The MG HS PLUS EV has entered runout with the Excite model now on sale for $34,990 driveaway (save approx $11,000 and over 20%). The Essence model is also on sale for $37,990 with similar savings.
These as plug-in hybrid models with a fairly small electric range of 63km, but good fuel economy of just 1.7L/100km. Performance of 119kW, 250Nm and 0-100km/h in 6.9s.
You can search MG price history here at The Beep.
Those people are probably approaching the time they need to replace it anyway.
So their resale just tanked :(
Isn't all cars?
Would it have a big impact on the long-term resale considering it’s just a few cars on clearance at the end of run?
who tf buys a car for resale?
Yep, just another reason why we all need to stay away from electric cars and plug in hybrid cars. Petrol and standard hybrid are the way to go. Once solid state batteries come in around 2028 (1200km of range), that's when you can buy an electric car. Before then, you're just paying for an inferior product that will have little resale value because who's going to buy a second hand Blackberry when you can buy a brand new iPhone/Galaxy Note.
Having said that, this seems like the deal of the year. I don't see a medium sized PHEV getting anywhere near this price, it's an insane deal as it's cheaper than a normal hybrid car from any other brand!
@supersabroso: When petrol eventually goes up to $10/L who is going to want a petrol car? They'll be worthless, a plug in hybrid will still have some value and old electric cars will be sort after for cheap transportation.
just another reason why we all need to stay away from electric cars and plug in hybrid cars
Hard disagree.
I wouldn't buy a brand new EV because their resale drops so hard in the short term, but a near-new used EV (at depreciated prices) can still be an excellent deal. The cost savings associated with much cheaper energy and low/nil maintenance are pretty substantial and will add up quite a lot over several years of ownership.
There are also some pretty good deals for new EVs available thanks to FBT exemptions etc, but that's too complex to go into.
Once solid state batteries come in around 2028 (1200km of range), that's when you can buy an electric car.
It's hilarious that people think this is true. Solid state batteries have a lot of promise, but they're not going to be revolutionary, nor will they make older EVs obsolete and valueless when they arrive.
Firstly, solid state batteries are going to be quite expensive at the outset, and will take some time to scale up to broad mass production. The cars that get them first are likely to be expensive luxury vehicles, not mainstream cars like the MG in this deal.
But more importantly, the idea that people actually want/need cars with 1200km range, and are willing to pay serious money to get it, is laughable. We have become accustomed to having a certain range in our ICE vehicles, but it has never truly been necessary for the most part. There are very few people who actually need 1000km+ of range, and less than 10% of the population actually want this enough to pay for it.
Sales figures for EVs consistently show that the vast majority of buyers opt for smaller capacity batteries, acknowledging that most people so rarely actually drive long distances in a single trip. The average Australian car only travels about 12,000km per year, or 250km per week - so a vehicle with 350-450km of range is more than adequate.
There will no doubt be vehicles with very large batteries and super long range, but they will be very expensive vehicles to cater to niche markets - for example, people who live in very remote locations, or need to regularly tow heavy loads. The truth of the matter is that very few people actually need long range vehicles and "range anxiety" is an affliction almost exclusive to potential EV buyers, not people who actually own and drive EVs.
Instead of cars with ludicrously long range using very expensive batteries, solid state batteries will enter the mainstream in similar capacities to current models. They have The space and weight savings from solid state batteries will be used to achieve better efficiencies, packaging and practicality.
And even once solid state batteries become the norm, the EVs that are currently on the road are no less useful than they are today. They are still more than capable of doing everything that the average car owner does on a regular basis. Even if they have degraded batteries in 10 years time and have curtailed range, they're still perfectly suited to urban commuting, which is what ~40% of our current private car fleet is used for.
But more importantly, the idea that people actually want/need cars with 1200km range, and are willing to pay serious money to get it, is laughable. We have become accustomed to having a certain range in our ICE vehicles, but it has never truly been necessary for the most part. There are very few people who actually need 1000km+ of range, and less than 10% of the population actually want this enough to pay for it.
Plus you have to cart all that battery weight around with you permanently, when most of the time it is barely being used.
If batteries do ever improve enough to give 1200km range they will likely be halved in size and mass to give around 600km instead. This would be much more desirable to most people, not to mention half the price.
As long as a recharge can happen reasonably quickly it's a short stop on an otherwise very long 600km+ drive.
Plus you have to cart all that battery weight around with you permanently, when most of the time it is barely being used.
Indeed. It's very inefficient to spend a lot of money (and permanent weight) to lug around a huge battery when you're just doing 20-40km commutes 99% of the time. Stopping to charge occasionally on the few long trips you take each year is no great hardship (assuming there are chargers available in the appropriate places…)
If batteries do ever improve enough to give 1200km range they will likely be halved in size and mass to give around 600km instead
Precisely - the appropriate number is debatable, but somewhere between 350 and 600km is a totally adequate range for almost everyone, even in a country like Australia because 90% of the population lives in an urban environment and only a select few ever go on genuinely long drives in isolated places. The fact that you can already cross the Nullabor, or circumnavigate Australia without any major issues is evidence of that.
lol another nao can.
From what I read you'd be pissed if you bought it today.
you'd be pissed if you bought it
Would take me more than a few drinks to buy one.
Buy another one and return the new car with the old receipt.
they're (along with a few other makers) clearing their stock in ahead of some ANCAP rating changes in early 2025 (think it's March)
Expect to see more deals from MG and a few others before then
Why would that change anything though? I thought new rating changes only affect cars tested after that date, MG dont have to retest and they get to keep their current ratings
Some predicting crap rating?
They are clearing stock because it's the MY22 model and it's almost MY25
MG has a long history of producing reliable cars and is a respectable Britis…. I mean Chinese car company.
Funny because when it was a British company it was still shit. I know it’s fun and easy to have a go at the Chinese, but it’s hypocritical and ironic that 60-70% of the things in your household are probably made there. Rather than complaining as a society about Chinese made goods, why don’t people get off their ‘white collar service’ high horse and invest in manufacturing in this country to the ‘standards’ Ozbargain people demand.
Spoiler: you’ll have to pay $100k plus for the same care produced here but hey I’m sure you’ll fork that out because Nathan made it instead of Lim.
Sadly a lot of the time now when it says made in Australia it means poorly made… sucks how times have changed :(
What's something made in Australia that sucks?
@MerlinKlendatu: Not wrong. To make matters worse, its not just careless aussie tradies you need to worry about these days. I see a lot of what appear to be visa workers, at least in my neck of the woods in Sydney. Not even the same people every day either. Some have no english (i've picked up a few items listed on market place from work sites etc) so how they could be complying to regs… well, of course they arent. I know nothing about the industry random observations and feedback from ppl who built houses. I'd be freaking out if i had to build a house.
@gakko: Quality of a certain brand of single piece leather boots favoured by the working professionals especially those who work for one of the Big 4
@0 0 0: Good old RM Williams of course. My boss at work bangs on about his RM Williams boots all the time.
Time to show him this review - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N5QX2_5jvtY&t=22s
@gakko: All politicians, some of the houses & apartment, apart from these what else do we really making now adays?
It depends what 'it' is. We still manufacture quite a bit of sophisticated stuff here, just not a lot in the low cost high volume space, e.g. consumer goods.
It's like the American rednecks and hillbillys complaining about China and then doing all their shopping at Walmart where everything is made in China.
Yeah and ours here yeah our Ute's are not mad ein chine or neither those Asian country then check the label on their cars oh sugar is manda in Thyland I though was Japan or America wrong mate hahah
Or just pay enough for Chinese to build rockets that can go to the moon rather than complaining it's cheap and crap.
eerrrrr everything you find on oz bargains and inside your home is likely to be made in some third world / developing country where the treatment of workers is likely to be poor.
unless your house is full of custom made pieces and made to wear clothing using only western labour, then forget about it and get off your high horse thinking only china is treating their workforce bad.
@TheMindsetTraveller: So you aren't allowed to criticise something unless you can personally solve it on your own?
Far better for a person to be working voluntarily in "poor" conditions than be unemployed and hungry. The key is "voluntarily". Their choice, not of someone sitting a world apart with no direct knowledge of their context.
@jalwa: When you're hungry or homeless "voluntarily" takes on a different meaning than the one you're proposing.
You r so behind…
Beside what the other mentioned, i just want to mention, Chinese labour is not so cheap now. A lot of retailers, particularly Clothes retailer have moved out from China about 10-15 years ago. Check your clothes label bro
🤣🤣🤣
In phillipines they still market mg as British.
It appears its due to the Stolen islands in the South China Sea and the reluctance to buy chinese there.
So, buy at your own risk then….this price is sinking faster then ev market
Possibly, but this price is only 3k more than the petrol version. So I don't think cheapening EV components would bring it down too much.
At this price it is a no brainer to buy the PHEV HS over the petrol HS. However, I feel like BYD is the brand to go with, it's just not worth it at the moment as you won't recoup your savings. In general, petrol prices are cheap and home loan rates are high, it won't be worth upgrading to an electric/plug in hybrid car at all as you won't money back.
This new sharp pricing on the HS PHEV is the only exception as you should get your $3k back in 4 years or so provided you charge your battery at least every week.
than*
Note. This isn't very efficient, it uses 8L/100km or so if the battery isn't charged https://www.carexpert.com.au/car-reviews/2023-mg-hs-plus-ev-… and you need to force it to EV mode of you don't want the engine to run above.40km/he.
This.
The advertised economy if 1.7L is based on a charged battery. So unless your driving patterns is almost entirely short trips and you can charge it constantly, you will get nowhere near it.
Oh and to make it worse that electric range of 63km is on the fantasy-land NEDC test cycle, in the real world you'll get less
The reviewer said they were getting 6 to 6.5L/100km. The 1.7L figure is likely to be valid on short low speed trips.
I neutral rolling down a hill with the AC on?
Also, EV won't kick in if heating is on in the car. So, most of winters you will be driving in Auto ~8L/100km. Don't ask me how I know.
..wife yelling in the background "You bought it for 50k in May 2023. You idiot"
@akplayer: Yeah I realised that lol! I switch my fan off in winter so that it doesn't turn my hybrid car into a petrol car to get the same fuel economy again. Can't do the same in summer as the heat is too much to deal with. That AC feels too good.
What equivalent car with much better economy would you compare this to? If I look at the RAV4, the base model is about $11k more. If you bought the MG, how many years would it take you to spend that $11k difference in extra fuel? Genuinely asking. If I can I always prefer to pay the premium for better quality but for a lot of people deferring that $11k cost over X number of years is a significant difference in affordability to them.
Real world test suggests the RAV4 uses about 6L/100km. Assuming the MG HS PLUS EV uses 8L/100km, then savings of 2L/100km. Assuming driving 20,000km per year, then it will be saving about 400L per year. Assuming petrol is $2 per litre, then savings of $800 per year. It will take almost 14 years to spend $11k of fuel differences.
Toyota have proven themselves to be quite a reliable car and their hybrid technology have been proven themselves over the years. Not sure how well the MG hybrids will hold up over time.
@haz: RAV4 hybrid is 8L/100km from personal testing. The MG hd we tested was far better than that, averaging 5.5L/100km. Toyota hybrid is not known for their fuel efficiency these days. Maybe 10 years ago?
@onlinepred: 2021 RAV4 hybrid I've had since new gets 6 - 6.5 L/km.
I track it each time it's filled and it's pretty much on the money with the display in the car.
It's been below 6 on a couple of longer easy driving road trips.
@techno2000: Drove bout 110kms-ish in a RAV4 hybrid a few weeks ago. Coolangatta to SeaWorld over to movie world, back to Tweed heads then the airport, filled up at the airport, used 4.5l of fuel. We did crawl from light to light all the way up the gold coast hwy on the way up, freeway on the way back. Cars sound horrible, but they work great and won't be worthless in 10yrs time
@onlinepred: Not so sure that your experience is consistent with numerous reputable publications testings, particularly with the statement that "Toyota hybrid is not known for their fuel efficiency these days."
People should take that claim with a grain of salt and see reputable reviews for themselves.
@x d: Yea, I don't know what to tell you. After being told the Rav4 hybrid can do 4.7l/100km, I couldn't believe it. It could be a faulty battery perhaps? Either way, my work colleague struggles to better 6.1, and they really really try hard to not use too much.
I drove it in normal mode, not sure if they makes a difference either? I didn't use ECO.
Toyota's smaller cars are obviously more efficient, but so are Honda/Kia/Suzuki. Audi seems to get better fuel efficiency in the medium SUV range.
@onlinepred: It definitely can. Don't have it any more but had a Hybrid RAV 4 Cruiser 2WD for 6 months at the beginning of 2023. I owned sport cars all my life so don't drive slow. Always in the fast lane and in power band taking off from the lights.
The trick and Toyota probably doesn't educate buyers well is that you need to harvest the kinetic energy early in slowing down to a stop by not braking at the last minute but to press the brake early lightly to increase the regen from weak to max, without activating the friction brakes.
Got the economy from 5.5 early on down to 4.7 and it stayed there until I sold it 8000 kms later.
Toyota's hybrid system is pretty much the best in the business IMO, even though I don't have one any more (moved to EV and PHEV for FBT reasons)
It'll be more than $11k of difference (approx. $18.5k) as the base models of the RAV4 don't even have leather seats, heated seats/door mirrors, 360 degree camera, moon roof or a powered tail gate. This has a lot more tech than the RAV4 (even the cruizer model at $56k) and as long as you charge it up once a week, the fuel economy will be better as well. 64km of pure electric only range is far more in hybrid mode. If you charge this up twice a week you should be getting 1.1L/100km. The outdated and aging RAV4 that has minimal tech will never make the money back.
I like phevs but be aware their stated fuel efficiency depends on driving with full charge often. It's not the efficiency achieved by driving in standard hybrid mode when the battery is low. It's kind of meaningless imo.
Well the idea is that all these day-to-day short trips around town are done almost fully electric. When you go for a longer trip out of town then yeah you will pay for a bit of fuel.
The issue with these Chinese cars racing to the bottom for price is current owners are getting shafted on re-sale value
until you think these cars are at their price floor you might want to hold off…
otherwise these are really good value
True words. Short term gain, long term pain.
The fact that their government put tariffs on Australian exports in retaliation to just a comment, now their economy is in real strife and need the world to prop them up via their sole, most advantageous industry.
And we fall for the trick. Theyve even banned EVs from their underground parkings.
They sure have capitalism worked out to their benefit
Australian Government did the same on some of their products, we would be a copy of China if the politicians would get away with it
Given how different the government handling of COVID times in Australia with other democratic countries,I would say we are already close to China
Theyve even banned EVs from their underground parkings.
Didn't know this. A sensible idea given what can happen if they catch fire. (I know it's rare but it's still devastating.)
banned by some property owners…. not banned by any legal authorities
@Shenannigoat: I know EVs are a "relatively" new industry… but I can't believe why manufacturers continue to make and market with lithium ION (manganese, cobalt etc cathode) battery power. The far safer lithium iron phosphate (LiFePO4) is the clearly appropriate chemistry until something better comes along.
The drawback of a lower energy density is far outweighed by the safety of no fireballs.
Tesla has made the switch in their home batteries…. they don't have a bad reputation for failures in their anti fireball strategies, but switching to the safer LiFePO4 is a clear indicator of the difference in safety.
I have no interest in an EV without a safe battery.
@rooster7777: Most manufacturers are bringing out (or have) LiFePO4/LFP battery vehicles, including Tesla.
NMC batteries do have better performance characteristics though (at the expense of being happiest kept at 80% SoC), not enough for my tastes though as LFP has plenty of go juice.
I can't find what chemistry the HS Plus is, which is annoying as a consumer, as, like you, I prefer to avoid NMC where possible.
@gunslinger: nodsnods… unfortunately it can be hard to find out the battery chemistry, with a mix across many manufacturer's ranges.
I guess when manufacturers have only have 100% Lithium iron, they'll probably be shouting proudly from the rooftops about the safety.
@rooster7777: Because mass and volume matter a lot when you have to lug the battery around with you.
It's not a small difference, LiFePO4 weighs a lot more and takes up a lot more space than Li-ion.
For home batteries these things don't matter, apart from maybe shipping costs.
banned by some property owners
who frequently posted here every time an EV deal comes up.
What type of car cannot catch fire?
It makes sense to ban fast chargers from underground, but not parking or even slow charge.
You'd be pissed to have bought that car in the last few weeks