Loading indicator
News & Reviews
Last 7 Days

by Matt Brogan

Well it’s been a little over a week now, and we’ve finally pulled together all the results for our Ford Falcon XR8 versus Holden Commodore SS AFM fuel economy challenge.

To take you back a few steps, and perhaps as a means for summarising the situation, the idea for this little test came about after a few of our road testers noticed the claimed fuel economy differences between the Ford Falcon XR8 and Holden’s all-new Active Fuel Management (AFM) Commodore SS were not quite as they’d claimed they were.


So to settle the situation once and for all, we proposed a showdown between the pair, one of the most comprehensive tests of its kind carried out in recent times, whereby the cars would be put through a number of tests aimed to categorically rate the two against each other not only in the fairest manner possible, but in real world conditions – something many rival publications seem unable to grasp.


Our cars were driven as the average owner would drive a car. No taping up gaps, no folding in mirrors and minimal use of controlled environment testing (performance testing being the obvious exclusion).

The results, as you’re about to see, speak quite clearly for themselves.

The Results

To begin, it’s best if you click through the below four articles to bring yourself up to speed:


But for those of you who have been following our progress closely, we’ll commence with a few graphs from our performance testing day at CarAdvice‘s private track in country Victoria.

Quarter Mile (0-400m): Winner – Ford Falcon XR8

First up, we have the standard measure of any Aussie performance vehicle, the quarter-mile run (or 0-400m for metric buffs).


Now as it’s pretty plain to see, the figures aren’t too far from the manufacturer’s claims, and what’s more, are within less than a second of each other.

Ford Falcon XR8: 0-400m

Ford Falcon XR8: 0-400m

Holden Commodore SS (AFM): 0-400m

Holden Commodore SS AFM: 0-400m

We ran the cars as level as possible for this test. Additional weight (fuel and passengers) was dead even, both cars used identical fuel, they were tested on the same day, one after the other to ensure weather conditions and track temperature were identical and were both run with tyre pressures at the manufacturer’s specifications. We even used the same driver in each car.


The results, in case the graph is a little hard to read, shows the Ford Falcon XR8 winning the 400 metre run a 14.72 second pass and a terminal speed of 163.89km/h, while the Holden Commodore SS AFM managed a marginally slower 14.80 second pass with its terminal speed being 161.38km/h.

Standing Start (0-100km/h): Winner – Ford Falcon XR8

Next we did the obligatory standing start run, or the 0-100km/h test.


This test, quite simply put, aims to see which car is quickest when timed accelerating from a standing start to a proposed speed, in this case, 100km/h.

Ford Falcon XR8: 0-100km/h

Ford Falcon XR8: 0-100km/h

Holden Commodore SS (AFM): 0-100km/h

Holden Commodore SS AFM: 0-100km/h

Again, the results speak for themselves, and as previously stated with our 400 metre run, the cars were tested following a criteria aimed at being as fair as possible to both parties.


Once more, for those who find the images a little small, the final analysis shows the Ford Falcon XR8 as our winner once more with a 0-100km/h time of 6.54 seconds while the Holden Commodore SS (AFM) came in just behind with a time of 6.74 seconds.

Braking Test (100-0km/h): Winner – Holden Commodore SS (AFM)

It’s all well and good to be able to go hard in a straight line, but so is putting the anchors on in those less than ideal times where a sudden stop is required.


Further more, most publications seem only to test stopping times from 80km/h, which is great if that’s as fast as you ever plan to go, but given the fact most speed limits in our home state of Victoria are 100km/h, we thought this speed would give a more accurate, real-world feel to our braking test.


While the results are perhaps not surprising, given the fact it’s a lighter car (Holden: 1782kg v Ford: 1832kg), the Holden Commodore SS AFM managed to nab this one from the Ford Falcon XR8 recording a stopping distance of 38.78  metres, just over one full metre further than the XR8’s result of 39.75 metres.

Ford Falcon XR8: 100-0km/h Brake Test

Ford Falcon XR8: 100-0km/h Brake Test

Holden Commodore SS (AFM): 100-0km/h Braking Test

Holden Commodore SS (AFM): 100-0km/h Braking Test

Economy Test (0-800km): Winner – Holden Commodore SS

Finally, and perhaps more importantly in these times of increased fuel prices and environmental consciousness, our economy run set out to prove not only to ourselves but to V8 loyalists country wide which of our two beloved locals would come out trumps as the most economic bent eight.


Holden have put an admirable initiative in place to reduce fuel consumption in its 6.0-litres Commodore SS by introducing a system known as Active Fuel Management (AFM) on all automatic variants.


Simply put, the car shuts down four of its eight cylinders when they’re not required in a bid to conserve fuel, but after having had both the Holden Commodore SS manual (non-AFM), Commodore SS automatic (AFM) and similar Falcon XR8 manual and automatic models, we here at the CarAdvice office simply couldn’t credit the claimed savings from the red lion as being anywhere near where it claims. In fact, we thought the difference in real world terms was quite negligible.

We were right.


Our test equipment, courtesy of Applied Measurement, shows that the two cars recorded very similar fuel consumption figures over the run from Melbourne to Tarcutta and back, in fact so similar that they were within .03-litres/100km within each other.

The reason for this destination was that it is exactly half way to Sydney, meaning for all intents and purposes a tally of kilometres almost identical to the more illustrious of economy runs, the Melbourne to Sydney drive.


The graphs show that the cars were, as in all our tests, driven as normally as possible. Steady throttle use, the occasional overtaking manoeuvre, stop-start traffic both in and out of the city, in fact all the facets of a drive any normal person could expect on a similar trip.

But what does it all mean in real terms, well our final figures prove the point without so much as another word. The following figures were accrued over 935.227km:

  • Holden Commodore SS (AFM): 9.79 litres per 100km (Average)
  • Ford Falcon XR8: 9.82 litres per 100km (Average)

The following figures were achieved prior to the test during our regular test drive conditions:

  • Holden Commodore SS (AFM): 822.92km @ 14.1-litres/100km (Average)
  • Ford Falcon XR8: 902.80km @ 12.25-litres/100km (Average)

Although we can’t include the road test fuel efficiency figures in the final test as the conditions weren’t controlled for both vehicles, they’re indicative of what we experienced when both of these cars were road tested earlier in the year.

It’s also worth noting the SS Commodore’s inaccurate speedometer. It ended up being out by some 7km over the trip back. In addition, the analogue speedometer was out by some ~7km/h at 110km/h, while the digital speedometer was out by around 4km/h. The XR8 on the other hand had its digital and analogue speedometer accurate to 1.5km/h at 110km/h.


If you go through all the figures, you will find the following results in summation:

  • Ford Falcon XR8
    • 9.82-litres/100km.
    • 235.0kW – at the wheels. 288.8kW – at the flywheel.
    • 6.54-seconds 0-100km/h.
    • 14.72-seconds @ 163.89km/h.
    • 39.75m 100-0km/h.
  • Holden Commodore SS (AFM)
    • 9.79-litres/100km.
    • 204.5kW – at the wheels. 252.4kW – at the flywheel.
    • 6.74-seconds 0-100km/h.
    • 14.80-seconds @ 161.38km/h.
    • 38.79m 100-0km/h.

When it’s all said and done the Holden versus Ford argument is one that isn’t going to be settled by any test or trial and will instead remain one rivalry fought on passion alone despite any performance, economy or technological difference offered by any logical, scientific test any one could reasonably be expected to put a car through, and as we see it, that’s a great thing.


Without the love, the rivalry and the hard-fought competition between these two brands neither of these ground pounding Aussie V8s would survive, and though many eco-warriors would consider that a victory, those of us who grew up watching Bathurst in our pyjamas or spent countless hours tinkering with their own piece of locally produced muscle would see it as a sad day either is lost to a four pot import.

Yes, yes, the Ford may be faster and the Holden may be a touch more economical but at the end of the day would this make any die hard Ford or Holden man change teams?

Not bloody likely.

Special thanks to: Springy Performance & Applied Measurement & CJC Photography

VBOX equipment courtesy of:

Applied Measurement

  • Limited Slip

    With its better sound, better interior, more modern styling better ZF transmission, nicer ride comfort and seats and virtually identical economy the FG is the better car over all.

    AFM is a waste of time and a wate of money that GM and Holden dont have.

    But in the real world the XR6 Turbo shits over both of these……………hope I can get one with that fantastic XR8 bonnet on it !!!!

    • http://www.facebook.com/ThePrussianKodiak Daniel TheHessian Schmidt

      ^ This right here, instead of holden putting money into AFM they should put it towards better seats then the rocks they give now. Ford will always win with ride comfort, the impressive ZF gearbox that both BMW and Jag use in their cars and a very high quality sound system.

      The ford comes out on top. A XR6 Turbo would come out on top of both,

      As the test showed both cars in terms of engine performance are so similar that can no longer be used as any real test between them.

  • matt

    Thank you for such an un-biased article. It’s a breath of fresh air in automotive media.

    SO much dribble comes out in printed and other online magazines it’s no wonder I haven’t bought one for years.

  • AAA

    Honda Accord V6 3.5 with VCM/AFM : 10.0L per 100km

    Aurion V6 3.5 without VCM/AFM : 9.9L per 100km

    Furthermore, with VCM/AFM more parts more things to go wrong.

  • Limited Slip

    The SS in that colour blue looks alot like a BA Falcon…………

  • Jake02

    Any data on the Octavia RS chase car?

  • Jazrod (formally Twilight)

    no one can deny that the XR8 looks better though.

    and personally IMO is better over all (except not in that colour)…


    i have noticed that while all ve gauge speedos are out high(perhaps to keep the speed camera’s at bay)the digitals are generally spot on (against several gps’s).go figure.also as wheels mag found,the fuel tank is 80ltrs,not the 73 stated.the ve v8 killer wasps(real world)is piss poor compared to ford,and as for afm,it’s just holdens “seen to be green” smokesscreen.buy a manual instead,a few of them have been upwards of 290kw(i think they downpower the autos for reliability reasons)…

  • Paul Maric

    The Octavia RS TDI with optional race wing was averaging just over 5.0-litres/100km :-)


    oops,to clarify my last post,its the average fuel used and average speed as displayed after one resets it while driving,not the actual digital speedo,its out…

  • http://www.caradvice.com.au David Twomey

    The Skoda chase car averaged 5.5L/100km and did 940km on one tank of diesel.

  • smokin’R32

    I always had the impression the XR8 was a slug compared to the SS, in the magazines they always write it off as completely uncompetitive from the get-go compared to the XR6 Turbo and SS, good to see it put up a challenge.

    P.S. Glad the Octavia is good on fuel cause its severely lacking in the looks department, hideous!

  • demonaz

    Almost 7 seconds to 100km/h… Surprisingly slow, I’ve seen stock Aurions in that territory.

    • AUXR8220

      Those Times are on AU Series III Pace. 0-100 in 6.35 seconds(motor 2002) to 6.60 seconds (wheels 2001)

      0-400m in 14.68 (motor 2002) to 14.80 (wheels 2001).

      Fuel Consumption 15.06L (thrashing motor 2002) to 9.2L best 15.30 worst 12.4L avg (wheels 2001).

      Not to mention Breaking 100-0 35.3m (motor 2002).

      • AUXR8220

        Not a big leap forward when you think about it.

  • Glen

    demonas if you read the article it sounds like the cars had some extra wright on boardl

  • Ben

    where is the VF Commodore?? If Holden wants to maintain some sort of dominance which the General might want at a time like this, they have some work to do. This was a fantastic article, however I am a Holden fan and I would have loved to have seen it perform a little better but the Ford has it beaten pretty much. VF might want hurry its backside up because Holden are going to need it!! But great article!

  • Alex

    Considering you would have known that verdict in the beginning the point was… that was completely pointless?

  • Bavarian Missile (.)(.)

    Quote “their own piece of locally produced muscle would see it as a sad day either is lost to a four pot import.

    Yes, yes, the Ford may be faster and the Holden may be a touch more economical but at the end of the day would this make any die hard Ford or Holden man change teams?

    Not bloody likely.”

    Thats sums it up well……………

  • Westy

    Great to finally see the final analysis. I still cannot believe those numbers of < 10.0L/100km for both V8’s !!
    That truly is incredible.

    Be nice to see the same sort of comparo on the 6’s from both manufacturers in a real world test. Maybe an SV6 and an XR6 to give us the same true story about their real world consumption an even bring in a Toyota V6 as well as they claim to be the most fuel efficient from what I have heard.

    All in all great article and the live feeds and live GPS you guys did on the day of the test was awesome. Can’t wait for the next one.

  • http://www.caradvice.com.au OSU811

    makes AFM look like its a total waste of time, considering that engine is down on power and has the same economy as the xr8, plus the fact the ford has a much better 6 sp auto. It would of been interesting to see how the xr6 turbo compared as well, to see if its much better on fuel than the v8s, we all know it would have been the quickest of the three!!!

  • Elitist

    Cant believe these two moronic cars are still being compared to just themselves and not cars from other countries.

  • Devil666

    Just out of interest, why test the V8 performance variants in Auto guise? Surely the Manual transmission would be more reflective of the target audience.

    Be interesting to see how the XR8 does without its outsourced auto and having the commodore gain an extra 10kw. The quarter mile looks very much in jeopardy for the Ford.

    Very refreshing to see high capacity V8’s hitting the mid 9’s /100 kays. Such good long distance haulers.

  • http://www.caradvice.com.au OSU811

    devil666, a large part of the test, was to test the merits of holdens AFM Which the manual version doesnt have..

  • ssbob

    Interesting stuff on the AFM.

    Not a corner in the test? Shame as the SS in particular is more than just for straight lines.

  • Chris

    So whats the point of this AFM crap from Holden?? They would have been better off investing that money on a better 6 sp auto!

  • Troy

    I am also wondering what the average speed was, and what was your crusing speed by gps, not speedo, in the 110 zones.

    I recall in the other mags afm test they sat on a ridiculous 95 odd km per hour in the 110zone! Near any new car would get from Melb to Sydney at that speed! My new Hyundai Elantra 2.0 manual uses 6 litres per hundred at 120kmh GPS speed, allowing me to get from Geelong to Canberra 735km(GPS) on 42 litres. And making Sydney on a tank at that good speed.

  • Matt

    Wow, good write up but the conclusion disappointed me. Yet another publisher that doesn’t have the gusto to call it either way for fear of losing readers on the losing side.

  • Tony M

    I wonder what the litres per 100km would have been if the tyres pressures were much higer than the manufacturer’s recommendation.
    As has been said before, great comparison keep the good work up.

  • Frontman

    Matt, perhaps you are missing what the Authors are saying. Perhaps the two cars have their individual strong points and weak points but on a whole are really that close to each other that there is no standout.
    I believe that between thes two the standout one is the one that comes from YOUR prefered manufacturer. I would always got the XR8 without hesitation, but that doesn’t mean the SS isn’t as good. (it’s just made by Holden and looks ugly ;-))

  • Frontman

    CA team well done BTW. Suggestion for the next one of these formats, how about the popular varients of the big three Ausies. Say, SV6/ Berlina V XR6/G6 V SX6/Prodigy. Run the same format et al. but use family’s as the testers. Real world Real life Real results. Just a thought. 😉

  • Will

    Elitist: Agreed.

    smokin\’R32: For real road conditions the Skoda RS CDI is a superior vehicle: It is all about the applicable torque, solid and enduring engineering, ergo\’s, being able to compete on world market with a complete package, and better finish. In Europe the Skoda is considered a handsome if not a little conservative in presentation. You are a victim of partisan propaganda engaged in by some local press.

    Yes, I remember sitting up in my pyjamas and watching Bathurst as a kid and being thrilled with the antics of the time. That was a long time ago and people would generally agree there is a new world order, something that has been to difficult for boffins at GM and Ford Oz divisions to comprehend, let alone acknowledge.

  • Aussiecars

    Im betting Holden could of almost achieved these fuel figures just by lowering the engine output to 260 without the AFM. Oh what were they thinking… GM at its finest in shooting itself in the foot. Die AFM Die!

    Hurry up with the direct injection V6 already, it would have paid off more for Holden to get this engine in the commodore before the AFM and look at a 6 speed auto to mate up with it. (not that that 5 speed is a bad box, my old man has a VZ V6 Adventura and its a pretty good unit but holden needs to offer the 5 speed on lower spec models and a 6 speed on higher models..get rid of the bloody 4 speed already)

    @ssbob: Yeah the VE is a better corner handler but I dont think it would have changed the outcome.

    ps: Ive said before Im not a fan of HSV`s lights but seen a sentator(charcoal color) in the flesh for the first time today…Without the big boot spoiler on the back these lights actually look good (they dont look too low). Like the whole kit on the car, gives it a very euro look. My new favorite car in the HSV range.

  • Aussiecars

    @Will: Id love to know who you think in Europe considers the Skoda to be a handsome car? Its not just the local press that thinks its exterior styling looks like it came straight from the KIA factory 5 years back…. its most people. If I wanted a good “ugly” euro car Id buy a 5 series..sure its ugly but at least it looks modern.

    Ok Ok this is a Holden and Ford thread.. Ill stop now.

  • Will

    Aussiecars, for your benefit-

    Fifth Gear:
    It looks pretty reasonable, too. The amorphous aesthetics aren’t going to set pulses racing, and the hatchback’s rear end looks a bit too high from some angles, but overall it’s a handsome machine.
    Autocar UK:
    The conservatism of the exterior is also slightly at odds with the stylish, contemporary cabin. It can be said without exaggeration that the design and quality of the cabin is at least a match for the latest Golf’s. Indeed, the handsome sweep of the dashboard and the stylised instrument panel makes the Golf seem austere.

    I could quote more publications, but I don’t think you would get it. If hyperbole is your game, matching Skoda to Kia is like matching the for-tested products to Mahindra, with spoilers. Are you just back dated or holding onto that 12yo dream?

  • Andronicus


    I would love to see a shrunken down version of this Commodore. Just mini-fy it into a smaller mid size coupe.
    Like a Monaro but about the size of the civic sedan etc.

    Not sure why I want to see that, I just feel with it’s current shape it would be interesting.

  • Aussiecars

    EVO Said “And it doesn’t help that for all its visual sporting-up, including a new spoiler on the hatch and some nice chrome tailpipes, the Octavia is not a looker. Imposing snout, yes, but from the side it looks like a child’s drawing with those thick window-frames and frumpy stance.”

    I too can publish comments from UK sources…You write “in europe it is considered stylish”… guess not all of Europe agrees with that comment. Your not a Skoda dealer are you Will?

  • Pious

    Andronicus – when the new shape came out, I thought the commodore was a dead ringer for an A6 (at the time). well, there werent so many around at the time, and they looked pretty flash. Maybe a smaller version would look like an A4.

  • TonyB

    I would add my voice to a comparison of these two with a XR6 Turbo. That said I’m also surprised the XR8 came out of the comparison so well.

  • NRD80Y

    @ Andronicus
    “I would love to see a shrunken down version of this Commodore. Just mini-fy it into a smaller mid size coupe.
    Like a Monaro but about the size of the civic sedan etc.

    Not sure why I want to see that, I just feel with it’s current shape it would be interesting.”
    I’m the same. I would love to see a smaller commodore sold along side the current version. Something similar to BMWs 1 Series comparing to it’s 3 Series

  • Howie-R31

    just out of interest… Has there been a typo with them 1/4 mile times? Because high 14’s seems to be pretty bloody slow.

  • Andrew M

    You have finally come around.
    I told you the HSV rear lights shyte on the commodore range lights and as you said, especially when the HSV is in a dark colour.

    Great review,
    but as I voiced myself before the test, I still fail to see how this comparo would ever conclude that AFM is a waste of time.
    I do agree that it is based on the logic of what tests have been done thus far, but the only way to conclusively decide is to put the Pre AFM Auto model against the AFM Auto model over the same real world test together.

    Who knows???
    perhaps the Non AFM over the very same test would have drunk 11.79L?????
    noone can provide proof to say otherwise.

    I myself wont be swayed on point whatever of a litre better consumption, or point whatever better down the quarter mile.
    I consider what they are like to drive and how enjoyable the cabin is to sit in, hence i chose FG

  • Andrew M

    keep in mind that bothe cars were carrying an extra 150kgs (approx) over what they would normally be tested with

    Oh and to whoever said that the test needed to be done with manuals,
    Well for my reasoning there would be too many variables coming from driver ability

  • http://skyline The Salesman

    As some bloke just walked past my dealership with rugby socks up to his knees, footy shorts and no shirt (with a veranda over the toy shop) I am reminded of my childhood years in Adelaide, the home of Holden, and the conversation that was held again and again around the dinner table, Holden v’s Ford. I am embarrassed for us Aussies, why would anyone still care? Now don’t get me wrong. I am quite happy to cheer on my football team but I just cant get into an argument over to brands of American based companies make the better car. Their have been dust ups a plenty over it. Please Australia, expand your palate.

  • Andrew M

    Sorry T/S,
    I obviously got too involved in your story because I missed your point.

    Did he buy a Kia to show his pride in OZ???

    Or was he embarrassed for Aussies because he is a stereotypical model of one in a physical sense???

    Should we just accept whatever the norm is and waltz around like lemmings with out questioning or becoming passionate about anything??

    You wont catch me in an AFL argument, but that doesnt mean they arent relevant

  • peter

    thanx for this.
    how about a real world test of fuel economy between commodore sv6, xt falcon with 6 speed auto, aurion and camry for good measure. Please include city and country fuel economy, not just overall. especially as ford has come out with new adverts re cost of running a falcon

  • Aussiecars

    @Andrew M

    lol It was a very nice looking car, but Im still spit. I really like Holdens version of the rear lamps esp the Calais varient on a white or black car.
    But if for some reason I was to buy a HSV, the one I seen today would be the one Id want.

    I agree that they really need an AFM vs non AFM comparo to see what it does. It will also answer another question of mine …Have Holden taken a step backwards in the calibration of the 6 speed auto since the introduction of AFM? Would need a later SS Auto with the better calibrated 6 speed auto to prove it I guess…

  • Frontman

    The Salesman Says:
    May 5th, 2009 at 5:23 pm
    Yes but where you are located, he was dressed up.
    Rmember the larger majority of Kia buyers buy on price not by what they really like to drive. I know plenty of kia buyers (and other brands) that are still died in the wool Team Red or Blue supporter, just that they can’t coin up for their first choice so chose a new Kia over a second hand vehicle.

  • TBs future thought

    I drive and aurion and the figures of 9.9L are very optimistic. But i do agree with the aurion breaking 7 seconds i have done it.

  • Ozmun

    Elitist – DER,you cant buy an inexpencive,large4,door v8 form any were else,Der again.

  • TBs future thought

    And the skoda doesn’t suit this market and in my opinon it is ugly and should we take a vote. If you want a decent european car buy a golf or a jetta. And skoda have associations with autocar adds ect so im sure there is some sugar coating.

  • Tom

    How did you possibly manage such dreadful performance numbers, was that launched from idle?

    This is a silly test, and Holden should be ashamed of that dreadful engine. When the VE-SS hit the scene in 2006, heaps of test showed the auto’s run mid 13 second passes.

    I really hope this AFM bullshit is optional, if it didnt sap any power sure go for it, but if you want fuel economy go for the v6, some people want proper v8 performance with the automatic transmission.

    Whats worse here, is that the un-nutered v8 falcon is producting such dismal performance figures with the full 235rwkw on tap. Why can’t boss engines be fast? Is it the torque curve or the gearing or the weight of a car?

    Throw a manual non AFM SS against a manual XR8 and the falcon would get destroyed…

    ill take a used non-AFM SS or a xr6t thanks

  • Jake02

    TBs future thought Says:
    May 5th, 2009 at 7:33 pm

    And the skoda doesn’t suit this market and in my opinon it is ugly and should we take a vote. If you want a decent european car buy a golf or a jetta. And skoda have associations with autocar adds ect so im sure there is some sugar coating.

    Im sorry but thats a load of absolute crap. I fail to see why anyone would buy a Jetta/Golf now that Skodas have arrived. Skodas are better quality, more reliable, have much more room/practicality and are much more resonably priced than the equivalent VW models. The Jetta is possibly the most boring car on sale, and the Golf is overrated, especially the new one. I’d just like to say that ever since Skodas were introduced here, every single tosser that comments has been about the styling department. GET OVER IT!

    Just because it looks abit conservative doesn’t mean that people should think its a crap car. Just look at Toyotas! They are some of the most ugly/boring cars on offer here and yet people buy shitloads of them. The difference is that Skodas can actually be exciting (just ask all the Octavia RS owners, the performance is v good).

    Shame on you SmokinR32 (if you really do have a Golf R32 than you should like Skodas, theyre the same car), TBs Future Thought (You drive a friggin Aurion and you’re COMPLAINING about the looks of other cars…) and especially Aussiecars (I know you’ve said that you don’t own an Aussie car but come on, bogan) I just cannot see why the Octavia’s looks are actually worth going to so much effort for. It is for Will (and I and other owners) as we are defending our cars, as I’m sure others would do.

  • Tom

    And the FG’s styling is still absolutely abysmal

    look at that front on picture, the Holden looks muscular, the FG feminine.

    • Lukeyson

      Are you saying that you are attracted to the male of the species and not the female? Logically this means you are either a female with an interest in this topic, or a male with a fetish for the same gender – not that there’s anything wrong with either of those! It’s a good thing you like the look of the current VE into and beyond MY10 – it will be with us for as long as GMH has no money to upgrade it! Each bit of profit the company makes has to go into helping pay back that US$60b US government loan…..assuming GMH haven’t dipped into their own AUD$200M line of credit for repayment.

  • http://. Naughtyius Maximus

    LMAO………….men and women are equal arent they and are you old hat stating feminine looks abysmal? Or are you declaring your old school? Strongly think you should use better decription to decribe your views and feelings as women would find your comment offensive and wrong me thinks! Do agree the Commie looks more aggressive and Falcon toned done somewhat.

  • David

    Who buys auto V8’s anyway ?
    The manual versions are no contest, the SS shiits all over the XR8 every time !

  • Paul Maric

    For the person who asked about the speed during the test.

    We travelled at the speed limit throughout the entire test, so where the speed limit was 110km/h, we travelled at that speed as indicated by the Vbox equipment.

    We would have posted the graph of speed over distance, but unfortunately it contains deviations to the speed limit during overtaking, which someone would no doubt complain over. So we decided to leave that bit out.

  • kev

    how much different would these tests be in the v8 utes. better fuel or worse

  • kev

    and why have the auto price gone up to $2000 now. is it cos of the demand for them over the manuals????

  • Brett

    Seems to be a lot of people on here that say a manual transmission would better represent what the buyers of these cars want. Obviously the AFM is only available in auto guise so for the purpose of this test, a manual wouldn’t have worked. But do the buyers of Ford’s XR’s and Holden’s SV6/SS often buy manuals?

    How bout some facts, Car Advice? Might help shut some idiots up! What’s the sales split, manual/auto for both the cars on this test. I’d be very surprised it manual came out on top.

  • Cupid Stunt

    As some have picked up on these behemoths are crap performers for their engine sizes. Our 2.7 diesel ain’t that far behind them and goes 60% further on a litre of motion lotion.
    Value for money though they are up there with them.

  • john

    AFM definitely saps power at the flywheel. Motor Mag ran dyno tests on all ford/fpv, holden/hsv variants a couple years ago. The clubsport was putting out 298kw at the flywheel compared to a claimed 307 and the SS was putting out 291kw at the flywheel compared to a claimed 270kw. Stock SS V8 was putting out 21kw more than claimed while AFM is down at 252kw. That is 40kw behind the non AFM 6l. Everybody here knows about cars and they know 40kw makes one hell of a difference. Good work car advice on showing that AFM is nothing but a JOKE!

  • Martin

    My god is the Falcon ugly.

    • Ford Man

      My god !!!!!!! the Commondore is so dated and ugly.

  • Bret

    Martin – nothing inelligent to contribute then??

  • HAL

    Bret, you and the other usual suspects really have to stop bagging other people for having opinions that differ to your own. If Martin doesn’t like the look of the Falcon, for God’s sake let him say so.

  • Bret

    Hal, so we agree that it is merely his opinion then!

    Perhaps he should not make such rediculous statements, because clearly the FG is NOT ugly.

  • Andronicus

    @ Bret:
    “Bret Says:
    May 6th, 2009 at 11:10 am
    Hal, so we agree that it is merely his opinion then!

    Perhaps he should not make such rediculous statements, because clearly the FG is NOT ugly. ”

    ….in YOUR opinion. you just did the exact same thing that you were frying Martin about.

    And yeah I agree…. it’s an ugger… in my opinion.

    • fordsuck

      may you need to take off your beer goggles cause the ford never make a good looking car and the fg is one of their ugliest

  • Andronicus

    @ NRD80Y
    “NRD80Y Says:
    May 5th, 2009 at 4:44 pm

    …I’m the same. I would love to see a smaller commodore sold along side the current version. Something similar to BMWs 1 Series comparing to it’s 3 Series.”

    Totally. That is exactly what I was getting at.
    Good comparison.

  • Aussiecars

    When did I say I didnt own an Aussie car? I said Im not loyal to one brand and AussieCars didnt mean I like just Aussie Cars. My work car is a VZ Sandman. If that makes me a bogan than great because I need it for my trade and I get alot of people asking me about it.
    The family car is is a 2004 Mitsubishi Magna AWD. I know Australian made but we will be upgrading later this year. And at the moment it will be either a Mazda 6 or a VW passat depending on how business is going.
    So I guess then I will only be 50% `Bogan`… but you will still have a really really ugly car.

    @Brett I agree, I think at least 70% of these cars sold would be Auto. I think a manual transmission represents what people on the performance side of things would want (oh and holden fans because there auto/V8 combo has been gimped =P )

  • Nikos3

    Great review CA team!!!
    I am glad to own a SSV auto ( non AFM ), which I picked up a month before the AFM models wee launched.
    Loads of power on demand, great handling and comfortable ride. Gearbox seems to struggle, when switching back to auto, after driving it for a few kms in manual mode.
    I use the car for my daily drive and if you can afford it, go for it. Picked it up for $47.5K with sunroof and I still cannot wipe the smile off my face :-)

  • Martin


    I am just calling it as I see it. Just so you know also, I have no particular interest in the Commodore either. Honestly, an Australian built vehicle is really, really low on my list of cars I’d ever want to purchase.

  • HAL

    Nice one Nikos3, congratulations. Interested to hear what sort of mileage you’re getting around town doing the daily drive?

  • Nikos3

    Digital speedo normally sits around 14.6lt/100km, however I normally get 550kms out of a tank. On open road it drops to high 10’s and up to 750kms.

  • Jake02

    Aussiecars you blind cow. I said I knew that you don’t own an Australian car, as said in previous comments on previous reviews. Get it right.

    To add to my previous comment above, TBs future thought the skoda is actually a euro made car, the jetta is not. Another reason to buy one.

  • Andrew M

    Paul Maric,
    Couldnt you have at least pulled the average speed off of the trip computer???

    I also feel it would have been interesting as average speed plays a big part in getting good consumption

    On the Auto/Manual thing…….
    I find it funny that if you were looking to buy a 2nd hand commodore or falcon, you would struggle like anything to find a manual version. In fact the manual (and cheaper from new) versioned commys and falcons actually fetch more on the 2nd hand market than the autos.

    The funny contrast is that if you are looking for a 2nd hand smaller 4cyl car, you have your work cut out trying to find an Auto

    As for the front on shot and whats aggressive and whats not,
    the Octane colour of the falcon and the shadows being cast do not compliment it at all.
    Either ditch the colour (my choice), or dont take happy snaps at sundown
    Ive got no doubt that under better circumstances the falcons front QTR is more aggressive looking

    In that same shot, the SS could be mistaken for an Omega whereas at least the falcon couldnt be mistaken for an XT.

    But I do agree that in that particular angle, with that colour and those shaddows, the falc does look a little more awkward

    • fordsuck

      the ss looks nothing like the omega
      the falcon doesnt look awkward it looks retarded

  • Paul Maric


    Average speed for both cars on the second portion of the test was around 88km/h, I don’t have my notepad on my at the moment.

  • Andrew M

    Thanks Paul,
    88kmh is a fairly high average speed and makes it easier to comprehend your test now it is disclosed.

    Going by my trip computer Im lucky to get an average of 40kmh

  • Al Juraj

    The AFM/VCM sounds better than it really is. It only proves beneficial in highway cruising. The Accord that theoretically operates in 3 cylinders doesn’t mean fuel consumption like a Jazz. Economy is more on how an engine is made and not just the technological gimmicks.

    However, this test shows that even big V8s can be babied to deliver fuel numbers below 10 litres/100 km. It’s all on driving discipline, like avoiding brisk acceleration and heavy braking. Eight cylinders may see the light of day after all.

  • Westy

    I wish my comments weren’t being moderated……not sure what’s going on Car Advice but everytime I add a simple comment I am awaiting moderation. I have put 2 tickets in the system to ask why but I am still being moderated.

    The test was great and as per my previous comment here can’t wait for you guys to do another live test!

  • Westy

    Ok now it’s working….much better. I am free what a relief !

  • Paul Maric

    Andrew M:

    The average was around 88km/h because the majority of the trip was spent at around 100km/h.

    Your trip computer would indicate around 40km/h because of city travelling in addition to highway kays.

    Al Juraj:

    The cars weren’t babied for these results. We drove them just as anyone else would. Other tests which other publications have done have had the drivers sit on 80km/h the whole way with doors, windows and gaps taped, which is ridiculous.


    You didn’t bother replying to any of the tickets you requested, so we can’t help you unless you respond.

  • http://mazda James F

    Being a holden man, I reckon the XR8 does look better than SS and holdens have been too quiet for my liking (V8’s should pur, not be quiet – otherwise, I would drive a 6 or a 4)..

    Great article Mat – great conclusion and fair statement – “wont make either change camps” due to such slight differences…

    I agree – lets be proud of Aussie V8s (rather than all the imports).. Ford or Holden – who cares… there both great cars.. you cant lose with whichever one you buy or drive..


  • Al Juraj

    The VE SS looked dated beside the slick FG XR8. They should update it soon, perhaps make a more attractive rear end and shave on the front fenders.

    So guys what sort of driving did you do to come up with those figures? I can hardly see any regular driver get even close to 10 litres/100 km.

    • fordsuck

      the FG like all fords are just lazy designs and look boring they look like a old lady car
      the ve is one of holden best looking cars there no need to shave the front fenders cause they give it a aggresive look
      the ve range is the best looking car on australin roads

  • Andrew M

    I understand that an average of 88kmh means pretty much non stop 100kmh, thats why i think it is important to disclose the average speed.
    I thought you guys were gonna mix some city style driving amongst it…..

    The figures you pulled are pretty much bang on what the claimed Hwy cycle consumption is anyway
    Ford claims 9.7L on Hwy cycle to be exact

    My trip computer shows an average of 40clicks because on my usual route to work I travel through a section that is 60 k’s all the way.
    the average is always lower to account for stoppages, idle time and congestion etc.

  • Westy


    You didn’t bother replying to any of the tickets you requested, so we can’t help you unless you respond

    Paul M,
    I left a ticket with you and you said to try and logon and add another comment. So I waited until the article came up for the AFM vs XR8 verdict and added my comment to that article. It gave the same result and put me in a moderation queue. I then sent a second ticket as it happened again. I wasn’t aware I had to do anything else ?

    Didn’t bother to respond…what the ? I take offence to that as I did bother but again my comment was moderated and it took about 3-4 days to get a reply to that second ticket I lodged. I love this site but don’t like being told I didn’t bother to do something when in fact I did!!

    I appreciate you response(s) as I don’t know why I was getting moderated in the first place since I don’t use profanities and I don’t use agressive tones in my messages.

  • http://www.caradvice.com.au Paul Maric


    Apologies. I didn’t notice your e-mail there. It grouped it with your old one and didn’t show up in the ticket queue.

    You sent an e-mail on May 4th, which I didn’t see until yesterday.

    Hopefully the problem is sorted now.

  • Westy

    Paul M,

    Cheers mate I am glad it’s all sorted. Thanks heaps now I can get on and enjoy reading and commenting on your articles.

    You guys all do a great job so keep the auto news coming.


  • Jake02

    After viewing and commenting these reviews/posts for about a year and a half, its only just hit me that the majority of people who comment are such tools. It really seems that anyone (any there are a few examples of who are tonnes worse) would do anything to offend someone else, even though the person they are trying to offend didn’t actually mean any harm at all in something they have previously posted. I imagine many are older than the school yard, yet the certainly act like it!

    If there ain’t anything nice to say, don’t say it at all!

    Come on fellas, stop being tools and actually talk about cars, which is why we’re here right?

    Westy, Millatime, Aussiecars, TBs Future Thought, Simonsez, Smokin R32 are a few examples of these people. There are many more out there, so feel free to name and shame them!

  • Westy


    What are you meaning by including me in that comment of yours ? I only comment on articles I see fit and have never derided or given someone some unnecessary bad mouth tirade ? What the ? I have no idea who you are and have no idea what you mean mate. I love this site and comment on the articles not the people. I had an issue with my comments being moderated for some unknown reason…the only thing I can think of is someone else is using my name……that may be why I was being moderated……anyway happy commenting to you too!

  • Jake02

    My point was that you didn’t have to be such a big tool about your “issue” and display so much attitude, so much I’m-better-than-you-ness. eg:

    “Didn’t bother to respond…what the ? I take offence to that as I did bother but again my comment was moderated and it took about 3-4 days to get a reply to that second ticket I lodged. I love this site but don’t like being told I didn’t bother to do something when in fact I did!!”

    Come on now, your getting offended at basically bugger-all. I, of course, realise that people get offended at different things but a personal attack on Paul Maric is unecessary, and it turns out the problem lied with the computer.

    Get it now?

  • http://sds sammy

    Interestingly i own a XLS ute 5.4L auto and it keeps up with me mates 260kw vz series ii manual, and in most cases i win. anybody explain dis to me?

  • http://sds Jake02

    I agree with ya Sammy, but can’t explain why :(. Holden = overrated. Ford = known for its reliability and flawless auto engineering.

  • Jake02



  • http://fqwf Blake

    The fg is a ugly car. At least the bf’s looked good.

    • Ford Man

      Falcon FG is the best looking and built car in Australia, Bommodore lovers should take off thier blind folds and test drive one or wont your one eyed daddy let you.

  • Astro

    Beauty is in the eye of the beholder!
    I have just traded my BA in on a nitro blue FG XR6 and I love it! It handles, it’s fast and as far as I’m concerned it is the best looking car on the road.

    • OMG

      Best looking car in your driveway, you mean

      • Astro

        How would you know what else I have parked in my driveway?

        • OMFG

          … yeah his other car is a VE SV6, so obviously the XR6 is the best looking in his driveway!

          • Matt

            Touche!! lol

            OMFG, you’d do well in the banter in my office :)

  • Harley Stone

    fourteen point plus secs for a quartermile, thats pretty slow.

  • Bobs

    Yeah very slow, I know these cars are slower than the awesomely fast FG Ford Turbos but 5secs flat compared to these at 6.5 secs seems a bit too much difference, Id be thinking more along the half a sec 0-100kmh that the XR6T would give them a hiding by

  • michael d

    good to see a test done with conditions evenly, as for looks i don`t like the big huge flared gaurds on the Commodore, the bf was one of the best looking Fords built i reckon but the fg does look quite good , but style is an personal thing anyway, as for being slow…driver +2 passengers 3/4 of a tank test equiptment? with only 1 passenger and 1/2 a tank these cars would be doing close to flat 14`s , i did`nt notice in the test (probably missed it) were these 2 run in yet, congrats on a good test.

  • cczmark

    I really do not understand the Aussie obsession with power. Your country speed limits are really low and in cities you have traffic lights at every junction. Speed off and then 200m later sit at the next lights for a few minutes. Repeat ad nauseam… Where’s the fun (or point) in that??

    In Italy they typically drive 1.1 or 1.4s and the speeds are MUCH higher than here. Anyone who’s driven an original Mini will know that you don’t need lots of power to have fun in a car.

    • Matt

      But then we don’t understand things about Italy like the obsession with what they look like or what they are wearing *shrug*

      With cost of fuel over there, they don’t much choice but to use smaller engines

  • James

    HI Guys, Nice one to test the two V8s that don’t really compare. I mean test the VE SS-V manual which gets to a 100KM in less than 5.4 secs against the Ford V8. And the Holden will win hands down. Secondly, The ford V8s are slow, their turbo siblings are way quicker.

    Overall, its nice to know the fuel economy on the these cars considering you tested the auto AFM. I thought the AFM was supposed to have good fuel mileage? Anyways. I’ll just stick to a VE SS manual V8 with a supercharger and worry about my petrol bill after. Considering the AFM is not that much different. I get good mileage anyway its only when I planted all day every day that the petrol bill gets expensive.



  • Flex

    XR6T easily outperforms both, is at least as fast as the HSV range 0-100, while beating them everywhere else. The magazines hate saying so but its true. F6 kills all the HSVs, XR6T as quick… SS/XR8 next step down. Turbo is king… torque is the most important measurement in real world driving conditions, FG XR6T has 533nm below 2000rpm… an experience to use, those who have driven it will know what I’m talking about.

    • fordsuck

      i have driven a FGXR6T and there not that good and they look like crap
      you cant compare a n/a car to a car with a turbo or supercharger
      if holden want to put a turbo on there sv6 (which they should just to shut up the ford fags)it would slaughter the crappy xr6t
      ill take a hsv or ss over a xr6t any day

      • brad

        fordsuck are these really your opinions or are you just deliberatley being a moron. We all get you dont like fords and commodores seem really seem to arouse you, but you say the xr6t doesnt go that well, are you dreaming!!. It would demolish an ss commodore and beats a hsv for 20 grand less. Its faster than a holden v8 and uses a lot less fuel, dont just take my word for it, read any review on the net. As for supercharging or turbocharging the sv6 holden would never bother because their 6cyl is a torqueless boat anchor. For the record im proud of the performance cars we build in this country and i would by either ford or holden, but yes i own a xr6t

  • Boris

    well looks like Flex is the only one speaking hte truth here !! 5.4 second SS’S??? dreaming!

  • Carfanatic

    Flex is right, I had the pleasure of taking home an Audi A8 V8 TDI, the 0-100 times were quite good, but it was the rolling acceleration that really put a smile on my face. By god 650 NM kicking in before 2000 RPM gets the adrenaline pumping and believe me, for a car that weighs nearly 2 tonnes is bloody well launched from 40 MPH to over 100 MPH very quickly. I backed off at 125MPH because it was still pulling hard and I didn’t want to smash a 58,000 Pound Sterling car.

    I haven’t yet driven and XR6 Turbo and I’m not a big Ford fan, but the prospect of that much Torque down low makes me want to jump intro one just to satisfy my adrenal gland.

    • Matt

      The roll-on acceleration in the XR6T does bring a smile to one’s face :)
      Overtaking on the highway in my VT Commodore & BF Falcon used to be “Is the gap in the oncoming cars big enough to get around the car in front?”, now in the FG XR6T its “I’ll get around all 4 cars in front of me”.

  • Don

    Great test guys.
    As usual the differences are so tiny its all down to personal preference in the end so lets just agree to disagree. The Holden and the Ford are both great cars so the whole love/hate thing going on at times here is just childish posturing.
    I have always driven Fords but recently went to an SSV (without the AFM rubbish) and love it but its was a very very hard choice between the two.
    Every car is good in some areas and not so good in others. While I love my SSV, my wife also loves her Audi TT Quatro and neither of us would swap. She calls mine a brick on steroids and I call hers a matchbox toy. For shear muscle and straight line acceleration or the long runs and mountain climbs or for load capacity the SSV completely canes the Audi but on the ultra tight corners and in the dirt in particular the SSV gets left in the dust literally.
    It comes down to how and where you drive.

  • Mark

    Was all set to buy a SS ute at $38000 drive away.Thought i should at least test drive the XR6 turbo even though the handling was shit(according to wheels)
    The xr6T totally blew me away.Its so much faster its rediculous.
    Have had it for 1 week now.Handling is pretty good.I was expecting much less.
    Fuel economy is excellent.Sits around 10-12.Power incredible.I totally blew my mate away in his VE SS pre AFM.He couldnt beleive how much quicker the ford was.

  • http://opel John

    I was, just like my dad a Ford man for as long as I can remember. That was until I bought a BA Ghia, my third new Ford and like the previous two I had no end of trouble with thing – it scrubbed out the first set of tyres by the time I had 3000km on the clock and to my complete disgust I could not get the manufacturer to fix anything. That was just one of many faults I was to endure with no assistance from the people who were happy to take my money. I now drive an SS-V Commodore and there is no way I would go back to the blue-oval product, I work too hard for my money to waste it on dodgy products.

  • http://www.caradvice.com.au/30255/ford-falcon-xr8-vs-holden-commodore-ss-the-final-verdict/#respond Nick

    are (and if, when) you going to test the commodore’s new SIDI engines?

  • Andrew

    I must say I spend a good part of my time seeing car reviews, and of course the old holden vs ford v8 comes up from time to time and I gotta say well-done Ford on this one. The XR8 largely is the underdog these days (with both SS and XR6 Turbo considered to be the superior products) and to see it have a great victory here is a nice sight.

  • Sammy

    I used to own various 4.0L Falcon BAs BFs and BA XR6 Turbos, i also owned a G220 Fairlane, they were all sweet cars, really nice to drive, the sixes were powerful in its class when compared to crappy V6 Commodores , but the G220 was soon replaced by a 6.0L VZII Berlina that i got.

    The 6.0L VZII Berlina that i drive in “Burgundy Red” looks plain and simple, less decoration and style than the similar Calais VZ.

    But, still it has an optioned 6.0L V8 under the bonnet. So here are some facts:

    So far, not a single equivalent auto or manual 6.0L could beat me on take off/at the lights or on the open, not a single turbo and non turbo ford or holden six could come close to me.

    Those cars had no chance, a 317kW 6.2 only kept up next to my 6.0L Berlina.

    fact 1: Berlina 6.0L VZII 2006 weighs like 150-200kg less than a VE SS or HSV 307-317-325kW cars.

    Its light, it has a big 6.0L L76, the most reliable engine in its class.

    Sure it is only 4 speed auto , but so what?

    It would only need 3 gears in my opinion.

    The magic comes from the engine, stronger 4 speed auto, drive shaft and the rear diff which on this car that i own is a 3.07 and still it beats a brand new SS VE of its family by half to 1 full car distance 0-100km/h.

    So far, no car could come close to me

    as i said, i loved driving the everyday family six cylinder Falcons, and Fairlane 5.4L, they were all fine…..

    fine in their class, even the FG XR6 i drove was fine, but very similar to old BA and BF XT performance wise.

    But again, all those ran out of legs quickly and were only great when driven slowly and carefully while in the speed limit zone, pushing them harder = failure.

    The only car that does 90% of my V8 6.0L Berlina VZII is XR6 Turbo FG and F6, but again they will always lose if they were to operate at high speeds such as 140 or 180km/h and when overtaking would be required say from 180 to 220.

    The 6.0L VZII cars do it easily and even with 4 speed auto.

    I suggest all of you who can afford a car loan, go get the last model of a VZ SS 5.7L or a 6.0L L76 V8.

    They are light, on par with Falcon BA/BF/FG technologically and if you get one with a 4 speed auto , then they are even simpler and more reliable, cheaper to fix and run and not too fancy with 5 6 or 7 speed auto rubbish.

    My next car is gona be a VZII 6.0L SS 6 speed manual!, they’re cheap now and i want one.

    please note, i have also beaten and also matched a 297kW SENATOR VZII , must be the light weight of Berlina that does the trick and the free spirit of L76 6.0L engine.


    • Ben

      What a load of cr@p, ur saying ur base model commodore is quicker then the falcons turbo 6? Have you happened to line up against an FG F6 lately??. Yeah ur car may only cost 15 to 20 grand, but when u start comparing it to 40grand plus XR6 Turbos n 80 grand GTS’s, it begs to differ what uve had done to it and what is actually true.
      N an XR6 Turbo is only fun at low speeds??? I bet you havent even drivin 1!!!! Berlina this, my awesome 6litre V8 that….pull the other one lol

      • The Real Car Fanatic

        Some people mistake beating someone off at the lights as racing and winning when in actual fact the guy in the other car is thinking, Look at this wanker trying to prove he is a hero.

        Oh sorry Sammy, what’s that, yoúr VZ SS blew away a Ferrai 599 today, hmmm, must have been the one I saw cruising along the Pacific Hwy this morning.

        Poor Guy, to think he spent a good protion of half a mil and got done by your base model V8 Berlina.

  • Sammy

    remember a Ford Falcon I6 4.0L is a great engine in its class, from the BAs 182kW and 380Nm to identical BFs 190kW and 383Nm which is identical to Barra182 mechanically, to the current FG 195kW an 391Nm which is 95-98% the same as the very 1st BA 4.0L, they are great , smooth and refined.

    But think about it , yes hey are like older 5.0L V8s and more economical and they do haul , they do get up and go.

    But when compared to a Holdens 3.8L V6, 3.6L V6 they are simply 1000 years ahead in everything.

    Even an old EF-EL-AU OHC 4.0L is more advanced yet simpler somehow.

    The thing here is there is no point getting a V6 or a six.

    Whats the point having a large car where that identical large car can come with a V8 in it and with more power.

    Its like being at the traffic lights in a fully fledged VE Calais with only 210kW and some dude next to you pulls up in a Berlina with a 6.0L 270kW V8?????

    He owns you not just for economy , but for safety and speed.

    My VZII 6.0L Berlina can overtake anything.

    Here is a list of V8 cars it can beat.

    All Boss powered Falcons up to 315kW
    All 5.7 and 6.2L powered Commodores up to 317kW “don’t know about the 325kW, never tried”
    But do not know about the VZII SS 6.0 manual, that might be 100th of a second quicker than my 4 speed auto.

    • Ben

      I thought ur other comment was bad, but this one…….far out. Your VZ Commodore is safer the a VE Commodore? Which, just going by facts, is the first commodore to ever get a 5 star safety rating, but ur base model commy is safer, because it has a 6 litre V8. As i commented before, go line up next to an F6, yeah this comparison isnt to do with sixes, but the best performance car in Australia n for 100 grand in the world, is FPV’s F6…..I just can not see ur box stand, 16valve ohv V8 beating a 65grand plus F6

  • Hung Low

    Blah blah blah blah blah my VZ SS gives me rim jobs. Blah blah blah.

  • Ben

    Use only got high 14s from these cars?? everywhere else ive seen they have recorded atleat 14.4 from the XR8, even the BA XR8 was good for that. And the SS even with less power shouldve pulled harder then that. Maybe do afew runs down the quarter, or learn how to launch the car properly.

  • Andrew

    Its interesting about “Sammy”s Berlina. He has a point in that its the big 6.0L in a light car. The 6.0L’s were known to be superior to the 5.7L low down so indeed I cant see the 4 speed being much of a issue (just smoother than having a 6 speed auto or manual I guess due to their being less gear changing) and the lightness no doubt would be the key, simple physics can vouch for that. He perhaps is getting a bit ambitious though in regard to the i6 Turbos, the very first ones maybe as they had well under 500Nm of torque I believe but later ones, I doubt it (definately not the 310 F6 I wouldn’t think).

  • Wally

    That must be some berlina , i mean i drive a BF turbo manual and i blew away a VZ SS and i doubt there is any weight difference between a SS and a berlina. i have also driven an SS and it just doesnt feel as good as the Turbo , the turbo just feels meaner , hence why i bought that. And as ben said the F6 is the best performance vehicle under 100k compared to others. Countless tests conclude this

  • Rhys

    These results are flawed in my opinion. I own a new 09 ve ssv afm totally stock and managed a 13.9 quarter mile and my worst was 14.2, also that was with a full tank of fuel and it was my first visit to the drag strip so im not a professional. I recently drove from sydney to the Gold Coast and managed to make it to Ballina before having to fill up, this is approx 750 km, the best economy i got was 8.8 litres /100km but sat on a steady 9.0, the worst i experienced was 10.0 when i stopped at Nambucca heads for the night and drove around town. Since then my fuel economy has continued to improve because the car has now got 6000 km on it.

  • Scrotum

    Who cares anyways… Coyote is coming!

  • Dawson

    I have been a holden fan and owned a holden all my life always having the V8 and V6 and 2 weeks ago i brought the 2010 XR8 and won’t go back to a holden.

    The Ford has better handling, better features, better gear box, better looks etc.

    I suggest for any wanting to buy a 2008-2010 Holden, test drive the Ford. You will love everything about it.

  • Zeek

    these two have always been biast when it comes to holden and ford, funny how they always tend to favor the falcon, as ford men them selves usualy do. The commodore has a better power to weight ratio and the auto is a quicker car than the manual, why? the auto shifts at every peak tourqe point in the gear range resulting in peak power through out the gears, the auto has been proven to shift up to 15 times quiker than even race driver could shift a manual gearbox. and for all the petrol heads out there AUTOS DO DO BETTER BURN OUTS! i have had racing experience with both transmissions and a former mechanic, so please don’t tell me other wise. So many advantages of semi auto’s have on manuals, u dont even have to change the clutch every 80’000kms…

  • linda

    both cars are sweet, but a 5.4L DOHC Boss290 is a much more advanced engine than a typical LS2 block with L76 aka L98 heads. The Falcon FG XR8 makes just over 230rwkw while the VE SS in both 260 and 270kW guise makes just over 210rwkw. It might have a better power to weight ration on paper but by less than 2%, yet the Falcon’s power and torque consistency make it a better and more drive able package. The 6 speed ZF is much faster gearbox than an improvised 4 speed with 2 extra gears the rubbish VE SS 6 speed auto which is very slow, in fact slower than a typical BA 4 speed auto due to its inferior 25 year old mechanics. Ford all the way, it is good to be bias when truth and honesty come to the reviewers mind. After all these guys who have tested these two cars, one of them being an absolute fake xenon light projector eye lighted piece of crap ve ss commodore, these guys are both engineers and are more competent to make comments than you Zeek.

  • linda

    a stock VZII SS commodore, as crap of a car that really is, in fact is faster than a mildly boosted F6 typhoon that makes slightly more power than standard 270 or 310kW when you only do a full software tune up.

    any commodore from VT to VZ are nothing but rubbish, but the one with a 6.0L engine, even though that engine is crap too and LS1 5.7 in 285kW and 300kW version was a better engine power vs engine size. The 6.0L with just a tune as i said above will in fact beat a mildly tuned 310kW F6 FG Falcon.

    Not to mention when you install an over the radiator air intake, full exhaust, a Falcon can have 100-200Nm more or 50-100kW more when with a hair dryer bolted on it, but the V8 will always win , be more economical and more reliable.

    In this case a Falcon being more reliable by default due to its advanced and bulletproof and an amazing I6 4.0L engine which will do over 1000,000km versus a crappy 5.0,5.7l strokerrrrr engines doing a max of 300,000 in their life time before needing to be replaced, the 5.7L LS1 (all variants) wont last more than 250,000-300,000km in an VT-VZ guise and a 6.0-6.2L the same story.

    Falcon wins in the end overall, but a stock VZII SS or Calais/Berlina with just a software tune will match and just about beat a mildly tuned F6 310kW. This is a fact, we need to be objective.

    Darin, Lindas bf

  • etry

    well we all know that the holden is the better car, it looks 100x better then that ugly ford and as they say i waould rather push my holden then drive a ford!!!!

  • Bradxr6t

    The VE SS and the XR8 are no much for the XR6T, with just a $500 flash tuner running 10psi,I’m running flat 13’s. As for fuel economy though even with the ZF 6 speed I’m in the mid 14’s maybe it’s just that I drive it hard. Anyway who cares about economy when you are smashing HSV’s that cost 20k more and making 6ltr SS’s look like a joke. Also I dont know why you would by an XR8 it handles worse, uses more fuel and gets creamed buy the turbo, the only thing going for it is the cool looking bonnet. So what if it sounds better give me speed over sound anyday you can cut ya centre muffler out and boost the turbo to give it a nice tune. It’s also about torque, max torque in the turbo is at 2000 rpms the V8’s take dbl that, the race is already won before those sort of revs are acheived.

  • Greg

    Great article. I’m a Yankee down under for a short time. I love the Holden SS I’m a GM fan in the States… I have a 1969 Camaro, a 2002 Z06 Corvette, and my wife drives an SS Trailblazer. I would love to buy the Holden in a LH version and bring it back home with me if it were possible…

    • Seymour Butts

      Ever heard of the Pontiac G8???

  • CalaisV

    My pre AFM Calais V, with a dyno tune, cold air intake and extractors puts out 260rwkw (c320kw at the flywheel) and over 610NM. With direct injected gas, I run high 12secs 400s and get 450km out of a tank of gas for around $45. Most xr6t’s are embarrassed by the Calais and I have dual zone climate control, 13 speaker BOSE system, DVD player, Sat NAV (aftermarket) and rear camera and 6 airbags including curtain (standard). This is the first Holden I have ever owned and I am very impressed (also the quad 2.5 inch exhaust sounds incredible).

  • Bob2876

    Ford is the best and Holden suck Ford xr8 twin turbo will smash a Holden ss

  • Lara_esn

    How can you people go for ford? Ford Sucks especially in the races. Holden is the best and always will be!!!

  • allah

    Those 0-100 times are really slow. I know of 3.0 L Turbo’s that do that time.

  • Alex Martini

    Quite possibly the first Commodore vs. Falcon article that is not one-sided (VF vs. FGII anyone?)

    • Rocket

      Holden always promote themselves as the performance and economy leaders but in the real world Fords prove otherwise. Ford could have done better in the marketing department but it is too late now for the Falcon.

      • Alex Martini

        Couldn’t have said it better. Falcon EcoBoost vs. Holden 3.0 SIDI? Falcon wins everywhere. Same with the 3.6 V6 vs 4.0 I6, 3.6 LPG vs 4.0 LPG, , 4.0 Turbo vs 6.0 V8, Boss 335 vs LSA 325 (or whatever that is called)- need I go on? I totally agree with you in that Ford simply didn’t promote their more advanced engines enough and when they did it was too little too late.

  • Marty Shead

    Seriously.. 290kw and a 14 second 400 meter and 0 to jail is high fives… That’s terrible. My 2009 370gt SP does 13.6 quarters and 0- 100 5.2.. And its only 249kw!!