Holden Commodore engine updates revealed
August 4, 2009 by Matt Brogan
Live (Updated 12:25pm):
Following on from our story yesterday, the CarAdvice team are this morning attending a press conference at Holden’s Fishermans Bend engine facility to discuss changes to the powertrain line-up for the VE Commodore and WM Statesman range.
Although the conference has just begun we can bring you news already as follows:
- 3.0-litre SIDI V6: This new engine will produce 190kW at 6700rpm and 290Nm at 2900rpm and will manage a fuel consumption figure of 9.3L/100km (combined). The 3.0-litre unit will be available in Omega and Berlina sedan, Sportwagon and Ute models.
- 3.6-litre SIDI V6: The existing 3.6-litre unit will gain SIDI technology and will be available across the remainder of the VE range (SV6, Calais & Calais-V), as well as six-cylinder WM models. The engine will see a performance increase to 210kW at 6400rpm and 350Nm at 2900rpm.
- Transmissions: All SIDI V6 engines will now be mated to a six-speed automatic transmission as standard.
- LPG: LPG powered V6 engines now achieve a fuel economy figure of 13.4L/100km (combined) as well as being the most CO2 emission friendly car in its class.
- Price: Most VE and WM models will not see any increase over the current recommended retail price.
- E85: Next year an E85 fuelled alternative will also be made available with this engine to be exported globally. Export vehicles to be powered by the Aussie V6 include SAAB’s new 9-5 model.
- Design: Exhaust manifold integrated into cylinder head to advance quality, save weight, reduce construction cost and increase efficiency. 3.0-litre engine some 10kg lighter than 3.6-litre unit.
- Market: 3.0-litre engine claimed to be “sweet spot” for the current VE model range although a 2.8-litre unit was available. Holden may utilise this engine in the future as powertrain and vehicle weight changes come about or if the market calls for it.
- Export: Opportunity exists for Chinese export of engines in the near future.
Fuel Efficiency, CO2 and engine specification tables below (click on image to enlarge):
Stay with us this morning for further updates as they come to hand.
Print it: 
Captain Nemo….direct injection and turbo charging is the way alot of car companies are going to go……Holden wont because they are into cheap engineering and GM have no money for future development. 9.3 l\\100 isnt very good, its hardly better than Ford 4lt I6. Ford will better this figure with the petrol I6 let alone the 2litre Turbo.
Ford would be laughing now because they were probably expecting something special from Holden but as usual its half baked ……..
DesignEng,
wonder if the ute will still start out in a manual???
Peviously on both the ford and holden sides, the base utes could have a manual box even though the base sedans did not allow it
DesignEng any car with a Turbo regardless of it economy benefits will attract a premium thats higher. Thats the way this over governed world works.
AndrewM, I suspect that Holden might be in a tight spot with the base Ute. It’s very conspicious by it’s absence from the tables. I suspect that they know that 290Nm isn’t going to cut it, but puting your premium engine into a base ute is a corporate problem. Maybe that’s their answer to the left over stock of the old 3.6s??
Err shak, no it doesn’t. Turbo deisels are about economy by using a smaller capacity engine. Don’t you think that insurance companies might just recognise the intent (not just by ford either) and price acordingly?
Anyway in most states you’ll save more in registration than what comprehensive insurance “might” cost extra.
Shak,
and on the otherhand rego is formulated on cylinders, not capacity, and doesnt factor turbo chargers.
The ecoboost will be cheaper to rego.
Insurance varies depending on the company. The model you drive can be a bigger factor in whether or not its dearer or cheaper.
Its not really clear how the ecoboost will be classified. VW was able to get P platers into their turbo charged cars as they pleeded that the turbo was for the economics of it
Beat me to it D
DesignEng i meant petrol turbos. And andrew i dont think the stigma of large car small engine is going to work too well in the minds of ford fans. They wont be able to convince punters let alone the RTA.
Shak,
so the stigma of large car underpowered V6 is better than large care plenty of power 4cyl???
Also why did you mention the RTA???
They dont govern Insurance prices unless you were agreeing that the rego costs are cheaper on 4cyls
The biggest factor in insurance prices is the insureds age and which insurance company is being used.
Commodore drivers are in for a shock when they get behind the wheel of a Falcon – Torque and a lot more than they’re used to.
Shak,
You’re still off the mark. Turbo doesnt necessarily = Performance Car. SAAB and Volvo both use low pressure turbo’s in their Family Cars to improve economy and power without packing on cubes. Does it necessarily attract high premiums? No. Not at all
Think about it. VW have a Turbocharged AND supercharged engine (Golf GT…TSI) ZOMG…Insurance premiums skyrocket? Fuel Prices huge? Running cost massive? False on all counts. Even my XR5 turbo is cheap to insure at $900 per year for a 24 Year old.
Ford will be running a 2.0L Twin Turbo that will probably put out similar figures to the LPG Falcon but most likely more torque of course.
Watch as Forced Induction eco-engines goes full mainstream. Insurers and Governments will be looking at carbon footprints and power to weight ratios. When you look at a small block twin turbo engine in a 1.8 Tonne car, 156Kw/380NM with the sustained torque of two turbo’s across a majority of the rev range isn’t so scary, in fact, it’s pretty cool! ;)
Shak – The Ecoboost 4 will beat the 3L v6 for performance,but it wont quite have the durability(a turbo is not the best thing for durability),the place were the commodore looks better is on the high KM secondhand market.
I highly doubt that Phil, but we’ll just have to wait for the inevitable comparo’s.
DesignEng please tell me where you got your info that the ecobomb 4banger will run on ULP & not PULP and if its a fraud website…sorry Ford website i would not believe a word they say just there usual PR bull. And what makes YOU think they won’t all insurance Companies charge more for turbos do you think just because its a falcon they will give you a discount?
Cargo how can you say the ecobomb 4 banger will have better economy than a Commodore it hasn’t even released in OZ yet stop believing Ford’s PR bull.
I wish everyone would stop calling this VEII. It’s not. It’s VE MY10. Holden don’t do the Series II thing anymore. Some of you may not know, but the VE Has been through small updates ever since it came out with the MY06 MY07 MY08 MY08.5 MY09, the current MY09.5 and the soon to be launched MY10.
So it’s only taken holden 2 years to catch up with the aurion? let’s see Aurion released in 2007, 200kw,6 speed auto and less than 9.9l/100km in a car that drives way better! well done holden way to go!
To put a fairer perspective on the BMW comparison above here are some more pertinent figures. Instead of comparing the 3.0L SIDI Commodore to the 2.5L 525i, wouldn’t it be better/fairer/more logical to compare it to the 530i with the same capacity engine? For info the 3.0L I6 in the BMW produces 200Kw/6650rpm and 315Nm/2750rpm of torque with the same ADR fuel economy rating of 9.3L/100km. So in the scheme of things Holden haven’t done too bad a job considering BMW are renowned for making some of the best 6cyl engines in the world. Kudos to Holden for at least giving direct injection a go and not sitting on their hands. I just hope the change to direct injection has gotten rid of the ‘uncouth’ mid to high rpm nature of the current ‘vibrotech’ engine. I still wonder to this day how Holden managed to make such a high tech specification engine just as unrefined at mid to high rpm as the decades old push rod Buick V6 that preceded it.
LOL: Anti Spam = BMW!
Instead of putting a diesel in the Commodore for the next update, they should try and chop at least 100kg from the beast. They could easily replace the seats and use some aluminium in the roof to improve roll and COG. Maybe also some weight from those fridge doors.
Capt. Nemo,
Please read my last comment before this one.
Just because the Falcon is Turbocharged doesnt mean it will ask for a hight premium. It will be slower than the I6.
Andrew M Says:
August 4th, 2009 at 5:32 pm
Insurance varies depending on the company. The model you drive can be a bigger factor in whether or not its dearer or cheaper.
Its not really clear how the ecoboost will be classified. VW was able to get P platers into their turbo charged cars as they pleeded that the turbo was for the economics of it
———————————————————————————————————————-
A P plater in NSW cannot legally drive a turbocharged VW Golf unless they apply for a special exemption, and we’re just talking about a 118kW engine here. The engine in the Falcon will be a lot more powerful than that.
Chucky, before the Golf it was typically considered that P-platers would not be allowed to drive turbo cars, despite all the protesting from euro car manufacturers. When the Golf came along, the RTA were forced to admit that the system was floored and have since expanded the list of which turbo cars P-platers would be given permission from. If a still fairly niche car like the Golf can make the RTA concede that much, surely a 2L Turbo Falcon, which still would be less powerful than the 4L NA I6 Falcon, will be exempted from the turbo ban. The fact is, the banning of a very popular car like the Falcon for a 2L Turbo engine when the NA version which is allowed is more powerful will expose the uselessness of the ban to all Australians. At the moment, when most people think Turbo they think WRX’s and EVO’s hence why RTA can convince people Turbo = hooning. When an economical Falcon comes in and is banned for being Turbo despite being less powerful than the version that had been allowed since day dot, even RTA won’t be able to fool people into believing that nonsense.
Thats what i was trying to say. A falcon which is thought of as a performance car by many Australia will find it very hard to try and convince the RTA just because it has a turbo. The RTA will ban it to make it look like they are doing something, when in reality it is less of a hoon car then a camry.
Guys, I think what we are all forgetting here, is that while 290NM is rather low, especially considering it is a downgrade from the previous 3.6 litre, in terms of actual engine design, 290NM from a 3 litre engine is actually very impressive, and a better figure per litre of displacement than Ford’s I6. Ford boys have been saying for years the only way the General can win the HP wars is adding displacement, finally the shoe is on the other foot and ‘Oh but it’s got no torque!’.
Can’t have it both ways guys. NM per litre is very impressive on that 3.0 litre.
More importantly, peak power at 6700? What is fuel cut out then? This engine could be quite the little screamer! Considering the high compression ratio, I expect a few benefits from burning Premium….
Devil666, check your maths. Ford’s 4L I6 produces 391Nm of torque, or 97.75Nm per L, Holdens 3L V6 produced 290Nm, or 96.7Nm per litre. Holden’s engines were remarkable in that they required more displacement and yet still had less torque than their Ford rivals. Case in point, 6L V8, 270kW and 530Nm, or 88.3Nm per litre, 5.4L V8 290kW and 520Nm torque, or 96.3Nm per litre.
So no, its not that impressive, its just Holden has finally caught up to Ford. End of the day, revvie low torque engines are fine for the lightweight Honda Civic Type R’s of this world, but a 1.7 tonne 4 door sedan needs a nice torquey engine. HP isn’t everything.
Anyone thinking this is a “red v blue” thing has got the wrong idea … we’re up against everything. Other big cars, small cars, SUVs. Euros, Japanese, US, Korea, Thailand. As for how it drives … I’ve driven the 3.0L and the 3.6L SIDI engines and the carping will stop when these cars hit the showroom. And real world? We got 7.5L on the Sydney to Melbourne trip in a sedan and a sportwagon. The ADR is just a measurement standard – no-one actually drives like that!
Holden have just signed the Commodores DEATH WARRANT. Most fleet purchases in Australian now have a NO V6 POLICY! Not only is the V6 not economically viable, it is not environmentally viable. In addition, what message do fleet businesses want to send out to their potential customers? In a word “GREEN”. And all this before I even mention the carbon emissions trading scheme. Then you have private buyers, the Holden faithful are turning to more economic and green cars in their droves.
&&
This engine is heaps large enough, the VL had a 3L/6 and it went very well and was frugal [remember him?:-)] on fuel if you did/nt hammer it.
No mention on the turbo 6, leave that for the future [shhhhh, mums the word!]
LPG looks the business, Ford want to get a hurry on with its LPi.
What about a test on Falcon LPG v Commodore LPG?
B//
Do i smell a rat, NO informations on the baseline Ute in the above graphs?
Once again [not just lack of safety kit] us commercial vehicle owners get screwed…..
Just think, another 10% reduction in fuel use, 15% less emissions if they fitted MultiAir……
C//
Before you go all gaagaa here is what outgoing CEO M/R of Holden mentioned on the new 3L/6:
“Annual fuel savings of $325″…….BIG DEAL!
All this hoopala to save just $325 dollars p/a.
Just get LPG fitted and you can save THOUSANDS per year…
Get back to us Holden when your @ UNDER 7L/100km
0 0
“Annual fuel savings of $325″…….BIG DEAL!
Thats big money for fleet companies, 1,000 cars x $325 = $325,000 per annum.
To follow on from luv local industry, if you say $325 big deal, well you are making an ass of yourself even talking about fuel economy. That is all you save buying the most frugal of petrol powered small cars, so why bother then if it is no big deal?
The most frugal small petrol car is the Suzuki Alto at 4.8Litres per 100km. $325 is all you save over a large car? My ass!
Golf are you letting people get to you? Your normal, worthy comments have become heavily laden with sarcasm. Stop it! It doesn’t suit your style. You have let the halfwits grind you down. :P
I wouldn’t say most fleets have a no 6 policy but many certainly do & that number is still increasing but at a slightly slower rate then it was when fuel prices were sky high & the global warming hysteria was in full swing.
Holden have been doing a pretty good job tho of getting out to the fleets to educate the decision makers on the facts & what they’re doing about it now & in the future.
Devil,
once you firstly check your maths, you must then realise the argument of torque per litres doesnt matter squat when you need a certain amount to move something.
Would you say a 1.0L V6 would also be adequate if it pumped out an “impressive” 97nm for that litre???
maybe they do have the nm per litre balance right, but that just means they need more Litres then
Great!!! but where is the manual cars??? why can’t i get a good family car ( holden or ford) and enjoy driving it. i just want a manual.