Holden Commodore to get new engines

By David Twomey | August 03rd, 2009

GM Holden will tomorrow unveil significant updates to its Commodore range aimed at cutting fuel consumption and luring buyers back to the declining large car market segment.

Holden will take a different course to that recently announced by major rival Ford, instead unveiling smaller and more fuel-efficient versions of its V6 engine.

It will also unveil a six–speed automatic transmission, which coupled with a 3.0-litre version of its V6 engine, is aimed at cutting fuel consumption by 10 per cent from the current 10.6 litres per 100 kilometres.

As part of the revised engine plan the Commodore powerplant will also be fitted with direct injection, which is expected to give the Commodore class-leading fuel efficiency.

The announcement of the revised VE Commodore has been widely tipped in the media for some time, but it became imminent when Holden late today issued a succinctly worded invitation to the media for tomorrow morning.

The statement said; “Holden chairman and managing director Mark Reuss will hold a media conference tomorrow to make a major announcement about the Holden Commodore sedan, Sportwagon and Ute, Statesman and Caprice.”

One thing is almost certain the car will not be the often-discussed VF Commodore but rather an updated VE, possibly called a Series II.

Mr Reuss, who last week revealed he would be leaving Australia shortly to take up a very senior post with GM in Detroit, has repeatedly said he believed the VE should undergo significant but ongoing changes, rather than a “major model revamp.”

The direct injection system, previously found only on much more expensive vehicles and used by GM on the 3.6-litre V6 engines that power its Cadillac range, will be a focus of the Commodore’s improved fuel efficiency.

CarAdvice believes the direct injection engines will be called SIDI, Spark Injection Direct Injection, as with the Cadillac version of the V6.

All V6 engines will get a version of the direct injection but those in the SV6 and Calais will use a 210kW 3.6-litre version.

Picking the new Commodores on the road will be a difficult task as styling revisions have been kept to a minimum with changes only made to improve aerodynamics and drag efficiency.

One thing is certain there will be a lot more equipment on all models as Holden seeks to increase the value argument to draw customers back to the large car.

The Holden news comes a little over a week after Ford revealed would fit a turbocharged, four-cylinder engine to the Falcon large car from 2011.

Ford says the EcoBoost four-cylinder Falcon will be up to 20 per cent more efficient than the existing six-cylinder, which means fuel economy could be in the order of 8.0L/100km.

Holden won’t have the new Commodore on sale for at least another month but wants to build anticipation as its seeks to stem the trend towards smaller cars.

It is also fighting to keep the Commodore in its position as Australia’s top selling sedan, and up to June it was just over 3000 units in front of its small car nemeses the Mazda3 and Toyota Corolla.

CarAdvice will bring you a full coverage of Holden’s announcement tomorrow.

omgwot

The VL is back! 3.0L, 12.5 seconds to 100?
Deco

before commenting and looking like an ass, you should research better. The 3.0L is fitted with DI and can produce KW’s up to 200.
DesignEng©™

I would expect that without serious discounting on the current model, sales should dry up totally.
This should make for some good run-out deals on VE series 1 models. Unless of course if VE II cops a price rise.
OMG

Exactly, Deco.
‘Wheels’ reported a hi-po 235kw version, also?
Jimbo

This is Holden’s response to Fords Turbo 4 engine??? Ford has taken a leaf out of the likes of VW and other Euro big guns with the EcoBoost 2L Turbo. Maintaining performance while being more efficient. I think the Falcon is going to make the Commie look very silly indeed.
AAA

With the fuel injector inside the combustion chamber, it could easily get dirty and clogged up?
Devil666

Anti-spam Ford, lol. 210KW seems low for a DI 3.6…. especially when the Caddy version is doing 225+ (230 or so) KW. ITS ABOUT TIME HOLDEN!!
Jimbo

10% is a big margin to be ahead of the direct almost identical competition.
DesignEng©™

Actually Richo it’s almost 16%, that Falcon will be ahead of Commodore VE II within 6-8 months of it’s release.

In the meantime VE II will have a 4% advantage over Falcon.
If that was your only criteria, then you would buy the LI LPG FG.
Aussie Cars

I read that the 3.6 will have 225kw in the sv6/calais not 210kw.
There are also rumors floating around that the 6 speed auto is the only auto box available across the range.

If the fuel consumption goes down, the interior gets an decent overhaul and the engine/gearbox is excellent the SV6 may just be back on the cards for our next family car.(Partner wanted one when they first came out a few years back)
Mazda 6 is still our pick at the moment…But if Holden pull it off the SV6 will be better value, more fun to drive and better equipped. All while sipping only a bit more fuel.
We are still waiting until next year before making a purchase so time will tell.
Jack

Car Advice, can you post where the maximum torque is on the 3.0?

I can remember a reference to something like 5900rpm, which means you will have to rev the pants off it to get decent pulling power, if true.

There was a time when the 186c.i. 3.0L Aussie designed straight six produced peak torque at 1800rpm. Now THAT was a Holden six!
zahmad

I was wondering what are the cost advantages of fitting the silly old V6 with DI over the 2.0L 195kw Ecotec powering the Elfin…how much more does the Ecotec cost to produce?…This has been a question I have been thinking about for a long time…
Cargo

Smaller engine less torque. You will have to rev its guts out to get it to perform. The 2litre EcoBoost Turbo will have more torque and it will have a flat torque curve so will blow this 3.0 vibraTech away and be more fuel efficient.
I dont know how much fuel you would save, if any, with a few people and luggage on board because the power and torque are up high in the rev range………what about towing? Useless…….
Andrew M

Jimbo,
Just to note its 10% better than the current commie fuel consumption, not 10% better than the competition.
The Falcon currently stands at 9.9L, the Commie would come in at 9.6L/100k.

The thing above and beyond that to be skeptical about is will it achieve real world figures.
In real world it will be as good as the class leader at best

Looks like the SV6 and Calais will get the 225Kw version which is probably a better marketing strategy.
I know the SV6 already got a Hi-Po version, but it still lacked usable grunt.
Hopefully the addition of direct injection brings reasonable power to the sub 3500rpm section
http://navelcontemplation.blogspot.com Supercujo

OMGWOT: The VL will not return as the VE Commodore is at least 500kg heavier than the old VL. That sorta dulls any performance.
Andrew M

I posted before others had suggested the power and torque range.
Well if thats true, than the thing wont use less fuel in real world.
But in saying that, if on paper they impress the tree huggers, Holden would have to be happy. The market for green image is certainly growing
Big End

Atmo V6 engines all lack serious torque……this is why the Falcon I6 is so damn good. All modern V6 engines need to be revved highy to get any grunt out of them.

Fuel consumption will hardly be any better than the 4 litre Falcon!! And in real world situations like having the family on board with luggage or trying to tow anything it will use more fuel……..
Alex

Why should people be lured back to this segment? I can’t say I’m a big fan of the styling on the new Mazda 3, but I like how many of them I’m seeing. I think if sales are anything to go by (which obviously they are) Australians are finally going away from cars like the Commodore and seeing that smaller cars from Europe and Japan are far better than larger cars from Australia.
I do trips now where I actually see more Volkswagen Golfs than I do either Commodores or Falcons! I think that’s a very good thing and I really hope that people won’t be won over by a facelift and some new engines.
If you want a large saloon, at least save up and get something impressive. Otherwise, you have a choice to buy a Mondeo, a 6, a Passat, a Superb, a 407 or something like those for the same money that are vastly more impressive, basically the same size outside, sometimes bigger inside and much more with the times. At least Ford are going to offer a four cylinder Falcon; that really is something.
Holden are laughably behind the times and I think they are in too much of a hole to get out of. I don’t just think so, I hope so as they are massively failing to impress.
The Realist

“One thing is certain there will be a lot more equipment on all models as Holden seeks to increase the value argument to draw customers back to the large car.”

Series II badges? Floor mats with ‘Holden’ in big red lettering? Four windows with power operation instead of two?
technofreak

Funny, V6 with only 340Nm….my 4 cyl mazda has 380!! and uses half the fuel…hehehehe.
DipStiK

Would this be the same as turning cylinders off? I remember that didn’t catch on. Large mass pushed by less pistons means more fuel for each piston to compensate… Anyone know?
Tom

More fuel efficient cars is always good news, regardless of how late to the table they are. Still, I’d be p*ssed if I’d just bought a Commodore in the last month. I saw the cover of the latest Wheels (might have been Motor) magazine stating in big bold letters how the new Commodore will trounce the Falcon with the new engines. Quite amusing, given how small the difference between them will be fuel economy and performance wise they will be.
Andrew

Andrew M,
I believe 10% better then 10.6 is actually 9.0L/100km. Which is class leading and not far for the Medium 4′s.

Jimbo,
The Commodore will not at all look silly, it a traditional big Aussie sedan, pulling Camry econmy on 6, when its bigger then a Camry. if people wanted 4 cylinder cars then the medium segment would be out selling the large segment.
Andrew

The Realist,
Could be mistaken here, but im pretty sure that the VE commodore has had power windows standard accross the range since it’s introduction, in fact i think the VZ did to . . .
Shak

Wheels reported that the Calais and SV6 would get the Hipo 3.6 with DI and the Omega and Berlina would get the 3.0 DI. They also stated that the 3.0 litre would have Camry beating economy with at least 9.7/100 acheivable. Wheels generally get their figures right, but i guess we’ll have to wait till tomorrow. They also said the 3.6 would have 225Kw and the 3.0 would get 200Kw, but the 3.0 would be hooked to a 6 speed as standard.
DesignEng©™

Andrew 10% better than 10.6 l/100km is 9.54 l/100 km. Which is only marginally better that Falcon already does, and some 16% behind where falcon will be.
davie

The times they are a changin…

This has obviously been in the pipeline for a while and its impressive to see how both Ford and Holden are responding with modern technology to the demand for more economical engines.

Argubly, this technology should have been implemented at least 3 years ago however better late than never.

If the falcon and commodore could shed a few kg’s this would change the game. dont know how likely this is with all the need for crash test compliance.
Shak

Alex if the 4 cylinder in the Falcon can lug the weight of a big aussie then im all for it, but you need a reasonable amount of power for that, and that cant be acheived by a 407, mondeo, 6 or even the Superb, as you have to rev the life out of those engines to get reasonable performance and that voids the benefit of having a 4 cylinder. Im not bagging the falcon but comparing mid size euro’s to large aussies is apples and oranges.
Captain Mainwaring

This will be interesting. Possibly Holden is on the right track as 3 litres is plenty with direct injection. Over at Ford, NOBODY is going to buy a four-cylinder Falcon, no matter how many turbos they bolt onto it. Falcon = 4 cyl just doesn’t fit the image. It’s like playing rugby league in a skirt. Not going to work.
Shak

Davie Reuss said that after DI, weight shedding was top of the charts, and that the 2010 update would definetly address this problem, so we can say that all of a sudden the Aussies are back on track.
Jimbo

Andrew M, I’m sorry that post of mine was not very clear. I was referring to my other post just above that one.
I was alluding to the almost amusing futility of improving the Commodores fuel consumption by 10% when the Falcon is already being improved by 20% on its already better figure. Hence after the change of engine the Falcon still has a +10% advantage.

Pointless Holden pointless!
Wheelnut®™

All models are expected to have the new 6 Speed Auto [similar to that used in the Caddie Sedan] except for the Omega which will retain the old style 4 speed Auto.

All models are expected to feature the 225Kw 3.6 Litre V6 as standard except for the Omega and Berlina which will have the 3.0 litre version

As for HSV don’t be surprised if they release a new model with a Direct Injection Twin-Turbo Optimised [DITTO} V6 Engine; to go up against the F6 as its expected to produce 300Kw+
Aussie Cars

Wow no one has driven it yet but everyone is writing it off. On paper I cant see the problem. Why go a 4cyl turbo that would use the same fuel for a little more torque if any? The 3.0 should do the job fine if the 6 speed is capable and for those wanting more, they can go the 3.6. Why import an engine when a capable one is being built right here.
We all know a diesel is coming sometime next year and that should complete the range. Add the diesel and the V8 and very few car companies out there offer so many engine choices on 1 model car.

If the 6 speed is crap, engine terrible and fuel economy sky high then sure there in trouble but at the moment I think on paper its looking pretty good for the commodore right now. Glad there starting to turn things around as V6 drivetrain was prob the VE`s biggest let down.
Andrew

Andrew, the VZ only had front power windows standard at Executive grade. The introduction of VE saw 4 power windows standard
Shak

Wheelnut HSV is expected to retain the 6.2 but give the GTS a new peak of 327Kw to create a hero model. But the other models will all recieve upgrades in terms of styling and engine and tranny calibration to deliver improved performance. And as always Wheels is hardly wrong.
Aussie Cars

@wheelnut: Where did you read about the 4 speed? I read the 4 speed is no more and if anything the base models may get the 5speed but most prob the 6speed.
davie

Shak,

Interesting news re weight loss but lets see first what they can actually do. Holden promise weight loss as a reactionary measure every time a new body series comes out (VT and VE) yet little is ever done.

Maybe they can easily do ye-olde alloy bonnet like subaru. I hope they can also find other savings while balancing R&D costs to do this.
Shak

Davie well so far what Reuss has said has been all truth, and lets hope this follows his tradition. And you are right bout Holdens blank promises, but im keeping my hopes up as a Holden man.
Frosty

To the realist, you are very, very wrong. One obvious comment you made that is wrong is about the Commodore only having 2 power windows. For quite a long time now even the base model Commodore had 4 power windows as standard. By memory the YV was the first one to have 4 power windows as standard on the then Executive Commodore. Holden has always been ahead of the times putting extra standard equipment on their Commodore well ahead of the Falcon. The Falcon ute still doesn’t even option Stability control which the Commodore ute has had since the VE was released. The VZ Commodore had stability control standard on the VZ range and had it in as standard well before Ford did. You may say that the Falcon ute has the option of side airbags which the Commodore ute doesn’t currently but I suspect tomorrow that you will find that the Commodore ute will come with side and curtain airbags as standard. It is coming this year and with the new model VE 2 or MY10 being a reasonably big update the time seems right for this change to take place. All will be revealed tomorrow and I will be watching the Press conferance live at 11am to hear first hand what will be coming. Anti spam word is Ford, something that will seem ancient after tomorrows press conferance.
Shak

Aussie Cars, im with you. i heard from mates at Holden and Wheels that the Omega and Berlina would get the 6 speed along with the SV6.
Shak

I also heard this rumour saying that ALL and i mean ALL Holden produced engines would be E85 compatible by the end of 2010. Hopeful but doesnt look possible.
Frosty

Wheelnut, the Omega and berlina are going to ditch the 4 speed auto and will have a 6 speed auto.
Wheelnut®™

AussieCars – I just re-read the article in Wheels and the 4 speed clunker will be in the base model ute – along with the current old-tech 175Kw V6.

I know that Shak – but I read an article in Wheels a couple of years ago which said HSV have been thinking about introducing a car with a smaller V8 which will sit below the Clubbie and the Maloo.. wait and see I guess
Simon

This is the first thing I’ve liked about Holden for a long long time.
Andrew M

Frosty,
how does that go again???
wrong, wrong very wrong was it???

you also need to check your knowledge because the falcon ute has had stability control for around 12 months.
They upped the price 400 bucks to cover it

Also humerous to read your very one sided view that its appaerntly unacceptable for falcon ute not to have stability control as standard, yet you would view no side airbags in a holden product as acceptable???

but anyway, Ill learn you a bit right here right now so listen up
VY never had 4 power windows standard as you claim.

Falcon ute has infact got stability control

The Holden ute with out airbags is a weird one. I did infact drive a SS and SV6 with more than 2 airbags at my local dealer but in checking this, I can not verify this on the holden site.
But while i was there I did find that they try and sting you 280 bucks for a flip key like the falcon has standard

Also i just noticed that they charge you for alloy faced pedals, whereas on the XR they are standard.
Same for the locknuts.

Wow, the closer i look the more i see extreme pricing they charge in comparison to ford for things like bluetooth and alarm.

even the factory XR seat covers i got were cheaper
Andrew M

Oh, and also a shout out to “Andrew” (with out the “M”)

Check your math again champ.
Andrew

Andrew M,

Arhhh yes my math was bad, but is acceptible for the falcon to come with up to six airbags?

Also it doesnt matter what the falcon will be when the 4 comes, it matters what it is here and now, which is trailing behind the commodore in sales, i think i remember a certain ford australia ceo stating the FG would put falcon back on top, still waiting for that ford, like we are for the focus, oh wait your not building that anymore . . .
Mike

I with you Aussie Cars. The wife and I are holding off purchasing a new car to see what the fuel economy is like as we also are looking at the SV6. Can’t wait.
Al Juraj

It’s about time they build the car they should have in the first place. Four-speed auto with a droning, drinking engine was simply unacceptable in a large car. Fortunately for them, a huge part of the country is made of fools who’d fall for an ‘exclusive to Oz’ lion badge and kept it on top. Finally there are signs Holden is loving Australia back.
Frosty

Andrew M, you should get your facts right as the Falcon Ute does NOT have stability control as yet and traction control which you are probably thinking of is a expensive option. So I think you should correct yourself as even the Ford website does not mention stability control on the FG Falcon ute.
Baji

I think there may be a typo in the article. It says “Spark Injection Direct Injection” but i think its supposed to say “Spark Ignition Direct Injection”. SIDI just doesn’t sound as good as Mazda’s DISI
Frosty

Andrew M, the following is from a recent review of the Falcon ute and I quote.
“Unfortunately, Ford hasn’t yet calibrated a stability control system for the basic Falcon ute range. There were about 30 prototype utes undergoing final development of this potentially life-saving technology as we went to press and it was expected to be on all Falcon utes by the end of the year. Ford insiders have admitted that Holden caught Ford by surprise by making stability control standard on the new Commodore ute and it subsequently has expedited the development of that technology.

In the meantime, traction control is available. Sadly, it’s a $750 option. We reckon it should be standard as the Falcon has plenty of poke – and a rudimentary rear end to keep under control. “
john a

i had a vs series 2 with power windows front and rear,traded that on a vt it also had power windows front and rear,
Frosty

Oh and also the Falcon does not have 6 airbags as yet standard on all models. Something that could have been fixed by now if Ford thought it was worthy. How on earth it got 5 stars without 6 airbags is beyond me as obviously in a side impact it would NOT be as safe as a car with Curtain airbags fitted regardless of the structure strength. Anyways we will all see tomorrow what eventuates but one thing I do know is that the one weakness the Commodore had is no more after this announcement and will Ford follow up with a MY10 update to try and keep in touch with the Commodore and offer curtain airbags as standard on the base models which for a car release in the last 12 months or maybe slightly more should have had in the first place. I think not because where will Ford find the money to do the things Holden have been doing since the VE introduction.
Frosty

I actually had a VS series 1 when they were released and it had front and rear power windows as standard and it wasn’t a Calais or even a berlina or Statesman/Caprice.
Robin Graves

A small capacity V6 with high power output = oversquare engine = short stroke = no torque at low revs. The 4Cyl Turbo Falcon on the other hand will have a longer stroke and boost to go with it. The 4cyl Falcon will feel more like a lazy long-stroke 6cyl than this ‘windmill in a hurricane’ 3.0 commodore. I bet in real life situation with some weight on board, aircon on a hot day, the 3.0 will use just the same if not more than the current engine. But no doubt it will fool the clowns anyway. Wait and see the direct, real life comparison on economy, my money is on the Falcon.
Byron

Can’t wait. About BLOODY time!!! Interesting what engine kw/nm will be for both 3.0 & 3.6litre. Exterior & interior also worth taking note. 10/10 Go Holden & HSV
Frenchie

Really this fuel consumption business is only there to please fleet buyers. Not putting Holden down, but this should give their sales a good boost.

One fact most people are missing about the Ford’s turbo 4 is that insurance will be quite high.
Terry

Yet again the Holden lovers lap up announcements like these from Holden no matter how trivial, inconsequential, or unimpressive they may be. Examples from some of the above posts are as follows:

People claiming that a 10% improvement off the current 10.6 litres per 100km works out to 9.0L/100km (talk about failing basic maths class), when in reality its actually almost 9.6L/100 from a 3.0L Direct injected engine. Compare that to 9.9L/100km for the regular non DI 4.0L ford inline six, still impressed?

People claiming that Holden is so far ahead of the competition that they had little things like power windows all round standard as far back as the base model VY (couldnt be more wrong) and somehow conveniently forgetting things like the fact that air conditioning wasnt even standard in the base model VE until 2008 !

People claiming that the new 3.0L DI engine will leave the opposition for dead even though they are only looking at peak power figures, and completely ignoring the most important thing for a big heavy car, torque! The current commodore 3.6L engine is already some 50nm down on torque over fords 4.0L inline six, and the new 3.0L is likely to put out only around the 300nm mark. Bear in mind that these same people that are so impressed by this engine have openly laughed and criticized the upcoming ford 2.0L ecoboost 4 cylinder which offers 205kw of power and most importantly 380nm of torque from only 1500rpm! all while delivering fuel economy figures as low as 8.0L/100km in a car as big and heavy as the falcon.

I cant help but feel that these same people dont really care much about ACTUAL facts and figures, preferring instead to believe holdens marketing campaigns that boast fuel efficiency, power and environmental buzzwords, whilst at the same time choosing to ignore the competition. It’s because of this same sort of thinking (or lack of it) that manufacturers choose to drag their feet and rarely offer any genuine innovation.
john a

terry dont be an owner operator all your life,holden people are no differant than ford people,only last week several ford lovers on this site were declaring that the axing of the aus made focus was a positive thing,falcon or commodore both great australian cars.and i hope we have both for many years to come.
Cargo

All this hoo haa over a gutless 3 litre engine that will not only get worse fuel economy than the 4litre Falcon but will be blown into the weeds by the Turbo 4 when it comes out…..anyway GM Holden lovers, dont get too excited……remember Gov Motors is bankrupt and it had been stated in the U.S. that Gm and its now not so many offshoots will have bugger all money for development for a long time so this may be it for a while……and there wont be as much this time as you are wishing for……the piggy bank has a huge hole in it!!
thenameless

Frosty you are WRONG! DSC is available as an option!
And no, Commodore did not have power windows f&r during VS or VT or VX for that matter on the Exec, unless optioned. Get the facts straight!
http://skyline The Salesman

More of the same from Holden. It wont matter how small the V6 is or how many gears drive it. It is still a V6. Another step in the wrong direction.
JEKYL & HYDE

can confirm the “sidi” bit.still think it will be 225kw though.and six speed.the 3.0 ltr motor is only for the gov’t and the greenies(read NOT retail)anything else,including possible bumper/weight changes are still a very tightly guarded secret(until toworrow at least)…
Andrew

I appoligised for my maths once, but it simply comes down to the fact if i wanted to drive a Flacon 4 (hahahahah) i can’t because im a P plater .
Splatcat

So Holden need to use a 3.0L V6 to match the fuel economy of the Falcons 4.0L. Just more smoke and mirrors from Holden.
Motorhead

The Falon ute gained DSC (dynamic stability control) when the FG FPV utes were launched which was last year so you’re relying on old info Frosty, if you still don’t beleive me check their website.
Also while I beleive the Falcon shoud have curtain airbags standard across the range & would pay the $300 if I was buying a low spec model myself, features are not the be all & end all rather they supplement the package but can not cover up if the overall structure is not up to scratch.
AB

The Falcon ute has had Stability Control (DSC) available for quite some time now, optional on base models and standard on the rest.
Cargo

AB…..its amazing how many people on here have their facts wrong. They are mainly paid Holden bloggers who are paid to come on here and discredit Ford……its so abvious.
Tony M

So far all I have read is that the 3.0/3.6 DI will have a lot more kw’s than the current motors. They will have 6 sp gearboxes BUT their peak torque will be around 3500rpms. The new 2 litre eco 4 from Ford will have similar kw and torque but the torque is there at 1800rpm. The new VE2 will have more features as standard: more weight. The Falcon will be lighter. When you start to compare the stats all I can conclude is the new VE2 with new DI engines and gearboxes in the real world will be no different to the current VE1. Maybe marketing will get Holden over the line. I still believe the upcoming Falcon next year will have the wood over the VE2.
Golfschwein

Why all the negativity? The Commodore finally gets the transmission it deserves and a motor no bigger than it actually needs. People here are saying that it will use no less fuel than before, because the driver will be burying the wellie more, but the reality is that so much of our driving is done behind others.

My Golf diesel has 77 kilowatts and 250 Nm, and even that’s too many when stuck in a train of Perth drivers doing a steady 56 km/h after taking off from the lights three intersections back. Under those circumstances, it can do incredible economy, more so than when I’m just belting to the shops and back.

I’m betting the same will ring true for the new 3 litre Commodore engine, just as any other car.
Andrew M

Frosty,
The falcon ute does have stability control.
You must be looking under the wrong heading or something.

I signed up for my XR ute on the last day of the month before DSC was set to be included. I was giggling because i paid the pre DSC price, but the build would of course be in the next month when they start fitting DSC.

Ive only got to walk outside to see my traction control/DSC button staring at me.

Also check your powerwindows stat. It wasnt standard in VS, not even VY.
Sure you may have had a model with it, but it had to have been optioned.

Same goes for A/C. it wasnt standard until recently on the commodore, but try and find even a VN that never had the box ticked….
Andrew M

Frosty,
oh and on the airbags,
well fords 4 are still safer, and its proven.

Also you obviously dont know that when a vehicle only has side airbags, they are different side airbags to the side airbags in a car with curtains.
stand alone side airbags are guitar shaped to also protect the head
Johnno

When are you idiots at Holden going to realise that the Commodore is way to heavy for a smaller engine! More torque and lower revs is needed to make this car more efficient. My new Calais V, Sportswagon V6 uses more fuel than my old VY 3.8! Stroke that Ecotech out!
Dave

yea but look at the 3.0L Di Omegas final diff ratio, its 3.27 its fairly short and when coupled with a 6 speed it seems like a quick car but in fact it is NOT, today I have test driven one vs my 2003 BA Fairmont which is not as light as a base XT, and my old 4.0L VCT I6 Fairmont kept on keeping up with a new Commodore 0-40km/h and after wards pulling away from it in 1st gear while the Omega was already in 2nd. I tried this 8 times with two mates changing cars, proving to me that this new 3.0L Di really and seriously lacks torque in REAL LIFE!!!! for real! and that its 4.00 something 1st gear is NOT really giving it life on TAKE OFF and when couple with 3.27 is something that should be 3.73 and to make it work less the 6th should be 0.50.

Still the old 4 speed BA Fairmont which is basically a BA XT with 35kg more weight kept on winning pulling away overtaking and playing with a car which is brand new with just over 1000ks on it.

When we took this Omega and changed it to a Wagon it was even slower, something like 1 or 2 tenths of a second than a sedan.

We were bored so we got a VE SV6 and tried it against a BA Fairmont and Omega 3.0. The SV6 was really poor in mid range acceleration and only made me feel 2 or 3% quicker than in my old BA Fairmont.

Overall , Fairmont 4.0 four cogger with final 3.23 with tall 2.39 1st gear still out sprinted a 3.0L 30-40km/h and over and literally lost it 4-5 car lengths away.

And the current SV6 won by just estimated 10-20cm 0-100km/h and lost by 1 full car length roll start 40-100, 60-100, 80-140 from an old warn out 2003 BA Fairmont which weighs around 40kg more than XT.

And speaking of fuel economy, that old BA 4.0 182kW/380Nm of torque “190/383″ actually on RON95 , is a great value for $$$ vs performance vs economy.

So go out there, get a cheap Fairmont Ghia 2003-2005 for $12000 and enjoy it, it will go some 50km less on a full fuel tank than current torque less/ pointless 3.0L Di plus sounds 1000000 better and has loads of torque more!

cheers
Sarah

only true Ford person in Australia can be a Ford Falcon driver. End of story.
john woods

by reading these comments here you people annoy me haha ,

i still own one of the 1st BA Falcons 4 speeder of course and its an old and now tired 4.0 DOHC VCT, with 245000 on clock i can beat my work car, a 5000km new 3.0L direct injected sedan commodore

we are talking both cars similar on take off up to 40km/h and then my old beast just starts to pull away, slowly and then aggressively from about 60km/h leaving that weak little 3.0 1/2 car lengths behind up to 100km/h.

i have done this experiment 25 times over the past month with a colleague and let me tel you those 90Nm of torque that an old BA has advantage over 3.0 really play a big difference in flexibility.

and talking about 60-90km/h sprint, BA 4 speeder leaves 6 speed 3.0 Direct injected commodore 2 car lengths behind under full throttle down shift from 3rd or 4th in to 1st in a Falcon.

The Falcon just leaves it behind, seriously it destroys it.

90Nm difference, it should technically be 100 or 120Nm difference, but again its 1L bigger engine and that is what we really need, plus its I6 , much better technology than overrated and continuously failing V6 configuration.

It is interesting 8kW less from the 3.0L Di, but seriously it is 182kW at just 5000rpm vs 190kW at 6800 rpm or something like that

what does a 3.0L make at 5000rpm? 150kW, plot the graph and see for yourself , 3.0L makes just under 150kW at 5000rpm and BA 4.0 182 or in real life 189.8kW later on marketed as Barra190 which in fact is 100% identical to Barra182, same engine different marketing strategy.

So think about it, put the BA 4.0 on 3.0L commodore\’s 6 speed gearbox and slightly change the diff ratio from 3.23 to 3.27 and we are talking about a faster car, much quicker car, say 6.0s 0-100km/h.

sure….. yes 6.0s stock, i know people who changed a 2.73 from their BFs to 3.45 and their cars clocked 5.8s stock from 190kW when running 3.45 diff with 6 speed ZF.

think about it people food for thought? and that is why a new 3.0 feels quick, because of a diff ratio 3.27 vs falcons 3.23 and very tall 2.39 which still manages to beat the 3.0L , and 2.73 diff ratio from the BF with 6 speed ZF.

think again, BF with 6 speed is just one 100th of a second to 200th of a second quicker than a 4 speeder.

what does this prove, this proves that the 4.0L I6 does not need 6 speed, it can be happy with 3 speed and still do 7 to 7.5 s 0-100km/h.

put a new 3.0l on a 2.39, 1.45, 1.00 and 0.68 with 3.23 and we are talking 10-11s 0-100km/h.

a very similar story would happen with 195kW and 210kW 3.6 engines.

john
john woods

nothing beats a 4.0L for torque.

series 2 FG will make 440Nm and 220kW according to some and will be the last I6 in port injected form yet still in 4.0L size with more Nm/per liter than ever before and more power than ever before, yet still retaining its low rpm grunt and flexibility character.

i am sure that according to some these will be the power figures, 220kW/440Nm while the direct-injected I6 4.0L will definitely keep the jobs in Australia and continue the straight six tradition with a new 4000cc rather 3984cc I6 with direct-injection, new throttle body, better cam technology, quad VCT phazer systems, and well over 260kW-270/450Nm-480Nm from a 4.0L engine that will have every low torque characteristic as an old Barra220/230 5.4L V8s yet a lot more top end to play with.

I wish the Holden was making something of a 3.8L – 4.3L so we can call it an even game.