Wheels Car of the Year announced

[Road_Warrior]

Seems CarsGuide disagree too...

http://www.carsguide.com.au/blogs-an...ing_their_grip

What were Wheels magazine thinking with their Car of the Year choice?

If the magazine deliberately set out to create controversy over its choice of the Honda CR-Z, it has succeeded brilliantly. This is possibly the dumbest choice I have seen in decades, worse even than the Holden Camira, Mitsubishi Nimbus and Leyland P76. It features outmoded alleged "hybrid'' technology, absolutely no go and seats for two unless you are a midget without legs. Perhaps the sharpish handling won hearts at Wheels. It couldn't have been anything else. Otherwise, one wonders what drugs they are on.

Last year was a purple patch in terms of new car launches with plenty of worthy contenders for the top dog position. What about the Ford Focus with its brilliant handling and great looks. It’s a great prospect from every point of view. And the Eco-LPi Falcon that halves your weekly fuel bill and goes better than the petrol.

And the Volvo S60 in even the base T4, which punches well above its weight is super-safe and looks fantastic. There’s the Range Rover Evoque ... top styling, competent offroader, great engine performance with turbo petrol and diesel.

And from cost-benefit analysis you’d have to go the Kia Rio that was Carsguide COTY. As a performance pick you can’t go past the Nissan GT-R – even though the new one coming will be even better again. But the CR-Z?

OK, it looks alright if you're into that sort of dart shaped coupe/hatchback sort of thing but a sports coupe it most certainly is not, despite Honda subliminally linking it to the CR-X - a real rocket powered roller skate - with character, even in the targa roof version.

The manual CR-Z struggles to put away a 0-100kmh sprint in 10 seconds and the "auto'' is a horrible, even slower CVT slurring away trying to decide where to set engine revs. My 83 year old dad would give CR-Z a run for its money on his treadly, and he's got arthritis in his knees.

The hybrid drive system isn't really a proper hybrid because it's the wrong way around - a (wimpy) single cam petrol engine out of an econobox, with an electric boost motor. A real hybrid is like a diesel/electric train (and Chevy Volt) with the vehicle driven by an electric motor and the petrol or diesel engine powering a generator. Fuel economy is no reason to buy the CR-Z because it's nigh on impossible to achieve anywhere near the claimed consumption figure. And it's only Euro 4 compliant.

The tacky interior is a rendition of generic Japanese design in mostly hard plastic filled with naff quasi-green reward systems to "help'' you drive economically. Heaven help us if this is the direction of car development in the future.

[Gobes32]

Originally Posted by aussie muscle

i guess it didn't have enough 'new' in it. i seem to remember a furore over the exclusion of the VY commodore (which was the old car with new headlights).

I find that very disappointing, it is most certainly a new Territory and the driveline proves this. It has already been compared with the X5 in TDi Titanium form. Would have been a huge shot in the arm if it was at least in the running.

[TS50]

does this car bein awarded this just show how insignificant the award is in todays world?

[Wretched]

So the question is, has anyone read the full article for the testing this year that gives the list of eligible cars and the justifications for the eventual winner over the other cars?

[turboterror]

Well if no one else buys it (CR-Z), at least all the Hollywood actors will be happy there is finally a decent alternative to a Prius... thats about the only plus i can find here.

[tranquilized]

Originally Posted by Wretched

So the question is, has anyone read the full article for the testing this year that gives the list of eligible cars and the justifications for the eventual winner over the other cars?

Doesn't seem like it does it? I've read last months issue which narrowed the field down to the top 6, of which the Focus was a part of. I thought it was in for a good chance, and also thought it was strange the Terrirory wasn't included. New drivetrain should have got it over the line I would have thought. I haven't read the latest issue yet, I'll wait until I do before forming an opinion on the final result, although the Honda does seem like a strange choice.

But its safe to say that the reaction around here would have been identical regardless of which car won, unless it was a Ford.

[Geez Louise]

Surely this car must have some good qualities...I am just having trouble finding them!!

The Wheels Car of the Year use to mean something....it would appear not so much anymore....

[Bossxr8]

They didn't give the award to the Focus pretty much solely because the 18's on the Titanium are a bit noisey, the rides a little hard, and the turning circle is a bit worse than the rest of the range that they consider brilliant.

If thats the worst thing they can find across the range then why didn't this win. The CRZ is definately a dud choice, a so called "sports hybrid" that couldn't even outrun a soccer mums mini van. And delivers fuel consumption worse than any turbo diesel small car that would leave it for dust from the lights.

It might handle pretty well but its lap times would be so slow because it has zero grunt, so whats the point?

Wheels COTY just seems to get more odd every year. You can gaurantee they will cop a pasting in the readers write letters telling them they got it wrong. Picking the right car means not having to defend your choice. They will be doing some serious defending of this.

My choice would have been either Focus or Evoque.

[wrongwaynorris]

Originally Posted by calais

pfft..... what exactly does car of the year stand for anymore?

Wheels ( Holden Monthly ) has had a history of monumentally stupid COTY's . I believe they do it as a means of publicity to sell magazines and raising their profile among the non car enthusiasts once a year . Gave up buying this unabashed Holden PR publication a long long long time ago .

[Dr Smith]

Wonder how mag sales will go this month, lol. Anyone seen the front cover yet, maybe they'll put dinosaur pictures on it to boost sales.

[new2ford]

Originally Posted by XD 351 Ute

P76 is probably better on juice too.

Ed

The P76 V8 was getting well over 20 mpg when the equivalent Holden/falcon was getting about 15. You guys have the P76 to thank for the fact that you still have V8s. The Whitlam government wanted to ban V8s and Leyland went along to them with figures that showed their V8 was getting better fuel economy than the Aussie 6s at the time, which was true, and the idea was dropped!

I wonder how many people who make throwaway remarks about the P76 have actually driven one, zilch I imagine? The car was a revolution for an Australian car, it handled like a 2000s Falcon in the 1970s when the Holden and Falcon were wallowing Yank tanks with no steering or brakes. Underneath it was a European car with a V8. The COTY was well deserved.

Its problem, exactly like Holden and Ford was its Australian manufacturing "quality" which was atrocious in those days and gave the Japanese an easy road into the local market. But don't anyone let facts get in the way of throwaway remarks!

I too am perplexed by this year's choice.

[TS50]

Well I thought the Force 7 was a huge loss
The hard thing is that they had so many bodyshelss made and were dumped
I agree with you new2ford, the P76 was a better car than its looks

[Rodge]

Originally Posted by wrongwaynorris

Wheels ( Holden Monthly ) has had a history of monumentally stupid COTY's . I believe they do it as a means of publicity to sell magazines and raising their profile among the non car enthusiasts once a year . Gave up buying this unabashed Holden PR publication a long long long time ago .

I tend to agree. If this award is based on new technology, exaclty what are Honda doing differently with their so called hybrid technology that they wern't doing with thier 2006 Honda Civic hybrid ?

Honda's "hybrid" technology's only advantage its its relativly cheap cost compared to other hybrids, that's it end of story. They're now calling their technology intergrated motor assist, (IMA), and using phrases like electric boost....well I'll be honest enough to say my wife drives a Honda Civi hybrid as her shopping basket so we're familiar with Honda's technology and from my viewpoint all they're doing with the name change is dressing mutton up as lamb. That might fool non-thinking Wheeels jurno's but I for one am not impressed that Honda have done very little, if anything to improve their hybrid technology over the last 6 years.

Honda keep ringing my wife up, almost every 3 months or thereabouts looking to get us to change to the so called new "Insight" which has an even less powerful version of the IMA system than is in her Hybrid and I suppose yesterday's call was to inform her of the wonderful opportunity available with this all new model. I was there when she took the call, she didn't even let the sales girl get her usual patter out, just not interested and put the phone down. Even she, who clealry hasn't got a genuine motoring bone in her body, (hence the vehicle choice), realises Honda have lost the plot.

One time a while back on a previous pesky call from Honda she asked the sales girl when Honda were going to release a plug-in hybrid and the sales girl tried to convince her that if they relased one of those all the number that would but them would overload the national power grid...oh dear....no wonder she just now hangs up. Honda have lost the plot IMO and clearly Wheels journo's have too.

[johnydep]

Originally Posted by Road_Warrior

Seems CarsGuide disagree too...

http://www.carsguide.com.au/blogs-an...ing_their_grip

What were Wheels magazine thinking with their Car of the Year choice?

If the magazine deliberately set out to create controversy over its choice of the Honda CR-Z, it has succeeded brilliantly. This is possibly the dumbest choice I have seen in decades, worse even than the Holden Camira, Mitsubishi Nimbus and Leyland P76. It features outmoded alleged "hybrid'' technology, ............

The hybrid drive system isn't really a proper hybrid because it's the wrong way around - a (wimpy) single cam petrol engine out of an econobox, with an electric boost motor. A real hybrid is like a diesel/electric train (and Chevy Volt) with the vehicle driven by an electric motor and the petrol or diesel engine powering a generator. Fuel economy is no reason to buy the CR-Z because it's nigh on impossible to achieve anywhere near the claimed consumption figure. And it's only Euro 4 compliant.......

Read Wheels mag last night and thought the same thing when I look at the picture of the engine. Didn't Toyota bring out the Prius with the same petrol/electric motor set up - 15 years ago!

[peterhellmann]

CR-Z Hybrid is an awesome car if you've read the specs/reviews

[GT 160]

It doesn't get much better over at there sister publication 4x4 Australia.

The FJ Cruiser was given 4x4 of the year.

It's competitors were,

$200,000 Ranger Rover

$170,000 Merc

$55,000 Jeep

$80,000 Land Cruiser


Jeep and maybe the Land Cruiser i can get but seriously i lost count of how many $200K Range Rovers i saw up the Cape last year!

[Ben73]

They call it a sports hybrid do they?

That's an oxymoron. The only reason you would buy a hybrid is to save money on fuel. Driving sporty wont save fuel.

[1TUFFUTE]

a few of you uys taking the bail out option sayin youd rather reserve judgement till youve read the article. Well what a load of wansjhdxsw. There own press comments that are listed at the start of this thread tell us all we need to no. The crz is expensive...thenew focus has exactly the same as old er model price......no new tech(its al the same 10 yr old teck with new names)as attested to by an owner here...rodge. The new focus has new engines and diesel that all out economizes this car. Crz Safety...doesnt even rate 5stars...R YOU SERIOUS...do i really yneed to go on....i mean at least the focus looks good...drives good...is cheap..is cheap to OWN...blah blah blah they bag it themselves as SLOW expensive...cheap interiors and bad vision but still somehow it wins.

On a serious note id really love to know why the terri wasnt included as it has alot more new content than the included ecolpi falcon...??????

[Silver Ghia]

Not that long ago the Wheels COTY gong was recognised as the award to win. It seems to have paled into complete insignificance, along with the magazine which I stopped buying about 20 or 25 years ago because of the continual journalistic drivel in the articles.

AMC was a far better read, but recently that has fallen as well, for reasons I wont go into here.

[Bossxr8]

Originally Posted by Silver Ghia

AMC was a far better read, but recently that has fallen as well, for reasons I wont go into here.

Its definately gone down hill now that Paul Gover has joined, so now he spreads his pro Holden, anti Ford dribble in AMC too. It used to be an unbiased read, no longer.

It shows that Wheels COTY has lost any credibility it had judging by the media reaction to the award. Absolutely zero.

Its usually in the news and in the papers which car won, and ACA have done stories on it in the past. I didn't see or read one single piece of any of that this year. No one gives a flying f that a crappy little Honda hybrid won.

[Silver Ghia]

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

Its definately gone down hill now that Paul Gover has joined, so now he spreads his pro Holden, anti Ford dribble in AMC too. It used to be an unbiased read, no longer.

Thanks Boss, I tried not to mention PG, I tried...I tried.

Joe Kenwright who has now gone from AMC, brought very informative and excellent articles each time, miss those heaps. He also had his articles in Herald sun Carsguide some years ago which were also most informative and an excellent read... and look at what happened to that.

Now there's no regular motoring magazine again anymore that's worthwhile purchasing.

[Auslandau]

Originally Posted by Wretched

So the question is, has anyone read the full article for the testing this year that gives the list of eligible cars and the justifications for the eventual winner over the other cars?

Nope ... haven't read it and wont read it. It is a stupid looking car to me .... actually never heard of it ... do not know anyone who owns one nor anyone who is thinking of buying one. Based on a few reads on the internet now that I know what it is I still stand by the fact that it is not a car that seems to deserve a COTY ... let alone a top 50 finish. It is what I would regard as a stupid car with old technology, expensive and small.

That's what great about forums .... you can have opinions on things with out insults.

[Bossxr8]

Originally Posted by Silver Ghia

Thanks Boss, I tried not to mention PG, I tried...I tried.

Joe Kenwright who has now gone from AMC, brought very informative and excellent articles each time, miss those heaps. He also had his articles in Herald sun Carsguide some years ago which were also most informative and an excellent read... and look at what happened to that.

Now there's no regular motoring magazine again anymore that's worthwhile purchasing.

I actually sent them an email complaining about Gover now writing for them, and to bring back Joe Kenwright because he was such an un-biased writer who just told the facts, not pushing his own bs agendas like Gover does.

I'd bought every issue since the first, but am seriously considering never buying another one again.

[arlester]

The CR-Z is a fantastic car and does everything it is designed to do very well. Someone above said it doesn't get five stars? What are you on about this car is a 5 star car.

No it's not meant to haul a family around or tow a boat but it is a fun to drive economical car without the diesel clatter. Why do people insist on saying this car will get dragged off the lights by a mini van? Do you pull up and try and race everyone you are next to?

Like I said it does what it is designed to do well. Which is be a sporty looking and feeling 2 door coupe with a hybrid system to be more economical than it would have otherwise been. It is a fun car to drive.

[Wretched]

Originally Posted by Auslandau

Nope ... haven't read it and wont read it. It is a stupid looking car to me .... actually never heard of it ... do not know anyone who owns one nor anyone who is thinking of buying one. Based on a few reads on the internet now that I know what it is I still stand by the fact that it is not a car that seems to deserve a COTY ... let alone a top 50 finish. It is what I would regard as a stupid car with old technology, expensive and small.

That's what great about forums .... you can have opinions on things with out insults.

Fair enough then. Cause you don't like it, it doesn't deserve the win.
Glad you don't write for a magazine all the same cars reviewed.

I thought that since everyone here has been jumping up and down about the judgement I would have thought someone would have read it to see the justification.

But if it was the Territory or Focus that won.......

[Auslandau]

Originally Posted by Wretched

Fair enough then. Cause you don't like it, it doesn't deserve the win.
Glad you don't write for a magazine all the same cars reviewed.

I thought that since everyone here has been jumping up and down about the judgement I would have thought someone would have read it to see the justification.

Got it in one .... I dont like it so in my opinion it didnt even deserve to be there!

Glad I dont write for a magazine cos yes .... I would show a bias and that isnt a good thing in what should be unbiased reporting? I would be Gover's evil twin.

No one needs to read it to make an opinion ..... as I and others have said ..... it is not worthy of any accolade which is an opinion. Didn't know you needed to read someone else's opinion to form your own opinion. I have formed HEAPS of opinions all by myself.

Originally Posted by Wretched

But if it was the Territory or Focus that won.......

............. this isn't ilovehonda.com.au is it. Of course blind Freddy could see that the reaction in a FORD Forum would be different. After all ...... we ALL know what a Territory or Focus is? In fact a few here, I hazard a guess, would have at least seen one and many would have driven one. I am not putting my hand up to say I have even heard of this obscure piece of something. Most are here because they like what FORD offer ...... having a bias towards a model aint new and guess what ........... there aint nothing wrong with it either.

You are having your opinion ..... I am having mine so all is good. Just don't poo poo it.

Originally Posted by arlester

The CR-Z is a fantastic car and does everything it is designed to do very well.

Same could be said of a Lada Niva .........

[1TUFFUTE]

give yourselvs a slap in the face....this car may do all those things you meention fine...but there a dozens that will do it far better cheaper and safer then that honda will...looks are subjective but id still bin the looks aswell..... please like i already said...most of the article points about the vehicle where major items....but it still wins...pah...give me a break....if your goin to justify the win then DO IT PROPERLY....BEATS ME HOW YA GOING TO DO THAT THO

[Wretched]

Nothing wrong with an opinion, I never poo pooed it. I assume you based you opinion upon a thorough drive of these vehicles so then you could actually formulate your opinion on some kind of fact?

Yes this is Ford forum but this section here is for general automotive discussions so i assumed most members are car enthusiasts happy to discuss a whole range of automotive brands. Happy to be corrected.

Nothing wrong with a little bias (we all have it)but to constantly bag out journos or any other individual who don't gift a Ford product with some kind of award in every comparison seems childish (as highlighted in my deleted post earlier). Especially when no one has bothered to read the full justification (not always agreed upon), who cares, i mean really is it going to change your mind on the purchase of a car?

Funny though if the Focus won everyone would be patting Wheels on the back saying what a good job they did. I assume the COTY award was rubbish as well back around 2002 and 2004?

I'll admit I am disappointed the Focus didn't win but it made the field and was given a decent write up and people will still buy them.

[Bossxr8]

Originally Posted by Wretched

Nothing wrong with an opinion, I never poo pooed it. I assume you based you opinion upon a thorough drive of these vehicles so then you could actually formulate your opinion on some kind of fact?

Yes this is Ford forum but this section here is for general automotive discussions so i assumed most members are car enthusiasts happy to discuss a whole range of automotive brands. Happy to be corrected.

Nothing wrong with a little bias (we all have it)but to constantly bag out journos or any other individual who don't gift a Ford product with some kind of award in every comparison seems childish (as highlighted in my deleted post earlier). Especially when no one has bothered to read the full justification (not always agreed upon), who cares, i mean really is it going to change your mind on the purchase of a car?

Funny though if the Focus won everyone would be patting Wheels on the back saying what a good job they did. I assume the COTY award was rubbish as well back around 2002 and 2004?

I'll admit I am disappointed the Focus didn't win but it made the field and was given a decent write up and people will still buy them.

No one's really annoyed the Focus didn't win, just moreso that the winner wasn't worthy. If any of the other 5 finalist's won I don't think anyone would have an issue with it, cause the Focus, A6, Evoque, Scirroco and the other one I can't remember would have been worthy winners as they are good cars. The CRZ isn't much of a car, a sports Hybrid that isn't fast or that much economical either. Any small diesel will make more power and use less fuel while going faster, and cheaper, so where's the advantage bar pleasing some misguided greenies who think hybrids save puppies. Its just a nothing car that will sell in tiny numbers.

[russellw]

I stopped subscribing a couple of years ago after the standard of journalism declined but I invested my $8.95 today - not because I am fussed about the Focus not winning but because the choice of winner beggars belief.

Originally Posted by Wheels

Expertly engineered, impressively efficient, and with strong safety credentials, the Honda CR-Z is also a genuine joy to drive. The little petrol-electric coupe may not be blindingly quick, but it is eye openingly agile. Endowed with the kind of handling and steering that invites involvement, the Honda puts a smile on the face of any driver who accepts the invitation. And this, it hardly need be said, is a first for a hybrid...

So far .. so good, about what you'd expect to hear about a COTY winner BUT the devil is in the detail...

Originally Posted by Wheels

The CR-Z's shortcomings were already familiar. Rearward visibility, for instance, was poor. Despite Honda's claim to have extensively researched and tested the design of the two-window glass hatchback, the joint between the sloping top and vertical bottom sections of glass was big enough to conceal a following car. And the broad C-pillars were a further visual hindrance. While the front seats are roomy and supportive, the cramped rear seat made the Honda's claim to being a true 2+2 somewhat questionable.

Then there were criticisms of design, inside and out. The layout of minor controls was a confusing jumble, according to some, while interior materials quality should be better, argued others. Also noted was the disappointing retreat from the designer daring of the original 2007 Tokyo Motor Show CR-Z concept.

On the positive side of the equation:

Originally Posted by Wheels

But it was hard to dispute the Honda's efficiency. When the consumption calculations were done after the long transport stage, the 5.4L/100km of the CR-Z was the lowest. Highway driving doesn't favour hybrid drive-trains, so this number reflected the Honda's efficiency in other areas. No official claim is made for the CR-Z's co-efficient of drag, but its shape must be slippery. Reflecting the minimalist simplicity of Honda's IMA hybrid technology, the CR-Z is no porker. The base manual Sport is 1155kg, and the heaviest version, the Luxury CVT, is 1190kg. These weights are close to other small and sporty three-doors, such as the Mini S and VW Polo GTI, unencumbered by hybrid hardware.

Originally Posted by Wheels

Like the other cars that had made it through to Stage Two, the CR-Z had excellent safety credentials.

While safety was a settled question, the CR-Z's value remained a moot point through Stage Two. There's nothing else quite like it on the market, which didn't make the reckoning any easier. The range opens with the $34,990 Sport manual, the Sport CVT is $37,290 and the CVT-only Luxury is $40,790. While the CR-Z is arguably something unique, that starting price is the same as a base Prius, larger and with a more sophisticated hybrid drive-train. The CR-Z is also more costly than the closely related Insight. Coupes usually wear a price premium, and they're usually hard to justify on purely rational grounds. Another point of view was that anything costing $35K and up should have a more classily furnished cabin and/or greater performance. Value was obviously destined to be the COTY criterion that would be the most troublesome for the judges, me included. Still, running on regular 91 unleaded and wearing sensible 195/55R16 tyres, everyone could agree a CR-Z wouldn't be expensive to run.

Let us pause a moment and assess that commentary against the COTY evaluation criteria:

FUNCTION

How well does it work? Not very practically
Does the nominated car work better than its competitors? Probably not although if it's judged as a hybrid rather thanas a small car then it hasn't got much to beatalthough it's VFACTs classification puts it in the under $80k Sports category against the likes of BMW 1-Series, C-Class Merc Coupes et al.
Does it represent an improvement in user-friendliness? No
Is it better designed? Not given those comments

TECHNOLOGY

Does it deliver genuine advantages to consumers through the use of improved technology? Includes the use of new materials, superior production techniques and the use of innovative systems. The focus must always be the delivery of genuine advantages through the application of better technology ... and at a reasonable price. Again, the value equation doesn't stack up too well - if you are down to cheaper replacement tyres as a reason to justify the relatively high price then that's a brave call.

EFFICIENCY AND ENVIRONMENT

How efficiently does the car use resources. What impact on the environment does its use involve?
Takes into account fuel consumption relative to competitors. Also, to a lesser extent, whether the car represents an efficient investment of materials and energy. The environmental rating is based on carbon dioxide and emissions associated with use. Here it does stack up well. 5.4l/100 km in their real world driving loop is a good result and while the jury is currently still out on the environmental impact of hybrid drive-trains (and specifically batteries), we can agree that it probably meets this criteria.

SAFETY

How well does the car protect? A pass
Rates both active and passive safety systems of the car, whether standard or optional equipment. Likewise, a pass
A possible five points can be achieved for active safety features (ABS, EBD, BA, TC, ESP), while passive safety features (specifically, the number of airbags fitted) is also scored out of five. Ditto

VALUE

Does the price accurately reflect its qualities? Probably not
Essentially, quality - in every sense - versus price. Affordability is pre-scored (from a possible five points) based on the cost of the range.
A further possible five points can be awarded by each judge based on the actual pricing relative to competitors. Should have scored low on this criteria.

As we seem to have been denied the individual scores in each category this year, it is hard to determine how the result was arrived at but, in essence, it's part of what is wrong with the process these days.

As noted earlier, the remaining five contenders were eliminated for various other reasons that, in at least a couple of cases, were flimsy compared to the leeway provided to the Honda. I suspect Bill Tuckey would be horrified.

The Audi A6 was deemed to be more of a catch-up car than anything truly innovative - a view I'd agree with.

The Focus received high praise in most respects but was canned eventually because one variant (the Titanium) was: too firm and noisy on Australian roads; has an increased turning circle; a smaller boot and feels a bit nose heavy in diesel form. They did, at least, alibi themselves by stating that COTY was very hard to win if you had multiple model variants.

The Range Rover Evoque was canned for poor fuel consumption (perhaps a prelude to the Ecoboost Falcon); offering poor value and because the 3 door lacked practicality.

The Skoda Yeti (which should have been canned for the stupid name) ended up being eliminated for being compromised in the ride/handling equation, being slow and being poor value.

The VW Scirocco copped much the same as the Focus Titanium in having a poor ride on Australian roads.

CONCLUSIONS

I'd really like to say that after reading the article and the justifications for the choice, I can see the logic in their argument. But I can't.

By their own admission, we have a car that is expensive against it's competitors; has barely adequate performance (particularly for a so-called sports car); shows poor packaging efficiency; has poor design and control lay-out and has an interior which is under-done for the money. Sounds about as tempting as a visit with Bubba.

That it is fuel efficient, environmentally friendly and handles decently is not enough to save it and clearly the bulk of the buying public agree with only 75 sold in 2011 - outsold by almost everything in the class except the VW Beetle Cabrio and Saab 93 Convertible.
That it is the best (well sportiest) of the currently available hybrids is undoubtedly true but that isn't the criteria against which it should be judged and it's faint praise anyway

Which reminds me - whatever happened to the minimum sales volume criteria of past years or has that one been conveniently forgotten too?

Hard to see what should have got the gong given that I wasn't there, but the Focus would have been a strong chance given the praise for the rest of the range.

All I can do is hand Wheels and the evaluation team a COTY award of their own - Cause of the Year because that's the only justification I can see for choosing the CR-Z.

Cheers
Russ