Ford Falcon XR8 vs Holden Commodore SS AFM fuel economy challenge
April 27, 2009 by Paul Maric
Leaving Melbourne on an early, and slightly chilly autumn morning, our destination is Tarcutta, NSW.
The reason behind our choice is that the small farming town sits exactly halfway between Melbourne and Sydney on one of the busiest major highways in the world – the Hume.
Historically, this town was once a change over point for interstate truckies traveling the long road between our two largest capital cities, but with progress being what it is, Tarcutta will be bypassed within the next few years.
But, we digress.
The rationale behind this destination is that by driving up and back will approximate the same scenario as driving Melbourne to Sydney, a datum roadtest for fuel economy, but with the added bonus we all end up back in our own beds after the trip.
Our first stretch takes us from Melbourne’s busy CBD and sees us quickly on to a network of freeways before climbing the Great Divide on the Hume Highway to our first driver change point, a quarter of the way to Sydney, in Glenrowan, Victoria.
Old Ned might have got away if he’d been in a V8 but he was 130-years too early!
6AM will see our departure from South Yarra in Melbourne. Unlike other publications which have gone for unrealistic measures to save on fuel (folding mirrors, taping gaps and accelerating slow than the speed of walk) we will simulate real world driving conditions which everyday people like you and us would partake.
The most technologically advanced part of this trip will be our live GPS updates and live video crosses throughout the day. Tune in to our live video feeds at: 6AM – South Yarra. 9:35AM – Glenrowan. 1PM – Tarcutta. 7:30PM – South Yarra.
You will be able to chat to us LIVE via the video feed at these times. If you have any questions in between these times, simple post them as comments and we will answer them with each live cross. We will also be logging our entire route throughout the day with the VBOX, that will go online with our conclusion article.
LIVE VIDEO FEED:
LIVE GPS UPDATES:
<br />
Print it: 
Interesting. Also please let us know about ride comfort – especially Back Pain as you drive along …..
Interested in the amount of tyre roar (or not) as you go along. Is it noticably different in either car as the surfaces change.
This may also have a bit to do with the tyres of course…so what are the brands of tyres on each car?
Our company supplies software to one of the companies doing construction testing on the Albury bypass. Could have told you guys about that roadwork but figured you must have known it was all happening.
Nevertheless great coverage so far. Are those figures you talked about this morning for mileage legit ? Just over 9L /100 kays for the XR8 ?? That can’t be right can it ?
PS. Great real world comparo and look forward to the final analysis.
Shame both cars didn’t have the air con / climate control on.
* 9.67L/100km for the XR8 with the climate on.
* 9.57L/100km for the SS with no air con at all.
Consider the amount of 40kmh driving and stoppages / idling which should’ve favoured the AFM. That’s a definite win for the Ford.
So far, the Ford has had more power, more torque, faster acceleration, better braking, quieter interior, more comfortable ride and a better sounding exhaust.
NB A usual trait of Holden is to be optimistic with their trip computer’s too. (Guess it makes people feel better. Even though they are being lied to.) Which you guy’s have noticed.
On the trip computer angle. Can you tell us the figures that the display’s have for each car versus the actual obtained.
A prominent magazine did a comparison after running out of fuel previously and found the GMH car was 12% optimistic and the Ford 4% pessimistic.
Were both cars’ petrol tanks filled before driving? Maybe you could fill them up at the end to see how much fuel was actually used, when compared the trip computers estimates?
Phill C,
as a RACQ service guy once told me,
Never trust Commodore fuel guages or LPG guages
Also, work was done on the fuel guage on the FG to try and make it even more accurate.
One thing I am interested in is.
Have you guys used the Cruise control at all or are you just doing it all manually?
Another epic fail for Holden. Why do they even bother?
Phil C.
“Consider the amount of 40kmh driving and stoppages / idling which should’ve favoured the AFM. That’s a definite win for the Ford.”
Actually AFM is at no advantage at 40kmh or in stop start situations, or while idling. AFM is only active once the car is in or past 3rd Gear, once staying above aproximately 60kmh to 80kmh with little throttle input.
And i am hoping that the outcome of this test is not biased in any way, either to Holden or Ford.
Also a question.
In hill situations, will you be slowing down on the down hills to stay at the speed limit, and then accelerating again up the hill, or will u let the car flow down the hill
to gain and carry some extra km’s up a hill and then continue driving normaly ?
Thanks for the reply about the trip computers.
You said that the VE displays 9.2L and has used 9.57L, so it has been basically 4% optimistic. Much better than previous years.
You’ve also said the FG is pessimistic with its reading. Stupid move by Ford. I think, get it as close as you can, but not optimistic.
Why make your ‘customer/driver’ think they are using more than they are. Some people do talk about what they’re trip meter shows. Not doing the calculations at the pump. The Falcon has in most forms been the more economical since the AU. Unfortunately, there is about 10 years of Commodores out there with blatantly untrue readings.
Cheers.
In regards to the FG headlights / highbeams being fantastic, i know how you feel. My neighbour (FG XR6) reckons they are tops too.
I had a rental Hyundai Getz this past week whilst in Darwin / Kakadu and with the limited amount of nightime highway driving, I kept wanting to flick the high beams on. Unfortunately they already were…
Compared to my AU XR headlights on low beam, the Getz weren’t even as good on high beam. High beam, versus high beam no comparison. Shows that Australian designed cars generally are very good for our conditions.
Car Enthusiast Says:
Actually AFM is at no advantage at 40kmh or in stop start situations, or while idling. AFM is only active once the car is in or past 3rd Gear, once staying above aproximately 60kmh to 80kmh with little throttle input.
Well, I thought that idling, 40kmh, stop start traffic would be AFM at it’s best. Your saying that it doesn’t even become active in those conditions. Thanks for the info.
That is just crazy. Holden have been so stupid with this. Absolutely pointless really.
Last question is what fuel have both cars been running? Have they both been fuelled with the same rating fuels?
IIRC the Commo gets it’s power and economy ratings using 98 octane. What about the XR8?
NB As for the a/c on for half journey. Doesn’t really equal out. Time of day, terrain etc. But it will be better than not making that change.
This just shows how inefficient the Holden V8 is with its pushrods and 2 valves per cyl. The Falcon engine is giving away alot of capacity but has more power, character, performance, better fuel economy and sounds better. This Boss engine is also unique to the Falcon and the changes they made from BF to FG has really improved it. I think its a credit to Ford and FPV who actually design and develop their engines instead of just pulling them out of a crate and dropping them in like Holden and HSV do………
The FG styling also looks fantastic and makes the VE look dated already……….and that bonnet bulge is the ducks guts !!!!!! Looks fantastic ………….
Yeh just arsk peter brock he was looking good for top ten finish at targa tasmania and hes trip coputer said all was fine then it jus trun out of fuel.Its been well know there trip comp are way out
That’s a good point
“Limited Slip”
100% Spot On.
I just hope the cars buyers of Australia see or hear about this fabulous comparison.! Get over “this” idea that “Holden is the Best” BS.! LOL
Looks like you guys are havin’ a lotta fun.!
How do ya get a job like this.? Well Done.
“Limited Slip”
You do realise a non AFM commodore is faster than a falcon dont you? (did you forget this comparison is the AFM commodore?) Also a AFM V8 according to MOTOR magazaine is better on fuel than the falcon. But dosent mean much, I would rather an engine thats good at both.(not have to choose AFM or non AFM, thats why I would say the falcons 8 is the better option)
Holden could easily get 300kw out of the 6.0ltr if they wanted to without raising bugger all fuel usage. And Im sure you will find if they still offer the next model commodore without AFM than it will have 290kw to match the falcon.
Holden dont just take the engine out of the crate, its been tuned to fit holdens needs, not too different from the falcon V8 there….
On the looks department I think the falcon from the front has a fresher face than the holden but on overall body shape the commodore looks like the newer car. Can still see too many AU lines when looking at the Falcon from a the most side angle views looking at its lines. From dead front on the falcon looks so mean and oh so cool.
CAnt see any AU lines on FG …….they dont share any panels and unlike BF doesnt have the same doors…….FG is way more modern tan AU or BF. The ony way GM get more power from engines is to increase the capacity this is why the Holden\GM engines increase in size all the time because they are limited by the ancient valvetrain ……..
GM\Holden do just take the engine out of the crate and drop it in because it is made and developed in AMerica. The boss Ford V8 has many Australian made parts and is assembled and developed at FPV on their dynos. you didnt know that Aussie Cars?
@LimitedSlip
So every XR8 engine is assembled at FPV? Actually I did not know that… Just read up on it then. Very Cool.
So I am right in saying Ford were struggling to get anymore out of the 5.4lt engine so they had to get FPV to crack it open and rebuild it to beat the VE (which they did in power numbers but still failed to do in performance because the FG`s a fat bastard, which is funny cause looking at the 2 you would not pick it to be the fat one)
And you also forget that the 6.0lt makes more tourqe and does not weigh as much.
And when you get up to the HSV 6.2 vs the 315 boss, fuel efficency turns the tides big time the 315 boss drinks alot more than the 6.2. Goes to show capscity does not mean thirstier car.
I do know FG does not share any common panels with AU,BA/BF but they still have not got rid of that look.
Each model they have tried to hide it by lifting boot shape and raising the door heights but its still there.
Put the 2 cars front to back and look side on, the holden looks alot more modern and in my opinion looks better from the rear. I do like the Xr`s front end and I really like the FPV`s front end.
Sorry you didnt answer me before? You do know the non AFM SS is faster than the XR8 dont you? lol..im just messing with ya =P
AussieCars,
The boss motors used by Ford Aus aren’t used in that form anywhere else. It wasn’t that Ford Aus couldn’t get any more out of it, it’s just that FPV build them under contract.
Also you mention that a non-afm VE is quicker than aN XR8.
But try getting a non-afm with an auto….. Some people do want an auto trans.
Aussie Cars:
Limited Slip comments 10.40/10.43a.m are spot on
If your 6.0 litre V8 is so wonderful why in this comparison
does it get beaten in every department including also brake/comfort/ride and handling and headlights LOL
Oh the 6.0 litre without AFM will be quicker than the falcon.
O.K where does that leave the Holden for fuel economy then?
& like Limited Slip said[like many others] why does the Holden need “THAT” extra engine size just to be on-a-par,
performance wise.
See the Falcon only needs 5.4 litres to do the same or was that better.LOL.
Aussie,
People who want to tune up a car to the max will opt for the I6T anyway so your argument of tuning potential in the 6.0L is well and truely counter acted.
You do know the I6T is faster than the lot of them dont you??
The SS is the best performing vehicle holden have, the XR8 isnt fords best performing.
Scary isnt it……
aussie just so you know the commodore ways more than the falcon.
XR6T weight 1694
XR8 weight 1770 SS weight 1806
F6 weight 1805
GT-P weight 1855 GTS weight 1845
so i wouldn’t call the Falcon fat.
Escort,
I think he meant Fat as in “PHAT”
I believe he was trying to compliment the falcon on its awesome looks
Also Aussie, the only decent looking rear end on the lion side of things is the GTS rear end.
The SS rear looks pretty Pox to me.
Not a fan of the high tail lights, it just looks all awkward
Andrew Im the opposite. I like the high lights on the holdens but not a fan of the HSV lights. Think they sit too low.
Nah I meant Fat…phat is a word that stopped being used in the early 90`s =P
Schah7: Where does that leave the non AFM engine?? Not too far behind the AFM…AFM makes bugger all difference in real world driving as this site has told us before with there long term AFM. AFM at the moment is useless unless your going on a long trip. Another gimmick to try and sell cars. By the way that aussiecars guy I think hes spot on =P
These results prove conclusively the lies that other publications sprout so often that Holden have the superior V8. Motor and Wheels are Holden magazines and have a sickening bias.
AussieCars demonstrates this by telling us, “..a AFM V8 according to MOTOR magazaine is better on fuel than the falcon..”, so no doubt Motor took their figures from the cars trip computer, or are simply manipulating figures to tell the majority of it’s dwindling number of buyers what they want to hear.
Again this is confirmation that Holden do not have a single car in their entire range that bests the equivalent car in the Ford line up. Not a single one.
Well done Ford.
AussieCars The FG Falcon may be Fat but the VE Commodore is Fatter.
@Millatime: Oh no, not the wheels/motor conspiracy. Your not one of THOSE people are you??? You dont happen to drive a Toyota do you?
“Again this is confirmation that Holden do not have a single car in their entire range that bests the equivalent car in the Ford line up” – The Statesman…ok not really fair.
The SS Ute, its a better car than the XR6T and the XR8. Surely you have to agree with me there… Fords still using suspension from the 60`s on those things
SS Ute and holden utes in genrale are show ponys Ford ute are built for what there ment for
AussieCars
A ute. Thats short for utility. That means for carrying stuff. Which the falcon can, and the other one can’t. With movable tie down points. And one tonne on the tray. Great stuff again from Ford. 60’s tecgnology is still good for this stuff.
But is 50’s technology under the bonnet from Holden what you should be getting after handing over your hard earned in 2009?
Where is the final review with all the stats and figures etc. Been hanging out all day for the details but haven’t seen a thing. You boys been sleeping in today ? When/where can we expect to see the final info and analysis ?
“SS Ute and holden utes in genrale are show ponys Ford ute are built for what there ment for”
lol…oh ok….spoken like a true ford man. So if the fords arent show pony`s why does ford make an XR6T ute and an XR8 ute?? At least I can agree most the FG range is better than the VE range (it should be ..its alot newer)
I may like commodores a little more than falcons (mainly because I like the VE`s looks better) but at least I try not to spill BS…Im just bored today hence all the posts.
Also check your weights there mate…. SS is 1770kg ford is more (ford wont post XR8 kerb weight on its website for some reason, it says TBC)
well thoughs wieght specs were taken strait from wheels
heres motor mags one the one you love to talk about.
XR8 all option 1835 and SS all options 1790 so theres not much between them but who give,
we have the turbo six that beats the 6.0L
the FG may be a littel fatter but the VE still fat
Yes the VE is still fat…. I was only having a dig because it gets you fellas all wound up. By the way my subscription to MOTOR has ended and I have not renewed….I dont love to talk about them, I mentioned Motor Magazine because I had read that article..nothing more.
Just enjoy getting you Ford fanatics on the defence once and a while…and hey I learnt something new. Always a plus.
AussieCarQuote:
“By the way that aussiecars guy I think hes spot on”
LOL I like ya sense of humour.!
Hey as of the Ute situation, I was personally hoping that Ford at the release of the FG Falcon were to offer both the “work-house” type ute with leaf springs and an I.R.S
off the Falcon Sedan, to cover both bases.[so to speak]
I guess numbers sold and the economics just didn’t allow it to “happen”.
Haha, why not try both and see what flavour suits you best?
I prefer the look of the Ford but I might prefer the power delivery of the Holden after a test drive.
As for economy, who the hell buys a V8 and carefully looks at the economy? Buy a Turbo Diesel if it bothers you that much (If they were available).
Aussie,
You would be surprised how well the falcon ute handles for for something with leafs.
I remember reading a comparo aa while ago where the falcon ute out handled the commodore equivalent.
A falcon ute on leafs handles miles better than a japper on leafs.
Ford can also make a high powered FWD (RS Focus) turn corners, dont underestimate their ability to engineer things out of the norm.
Personally I couldnt stand the driving position of the commodore utes. Sure it may be acceptable to sit under the dash if you are gonna do some hat backwards style lapping, but their aint an ounce of practicallity in the thing.
You need a “go go gadget” style neck to do a shoulder check.
The SV6 isnt worth worrying about, but the SS is fun to drive. The XR8 seems to perform about the same and lets face it, point whatever of a second is never going to be noticed either way the gong goes.
The only thing that is styled better in the commy is the rear wheel arches, but what you trade for that is soon forgotten.
Still waiting for the final results of this comparo. Have you guys posted them anywhere ??
Falcon wins hands down..
Also for some reason I have 2 comments awaiting moderation from during this comparo when it was live which has never happened to me before as both only include info about this comparo ? Anyway I have been waiting for 2 days for the final information/analysis….hope we can see it soon and where will it be posted, in this article or in a separate one ?
Sorry Westy, we’re not sure what happened there. I’ve now manually approved your comments.
Cheers, Matt.
Matt,
Thanks mate. I am not sure either as it hasn’t happened before…..how bizarre!
With regards to my comments is there any idea when the final stats/data will be posted so we can all analyse? I am amazed at the fuel economy of both of these V8’s. I was thinking of an XR8 as my next car so this may just sway me all the way!!
Phil.C.
“Well, I thought that idling, 40kmh, stop start traffic would be AFM at it’s best. Your saying that it doesn’t even become active in those conditions. Thanks for the info.
That is just crazy. Holden have been so stupid with this. Absolutely pointless really.”
Read up, it’s about NVH. As a V4 an engine with 8 cylinders vibrates too much and becomes too harsh.
As for comments re the Ute. How many utes do you see carrying anything, let alone 1 tonne? I agree there is a market (tray top 1T) but it’s a crazy argument for a regular ute. 300kg is plenty. What do you regularly transport that weighs more than that? a Bike is nearly that OK but 2 won’t fit.
If you need to carry more, buy a trailer for $1200, not a $45k ute.
Yes, leaf springs can handle, in a similar way that pushrods can rev hard and be fuel efficient. The base technology is still outdated though. That the 6.0l comes close to the 5.4 in fuel economy while producing similar power (torque x revs) and better torque is testament to how good the Chev is (or how bad the 5.4 is perhaps??).
Oh, by the way, if the Ford V8 motor is so good how come the 6.0l is throttled by an intake restrictor in V8 Ute racing to keep them even?
Andrew M
did you try lifting the seat up?
Also, personally I like the fact that the Commodore ute is a complete unit rather than 1/2 a car with a bath tub on the back. That is personal opinion though. Has the Falcon still got a plastic floor in the back?
Calais-V Says:
May 1st, 2009 at 1:32 pm
“.. Has the Falcon still got a plastic floor in the back?”
Yep, and Holden have now copied it haven’t they?
And why can’t a Commodore Ute tow any more than 1600kg braked?? Most Jap 4cyl sedans can manage that.
Calais-V
as for the 6.0L simalar, better torque
there no replacement for displacement the 6.0L if a bigger V8
thats why it preforms better in most cases i would be like pitting an old 5.8L out of a phase 2 or 3 against an old 7.0L Cobra Jet in an XW-XY similar power but the 7.0L will still kill it becouse of the better torque
Calais v the Falcon ute does NOT have a plastic floor at all……it never has. Where did you get that idea? It has a plastic tub liner over the steel floor.
The Falcon ute is way way way more versatile than the current holden ute. You can have a tray, tub and fit many different configurations on the back as simple as bolting them on……great idea. Holdens dont really make a ute…….its more of a large glovebox on wheels.
Calais-V
Give it up mate, GM’s flatlining, so it’s nice of you to pay your last respects. Once the death certificate is signed, which will be very soon, the Commodore will have a pillow placed over it and firmly held down. Oh it’ll kick and struggle, but it’s fate is sealed allready. RIP.
Where are the results of the economy run ?
Millatime…..well said mate. RIP Holden.