Ford Falcon XR8 vs Holden Commodore SS
May 4, 2009 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
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
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
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.
Conclusion
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:
Print it: 
And the FG’s styling is still absolutely abysmal
look at that front on picture, the Holden looks muscular, the FG feminine.
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.
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.
Who buys auto V8’s anyway ?
The manual versions are no contest, the SS shiits all over the XR8 every time !
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.
how much different would these tests be in the v8 utes. better fuel or worse
and why have the auto price gone up to $2000 now. is it cos of the demand for them over the manuals????
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.
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.
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!
My god is the Falcon ugly.
My god !!!!!!! the Commondore is so dated and ugly.
Martin – nothing inelligent to contribute then??
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.
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.
@ 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.
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
@ 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.
@jake02
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 )
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 :-)
Bret,
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.
Nice one Nikos3, congratulations. Interested to hear what sort of mileage you’re getting around town doing the daily drive?
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.
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.
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
the ss looks nothing like the omega
the falcon doesnt look awkward it looks retarded
AndrewM:
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.
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
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.
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!
Ok now it’s working….much better. I am free what a relief !
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.
Westy:
You didn’t bother replying to any of the tickets you requested, so we can’t help you unless you respond.
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..
cheers
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.
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
Paul,
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.
Westy:
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.
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.
<|:-)
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!
Jake02,
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!
Westy,
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?
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?
I agree with ya Sammy, but can’t explain why :(. Holden = overrated. Ford = known for its reliability and flawless auto engineering.
WTF???? ARE THERE TWO JAKE02′S???
I DID NOT TYPE THAT ABOVE COMMENT!!!
The fg is a ugly car. At least the bf’s looked good.
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.
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.
Best looking car in your driveway, you mean
How would you know what else I have parked in my driveway?
… yeah his other car is a VE SV6, so obviously the XR6 is the best looking in his driveway!
Touche!! lol
OMFG, you’d do well in the banter in my office :)
fourteen point plus secs for a quartermile, thats pretty slow.
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
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.
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.
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
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.
Cheers
James
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.
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
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
well looks like Flex is the only one speaking hte truth here !! 5.4 second SS’S??? dreaming!
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.
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”.