How accurate are driving range claims from popular BYD, Tesla and Kia EVs? The latest results from Australia’s Real-World Testing Program show how EVs continue to fall short of the stated mark.
Motoring
Research and compare hybrid cars on sale: models, prices, specs, running costs, safety
Research and compare Subaru Forester models on sale: prices, specs, running costs, safety
Research and compare Chery Tiggo 4 models on sale: prices, specs, running costs, safety
Research and compare MG ZS models on sale: prices, specs, running costs, safety
Research and compare Kia Carnival models on sale: prices, specs, running costs, safety
Research and compare hybrid and PHEV SUVs on sale: models, prices, specs, running costs, safety
Do hybrid cars and SUVs match their fuel consumption claim? Latest real-world testing results in Australia
Hybrid cars have come under scrutiny in Australian real-world fuel consumption testing, with popular models from Chery and Subaru offering better economy than advertised – while others miss the mark.
Popular new hybrid small and medium SUVs are proving their value as economical alternatives to traditional petrol-engined models in the latest round of real-world fuel economy testing by the Australian Automobile Association (AAA).
The AAA’s Real-World Testing Program (RWTP), which also assesses electric vehicle driving range and EV efficiency (see our separate guide), has tested almost 200 vehicles over the past three years – including 33 hybrid cars – and found the majority consume more fuel in the real world compared to the manufacturer’s claimed figure, up to 33% higher in the case of hybrids.
However, the latest round of testing has found the recently launched Chery Tiggo 4 Hybrid and new-generation Subaru Forester Hybrid consume less fuel in the real world than the mandated laboratory test figure that appears on the windscreen label of each new car sold in Australia.
That compares to the MG ZS Hybrid and Kia Carnival Hybrid – also tested in the latest round – which failed to match their respective claimed fuel economy figure. Although the discrepancies were less striking than other hybrid cars tested previously, the mixed results underscore the importance of the real-world testing program.
“Affordable and fuel-efficient hybrids are now hugely popular in Australia as buyers look for good deals with a new car that will help them save money by keeping their running costs down,” says RACV Motoring Editor Terry Martin. “But it’s important to have confidence that the advertised fuel economy figure is realistic and relevant to people’s needs.”
Let’s take a closer look at the latest results, the process involved to achieve them and how they compare to other hybrids tested.
More: Research and compare new cars, SUVs and utes on sale today in Australia
More: How to find the cheapest fuel near you
How is real-world fuel economy tested in Australia?
The AAA Real-World Testing Program is conducted across a 93km circuit in and around Geelong in Victoria. It uses strict testing protocols based on European regulations to ensure results are repeatable and to minimise the influence of human factors such as driving style and changing traffic flows.
During real-world testing, the combustion-engined vehicles (including hybrids) are fitted with equipment that measures and records greenhouse gas emissions and pollutants that affect air quality. The data collected is also used to calculate fuel consumption.
Australian law requires car manufacturers to conduct a laboratory test for all new cars, SUVs and utes (up to 3.5t gross vehicle mass), as set down under Australian Design Rule (ADR) 81/02. This covers urban and extra-urban tests, and a combined result, which are all included – along with the equivalent combined CO2 emissions figure – on a (removable) label that must be placed on the windscreen at the point of sale.
The lab testing doesn’t, however, reflect the actual results of driving on Australian roads – and the differences can be substantial.
Research and compare hybrid cars on sale: models, prices, specs, running costs, safety
Hybrid car fuel efficiency: claimed vs real world
| Hybrid cars and SUVs | |||
|---|---|---|---|
|
2026 Subaru Forester Hybrid |
6.2L/100km |
5.5L/100km |
-12% |
|
2026 Chery Tiggo 4 Hybrid |
5.4L/100km |
5.3L/100km |
-1% |
|
2026 MG ZS Hybrid |
4.7L/100km |
5.0L/100km |
+6% |
|
2026 Kia Carnival Hybrid |
5.8L/100km |
6.0L/100km |
+4% |
Source: AAA Real-World Testing Program
2026 Subaru Forester Hybrid: Real-world fuel economy
The new sixth-generation Subaru Forester medium SUV marks a significant shift for the Japanese brand. Where the previous Forester Hybrid used a mild hybrid powertrain and was found through the RWTP to offer no real-world improvements in fuel economy, the new model features a full series-parallel hybrid system that delivers on the promise of lower consumption.
In the latest real-world testing, the 2.5-litre petrol-electric 2026 Subaru Forester Hybrid AWD used a considerable 12% less than the mandated lab test, achieving 5.5L/100km. The official claim is 6.2L/100km.
The Forester Hybrid also emitted 9% fewer CO2 emissions than claimed on the sticker in the showroom (127 vs 140g/km).
For reference, the previous 2023 Subaru Forester Hybrid (with a 2.0-litre mild hybrid system) was found under real-world testing to consume 10% more fuel than the mandated lab test at 7.4L/100km. It also emitted 13% more CO2 emissions at 172g/km. The overall result was actually higher than a non-hybrid 2.5-litre petrol-powered 2023 Subaru Forester, which managed 7.2L/100km.
Research and compare Subaru Forester models on sale: prices, specs, running costs, safety
2026 Chery Tiggo 4 Hybrid: Real-world fuel economy
The Chery Tiggo 4 has fast become one of the most popular small SUVs in Australia, recently adding a hybrid powertrain option. The 2026 Chery Tiggo 4 Hybrid Ultimate uses a 1.5-litre petrol-electric engine with 5.4L/100km fuel consumption, based on the official ADR 81/02 lab testing.
The manufacturer’s claimed figure proved to be closely aligned with SUV’s economy in the real world, with RWTP results 1% better at 5.3L/100km. CO2 emissions were also close, with Tiggo 4 Hybrid found to be just 1% higher in the real-world test at 124g/km.
In comparison, an earlier test of the 1.5-litre petrol-powered 2025 Chery Tiggo 4 Pro saw the SUV emit 22% more CO2 emissions (203g/km) and consume 21% more fuel than the mandated lab test (8.8 vs 7.3L/100km).
Research and compare Chery Tiggo 4 models on sale: prices, specs, running costs, safety
The MG ZS Hybrid+ Essence used 6% more fuel than claimed, but was still reasonably efficient at 5.0L/100km.
2026 MG ZS Hybrid: Real-world fuel economy
A direct rival for the Chery Tiggo 4, the MG ZS Hybrid small SUV – which also uses a 1.5-litre petrol-electric hybrid powertrain – was less impressive in real-world testing compared to the manufacturer’s claim, despite consuming less fuel overall compared to the Tiggo 4 Hybrid.
Against the 4.7L/100km claim, the 2026 MG ZS Hybrid+ Essence used 6% more fuel in the RWTP assessment at 5.0L/100km. It also emitted 6% more CO2 emissions at 116g/km in the real-world test.
In earlier tests, the 1.5-litre petrol-powered 2023 MG ZS delivered 7.7L/100km economy, up 8% compared to the lab-based claim. CO2 emissions were 5% higher.
Research and compare MG ZS models on sale: prices, specs, running costs, safety
2026 Kia Carnival Hybrid: Real-world fuel economy
The 2026 Kia Carnival Hybrid uses a 1.6-litre petrol-electric powertrain with an official ADR fuel consumption figure of 5.8L/100km. In real-world testing, the Carnival S hybrid version of Australia’s most popular people-mover consumed 4% more fuel, averaging 6.0L/100km.
The Carnival Hybrid also emitted 6% more CO2 emissions than claimed at 140g/km.
Previous testing of the Kia Carnival was based around 2023 petrol and diesel models, both of which were found to offer better economy than the manufacturer’s claim. The 3.5-litre six-cylinder petrol Carnival returned 9.4L/100km (-2%), while the 2.2-litre four-cylinder diesel came in at 6.0L/100km (-7%).
Research and compare Kia Carnival models on sale: prices, specs, running costs, safety
Other hybrid cars: Real-world fuel economy
In previous rounds of Australia’s Real-World Testing Program, almost all hybrid cars used more fuel than advertised – some with significant variations. Notable results in top-selling SUV segments include:
Hybrid small SUVs
2025 GWM Haval Jolion Hybrid – 6.5L/100km (+27%)
2025 Subaru Crosstrek mild hybrid – 7.2L/100km (+10%)
2024 Toyota C-HR Hybrid – 4.4L/100km (+10%)
2024 Toyota Yaris Cross Hybrid – 4.5L/100km (+12%)
2024 Hyundai Kona Hybrid – 5.2L/10km (+33%)
2024 Suzuki Swift mild hybrid – 5.2L/100km (+32%)
Hybrid medium SUVs
2026 GWM Haval H6 Hybrid – 6.2L/100km (+19%)
2025 Mazda CX-60 mild hybrid – 7.8L/100km (+5%)
2025 Kia Sportage Hybrid – 5.6L/100km (+14%)
2024 Hyundai Tucson Hybrid – 5.7L/100km (+8%)
2024 Nissan X-Trail e-Power – 6.7L/100km (+9%)
2022 Toyota RAV4 Hybrid – 4.8L/100km (+2%)
Hybrid large SUVs
2025 Hyundai Santa Fe Hybrid – 6.2L/100km (+11%)
2025 Kia Sorento Hybrid – 5.8L/100km (+2%)
2023 Toyota Kluger Hybrid – 5.8L/100km (+4%)
2025 Mazda CX-80 mild hybrid – 8.0L/100km (-5%)
Research and compare hybrid and PHEV SUVs on sale: models, prices, specs, running costs, safety
Petrol and diesel cars, SUVs and utes: Real-world fuel economy
The balance of the latest results cover the MG5 petrol small sedan, GWM Tank 300 diesel large SUV and diesel 4x2 utes: Mazda BT-50 Single Cab and Mitsubishi Triton Single Cab and Double Cab variants. See the table below for details.
Full results of all vehicles tested under the program are available on the RWTP website.
| Petrol and diesel cars, SUVs, utes | |||
|---|---|---|---|
|
2024 MG5 |
6.4L/100km |
6.8L/100km |
+6% |
|
2026 GWM Tank 300 |
7.8L/100km |
8.2L/100km |
+5% |
|
2025 Mazda BT-50 4x2 Single Cab |
6.9L/100km |
7.4L/100km |
+7% |
|
2025 Mitsubishi Triton 4x2 Single Cab |
7.6L/100km |
7.8L/100km |
+3% |
|
2026 Mitsubishi Triton 4x2 Double Cab |
7.5L/100km |
7.0L/100km |
-7% |
Source: AAA Real-World Testing Program
The 2026 Mitsubishi Triton dual-cab proved to be more economical in real-world testing compared to the official lab-based claim.
Australia’s Real-World Testing Program: FAQs
Buying and running a car is a major expense and consumers are entitled to expect reliable information on a vehicle’s fuel efficiency and, in the case of EVs, driving range. Motorists are potentially paying significantly more each year for fuel (or, to a lesser extent, electricity) than they would expect from the stickers based on laboratory results.
Overseas lab testing for fuel consumption, CO2 and noxious emissions usually don’t reflect the actual results of driving on Australian roads, and the differences are often substantial.
Yes. The testing system has been designed to give an accurate and consistent portrayal of vehicles’ fuel consumption and CO2 emissions – or driving range and energy efficiency for EVs – in Australian on-road driving conditions.
Tests are conducted in compliance with strict guidelines based on European Union legislation and developed in consultation with Australian regulators and industry. This ensures the results are repeatable and mitigates the influence of human factors such as driving style and changing traffic flows.
The Real-World Testing Program’s 93km route runs through parts of Geelong in Victoria and its outskirts. It includes urban roads (up to 60km/h), rural roads (60-80km/h) and a motorway (up to 100km/h), covering a range of road and traffic conditions.
The test results are derived from the average of at least two drives along the route. GPS tracks the vehicle location and speed for data analysis and to ensure the test complies with AAA protocols.
In developing the test route, the program’s reference car (a Toyota RAV4) underwent 23 tests. All up, fuel consumption variability was found to be less than 2.5%.
The Real-World Testing Program prioritises high-selling vehicles for testing. It aims to test two variants of each model with the most popular powertrains – for example, one petrol and one hybrid, one petrol and one diesel, or one single-motor EV and one dual-motor EV.
This provides broad market coverage to ensure as many consumers as possible can benefit from the results as soon as possible. Special-interest vehicles, such as new models or new technology offerings, are also considered for testing as this could provide useful benchmarks and insights.
Vehicles used in the program are registered and generally one to three years old with about 10,000-20,000km on the odometer. The combustion-engined vehicles use fuel (ULP, PULP or diesel) that can be bought at any service station. The specification of the fuel used is tested to ensure any impact on results due to fuel quality is controlled.
The Australian Automobile Association (AAA) runs the Real-World Testing Program on behalf of the Federal Government. The AAA is the nation’s peak motoring body, supported by state and territory motoring clubs, including RACV.
Vehicle brands have been consulted about the testing protocols and are kept up to date with the program’s progress, but they provide no funding for it. Vehicle brands are provided with test results, but they have no influence over the vehicles chosen for testing or publication of the results.
Looking for ways to save on fuel?
- Tips for fuel-efficient driving
- How to find the cheapest fuel in Melbourne and Victoria
- Downsizing your car to save money in an EV era
- The most fuel-efficient cars, SUVs, and utes in Australia
- Money saving tips to help cut the costs of owning a car
- Calculating the cost of fuel: petrol prices explained
- Research and compare budget-friendly small cars
- Research and compare new electric cars in Australia
The information provided is general advice only. Before making any decisions please consider your own circumstances and the Product Disclosure Statement and Target Market Determinations. For copies, visit racv.com.au. As distributor, RACV Insurance Services Pty Ltd AFS Licence No. 230039 receives commission for each policy sold or renewed. Product(s) issued by Insurance Manufacturers of Australia Pty Ltd ABN 93 004 208 084 AFS Licence No. 227678.
