-year) offers approximately 49km of EV-only range, less than half of GWM's range.
GWM says its ute achieved 1.7L/100km, also 'best in class' but real world figures will likely be much higher.
Cannon Alpha outputs 300kW and 750Nm via a hybrid 2.0-litre turbo engine paired to a nine-speed automatic and mechanical 4WD.
BYD offers 320kW combined power (1.5-litre turbo and two electric motors), 650Nm torque with a dual-motor setup.
The Ranger pairs a 2.3-litre turbocharged four-cylinder petrol engine (138kW/411Nm) with a 75kW electric motor, offering a combined output of 213kW, less than Alpha and Shark.
However, these claims are made on the ADR81/02-NEDC standard.
While the BYD Shark 6 undercuts the Cannon Alpha at $57,900 for the single model, GWM is pitching the Cannon Alpha models from $59,660 Lux and $66,990 (all pricing plus on-road costs), Ford is pricing high with the entry-level XLT starting at $71,900 (before on road-costs), with the top of the range Sport and Wildtrak variants priced up to $86,990 (before on road-costs).
But GWM insists the slight premium is justified by a long list of extra features – including better towing, a larger battery, superior off-road capability and a 'world class' warranty (7 years warranty, 7 years roadside assist, 7 years capped price servicing).
If the Shark was the first in the water, the Cannon Alpha is now asserting itself, not just over the Shark and Ranger but as the Alpha of the PHEV ute segment.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
ABC News
21 minutes ago
- ABC News
Noosa on a green mission as businesses and council voluntarily ban single-use coffee cups
The Queensland beachside town of Noosa has voted to phase out disposable coffee cups in the region despite the council lacking the power to enforce a ban. Noosa Shire Council this week adopted a plan to encourage a voluntary, industry-led transition away from single-use cups and remove them from council headquarters. A rubbish audit in 2023 found coffee cups accounted for about 20 per cent of litter items in bins at Noosa Main Beach. Many of these cups are lined with plastic and cannot be recycled. Councillor Amelia Lorentson brought the motion to Thursday's council meeting saying it was important for the council to lead by example to reduce landfill. She said she was inspired to raise the issue following the recent Noosa Eat and Drink Festival. "No-one had anything except reusable cups," she said. The event was organised by businessman Ben Clarke whose Noosa cafe supports transitioning away from single-use, plastic coffee cups. "He's leading the charge. It's voluntary and it's industry-led," Cr Lorenston said. "We're just enabling these sorts of programs where the industry shows other cafe operators how to transition out of coffee cups." The motion passed four votes to three and the council believed it to be the first such initiative in Queensland. In December, the small town of Bermagui on the NSW South Coast adopted a similar approach. The majority of cafes there have joined forces to eliminate disposable coffee cups from their businesses. Customers who do not have their own vessels pay a $3 deposit for a recycled reusable cup. That deposit is refundable at any of the other participating cafes. Some Noosa councillors questioned the relevance of trying to stop cafes from using disposable cups when the council lacked the authority to force businesses to adopt the measure. Councillor Tom Wegener said that the motion did not have the "meat and bones" to make a difference. Cr Lorenston respectfully disagreed. "There are coffee shops that are already doing this," she said. Cr Lorenston said the volume of plastic and litter at Noosa Beach following ex-tropical cyclone Alfred inspired the motion. "The motion was about empowering and encouraging businesses," she said. "The responsibility lies with all of us residents and also our visitors. "I've got my little keep-cup coffee cup that sits in the car all the time." Griffith University consumer behaviour expert Graeme Hughes said the success of the initiative would depend on its simplicity and the buy-in from local businesses. "It does necessitate those cafes to support this," he said. "If there's any friction in that process consumers are not going to be happy and find other solutions. "If there was an early incentive of a 50 cent reduction in your morning coffee that's a win-win scenario." Dr Hughes said the reusable cups were "quite trendy" a few years ago and the movement needed a "reinvigoration".
News.com.au
an hour ago
- News.com.au
‘Should not be punished': Queensland decries GST carve up
Cash-strapped state governments are looking west with envy as Western Australia pulls in its large slice of the GST carve up despite the healthiest books in the country. Resource-rich WA posted a $2.5bn operating surplus on Thursday – it's seventh budget surplus in a row. From Friday it is set to receive its share of the GST pool of 75 cents in the dollar, despite its strong revenue stream from its resources sector. State premiers and treasurers have been agitating for changes to the GST distribution, since the final figures were announced in March, and ahead of the funds formally being dished out on Friday. WA is still enjoying the windfalls of a 2018 GST deal struck under previous Coalition government by then-treasurer Scott Morrison and backed in by the Albanese government, where WA is guaranteed 75 cents of every dollar paid in GST. Without this benchmark, WA would have received as little as 18 cents back. The WA Premier and Treasurer credited their economic management for this week's operating surplus and healthy debt forecasts. Iron ore prices are hovering at $US95 while the state government has done its forecasting with an expectation of $US72 a tonne. But every state and territory except WA has been posting deficits since the 75 cent distribution reforms in 2018. The Queensland Treasurer feels short-changed, as strong coal royalties pad the state coffers. Victoria and NSW's slices of the GST pie are set to expand while Queensland's portion gets a trim. 'This money belongs to Queenslanders and we should not be punished because of our support for industries that underpin our national wealth,' state Treasurer David Janetzki said. The impending Queensland state budget, to be delivered on Tuesday, will show the effects of a dip in coal prices after an $8.8bn royalties windfall during the past four years. Despite the Sunshine State's royalty take coming down, Queensland's GST payout this year falls by $1.1bn to $16.5bn. In a speech to the National Press Club on Wednesday, federal Treasurer Jim Chalmers, who has historically opposed raising the GST rate, left the door slightly open to raising it from 10 per cent – the amount the excise has remained for the past 25 years. 'I've, for a decade or more, had a view about the GST,' he told The Conversation. 'I repeated that view at the Press Club because I thought that was the honest thing to do, but what I'm going to genuinely try and do, whether it's in this policy area or in other policy areas, is to not limit what people might bring to the table.' This year, Queensland is the only state or territory getting less than previous years, while every other jurisdiction is getting more. Victoria is set to become a net-recipient of the GST pool for the first time as well. 'It used to be the case that our friends in Victoria would help us shoulder the burden in supporting all the other states,' NSW Treasurer Daniel Mookhey said last month. 'Victoria is now a recipient state, to quite a large degree, $1.07 (per dollar taxed) is what they're getting. 'I'm going to continue to speak out, particularly about the fact that NSW is now carrying the federation when it comes to GST distribution.' The Northern Territory receives $5.15 for every dollar it contributes, far and away the largest return. Despite having the second largest population, Victoria receives the largest portion of the total pool, getting 27.5 per cent; with a $3.6bn year-on-year increase this time around.
SBS Australia
an hour ago
- SBS Australia
Australia's social media ban is approaching, but questions remain over whether it will work
April Willis says young people need a seat at the table for figuring out how to implement the teen social media ban. Source: SBS News / Ash Minchin Like many, April Willis has been using social media since her early teens. As she grew up on the platforms, she says she didn't immediately understand the impact it was having on her. She says that in hindsight, though, she can see that a lot of her "behaviours" and "the content and interactions" she had on social media platforms were "definitely not great" for her mental health. But the now 22-year-old ReachOut youth advocate says she doesn't think a ban would have stopped her. "I think the hard truth is that a lot of us are thinking, 'I would've found a way around it', as I'm sure many young people will." Whether she actually would have is one of the many questions experts are wondering six months out from the implementation of Australia's social media ban for those under the age of 16. And as of 11 December this year, social media companies will be required to take "reasonable steps" to prevent Australian children and teenagers under 16 from using their platforms. A government-commissioned trial into the potential technologies used to assess the ages of users presented their preliminary findings on Friday. Their key finding was that "age assurance can be done in Australia and can be private, robust and effective". "The preliminary findings indicate that there are no significant technological barriers preventing the deployment of effective age assurance systems in Australia," project director Tony Allen said in a statement. "These solutions are technically feasible, can be integrated flexibly into existing services, and can support the safety and rights of children online." With details about the accuracy of the technologies tested left for later release, experts are wary of the trial's initial claim. Daniel Angus is a professor of digital communication at the Queensland University of Technology and the director of its Digital Media Research Centre. "One of the key concerns that we have is how the industry often will inflate their accuracy and the utility of these approaches when we know that there are still significant issues when it comes to both gender and also racial biases, but also the general lack of efficacy of these approaches," he said. According to the Department of Communications, a government-commissioned report from the Social Research Centre found nearly nine in 10 adults were supportive of age assurance measures. Only two of those 10 had heard of at least one potential method to check a person's age online. 'This research shows Australians widely support our world-leading age restrictions on social media for under 16s and have strong expectations of platforms when it comes to data protection and security," Communications Minister Anika Wells said in a statement. Angus says the general public has not been adequately informed about the likely impacts of these technologies. "I think Australians are in for a very rude shock when this actually perhaps, gets implemented, and they all of a sudden are being forced to hand over [their] data to access services that they've freely been able to access up to this point," he said. "It's absolutely everything you would expect to find in the midst of a moral panic where people have been sucked along with this idea that, 'Yeah, this thing is really, really bad and we need to prevent it,' but have not stopped to think critically about this, and then not been properly informed about the fullness of that risk." John Pane, chair of digital rights organisation Electronic Frontiers Australia (EFA), is a member of the stakeholder advisory board for the trial. He says the EFA has "concerns about the rollout of this technology because it's not simply about restricting access to social media platforms for children 15 and under". "It requires all adults who participate in the online environment, who wish to access social media platforms to either have their age authenticated or establish their identity as a means of, or part of that age authentication. "So from our perspective, it's the Trojan horse for getting people to get used to providing more and more credentials online." Amid these concerns, some remain supportive of the ban, including Kirra Pendergast, another member of the stakeholder advisory board. "Initially, I was only against the ban purely because of the technical workarounds that are possible for some kids who are more technical than others," she said. "But after having lots of conversations with parents in particular, it became abundantly clear that the ban was making parents have a conversation that we've needed to have for a very, very long time." Pendergast is the founder of Safe on Social, an online safety advisory group for schools and businesses, and chief digital safety strategist at the global Ctrl+Shft Coalition. "I get contacted almost every single day by parents that are struggling with this," the cybersecurity expert said. "They don't know how to say no." Pendergast said parents and educators would have "a lot more time to get it right". "It's like all aspects of technical security, cybersecurity, and cyber safety. It's never ever going to be 100 per cent. This is never going to be the silver bullet. "It's a really, really good start because, again, it sparked all of the conversations that we needed to have at every level of society." Professor Tama Leaver, an internet studies academic at Curtin University and the chief investigator in the ARC Centre of Excellence for the Digital Child, says the ban responds to a "very real fear that parents have that social media is an unknown space". "If this is world-leading, we need to be quite clear on what the legislation is actually doing." He warned that the implementation of the policy may not address all the issues that have been discussed. "Some harms, for example, such as cyberbullying, were very much touted as one of the big problems to be solved," he said. "There is nothing in this legislation that addresses cyberbullying meaningfully at all. "This at best addresses algorithmic amplification … of young people's experiences of social media, but … we expect from what's been said already that most messaging apps are exempt from this legislation. "So, the spaces where we imagine cyberbullying is most likely to happen are not being touched by this legislation at all." Leaver was a signatory on an open letter from more than 140 academics and civil society organisations against the ban. "If the rest of the world is watching Australia and hoping that this might be a blueprint, we're going to have an awful lot of work to do in the next few months to actually have a blueprint to practically do this rather than simply aspire to giving parents some reassurance," he said.
