Holden Commodore International Special Edition
October 1, 2009 by Alborz Fallah
Holden Commodore Special Edition International Sedan and Sportwagon
Alongside the Holden Commodore SS V-Series Special Edition GM Holden has also announced the special edition Commodore International for completely different buyers.
The International sedan and Sportwagon models will deliver $7,500 of extra features (given the RRP of extra features) such as leather seat trim and 18 inch alloy wheels.
“The International edition is even better value when you combine extra features with the advanced 3.0 litre direct injection engine and 6-speed automatic transmission.” Holden Director of Marketing Philip Brook said
Using Holden’s all new 3.0 litre Spark Ignition Direct Injection V6 engine and six-speed automatic transmission, the Commodore International will gain all the features of the Omega plus:
- 18 inch alloy wheels (4)
- Berlina front grille
- Leather appointed seat trim
- Leather wrapped steering wheel
- Bluetooth for compatible mobile phones
- International badge
- Chrome decklid eyebrow moulding (sedan only)
- Rear Park Assist (sedan only as already standard on all Sportwagon models)
The new Commodores will go on sale from November with a driveaway price of $35,990 for the VE Commodore International Sedan (auto) and $37,990 for the VE Commodore International Sportwagon (auto). Metallic paint will set you back another $500.
LPG fans are unfortunately only able to pick the 3.6 litre dual fuel LPG Alloytec V6 engine in Commodore International sedan guise mated to a four-speed automatic transmission.
No photos of the new Commodore International are currently available, we’ve used a previous image which is almost accurate but is missing the SIDI badge. CarAdvice will update once photos come through.
Print it: 
Didnt they have an International model out a couple of months ago. This is just the old model with SIDI and a 6 speed gearbox. But its still really good value. When i inquired about the old International every dealer i went to had sold out and they only had omegas. In my opinion this should be the kit that the Berlina gets as standard to be competitive in class at its current asking price.
What, no diesel, let alone a descent trans. The batteries will go flat. Rubbish!
It has a decent 6 speeder as stated by CA and Wheels and Top Gear
I was only kidding. To be honest I like the new engine/trans combination. I honestly think the Commodore may be the best value large car around now.
Thinking of buying one later this year.
Hope you like it!!
Impostor. Oh well, there goes the neighbourhood…
That’s why CA needs accounts xD!
Or no accounts!
Another day, another Commodore Special Edition.
Great bang for your buck. Looks great from all angle & will definitely sell. FAST!Corolla prepare to die. Commodore & Cruze are just behind you. Watch out Toyota. Go HOLDEN!
when you say “all angles”, you must not consider the rear end as an angle then????
Whats so wrong with the rear?? I think with the Calais and Berlina it looks pretty good.
Well I wouldnt call it “great” looking.
even on sports models it seems “Basic”.
I think tail lights being too high doesnt help
I agree Andrew.. I actually prefer the HSV LED taillights
The Berlina and Calais have bigger tail lights, and are better proportioned. I didn’t like the Omega tail lights from the beginning.
Well Berlina, Calais & SS-V lights all look good. Omega & SV6 are alright, but not the best. I agree, they are placed up to high & do look arkward. But apart from that, it looks good. All is needed is a facelift inside & out. Go HOLDEN!
Read the recent Wheels comparo. SIDI not as fuel efficient as its made out to be. Struggles with the weight and Falcon isn’t all that bad.
It doesn’t struggle. It’s quite sweet and lively, by all accounts. The WHEELS guys confirm it doesn’t have the fleshy mid range of the bigger motors (that’s because it’s smaller and they’re bigger, funnily enough), but that doesn’t mean it struggles.
There you go saying the “wheels” word and suddenly all credibility is lost.
Why? Got anything better?
That wasn’t me =[.
Some dweeb with half a brain – and I really do mean half a brain – is putting comments on here in other people’s names, because they don’t have the knowledge or the intelligence to put forth a counter comment that carries any weight.
See ya. Wooden wanna be ya. No more comments from me.
What did they return then , out of interest
They returned 9.9 for the Omega, and 10 dead for the Calais. The Falcon returned 10.5 with the 5-Speed.
did they test more than just the base models???
What did the 6 speed Falcon return??
They didn’t test the 6-speed as they wanted to test the povo packs.
I believe the 3.0 SIDI can be matched by other engines on the highway, but around town, where most people do their driving, it will pull ahead of the 3.6 SIDI and the I6 4.0.
I think the problem with the Wheels test is that if you run cars on the highway and the pace is set by the bigger engined models, the car with the smaller motor is normally disadvantaged in terms of fuel consumption since it has to work harder. Let the smaller engine set the pace and usually the tables are turned.
Also it is a bit ridiculous for them to merely quote a single ‘average’ fuel consumption figure when the cars are run over a few thousand kms and several tankfulls. What every happened to reporting the fuel consumption throughout such extended tests and including a best, worst as well as the ubiquitous ‘average’ …
No they only tested the new engines on offer from Holden. The Falcon was just thrown in to put things into perspective against the competition.
The 9.9 for the 3.0L seems a bit deflating.
thats meant to be the motor with all their aces to get fuel economy down, yet with all the tech the best they have done is catch up to the competition…………
My god this is going too far……..that thing is looking old and should have had an update not just a mild engine update. The interior is even worse why didnt they do something with that huge slab of hard cheap plastic? Why spend all that money on the engine when it makes hardly any difference to the fuel economy? I will buy a 4 Litre Falcon and get the same if not better fuel economy and have heaps more torque and a better driveline…….
GM have no money left for development and GM Obama Australia will suffer …….
Ahhhh LSD you never fail to give a me good laugh. Keep it up buddy. Just like all of your other posts on Caradvice. All you do is bag anything with a lion badge. How’s the FPVtorbo going?
LSD Its the same cheap plastic that your beloved Falcons use in their interiors; they share a number of local suppliers – you Tool!
Ford hit a nerve with the special edition falcon it would appear.
The 3.0 DI V6 imo is rather unimpressive thus far for fuel consumption.
Thats not fair Adam,
I reckon its fair to say the 3.0L has easily lived up to expectations……
That is the expectations of those that couldnt see the real world savings in it
Nobody is yet to comprehensively test the 3.0 SIDI… Let’s wait until someone does before commenting.
(hint hint caradvice)
CA Top Gear and Wheels have all tested the SIDI engines, and they all say the same thing. The engines pull cleanly and sound nice when you give it to them but the 3.0 obviously doesnt pull as hard as the old 3.6 because of the obvious capacity deficit. they also stated that because the 9.3 result was acheived on a combined cycle and the Wheels test was all highway, the result is not official.
Maybe you should look up the definition of comprehensively.
I know everyone has commented on the engine, but what I mean, is a proper test, to get performance and economy figures over a vareity of situations.
Well if the wheels test was solely hwy K’s (which I doubt), then doesnt that mean the 3.0L will only get worse??
And yet the XT has show it can do sub 8’s on highway trips yet pulls a 10.5 here.
The trip wasn’t as easy going as it sounds.
Early days, Andrew M. To date, WHEELS are the only guys who have published tests on the cars. They stated themselves that the smaller engine might come to the fore in town and city driving, which they didn’t do. And they couldn’t provide acceleration tests because of equipment breakdown. There’s much more to learn yet.
I think the problem with the Wheels test is that if you run cars on the highway and the pace is set by the bigger engined models, the car with the smaller motor is normally disadvantaged in terms of fuel consumption since it has to work harder. Let the smaller engine set the pace and usually the tables are turned.
Also it is a bit ridiculous for them to merely quote a single ‘average’ fuel consumption figure when the cars are run over a few thousand kms and several tankfulls. What ever happened to reporting the fuel consumption throughout such extended tests and including a best, worst as well as the ubiquitous ‘average’ …
It’s hard to see what people are expecting of it. It’s a 3 litre V6. It goes hard, according to WHEELS (but is softer in the mid and upper ranges than the 3.6) and has better economy than some fours. Check its stats. There’s any number of 2.8 to 3.4 litre engines on sale right now with an inferior mix of power, torque and economy. Only one’s better and that’s the 3 litre six in the 5 series.
Wonder how Falcons 2.0L turbo will fare.
mm, the Holden is a very dated machine. You are a slave to marketing thinking otherwise. On second thoughts, don\’t think.
Yet in an above post you say that you think its the best value large car available in Australia ATM – and that you are thinking of buying one…. did you not?
No I did not Wheelnut. Someone used my handle to state this (2nd post under ‘Will’). This is unfortunate.
Well what do you expect to happen when you use your real name on a website like this where people “discuss” various automotive issues? – particularly when its such a common name like “Will William or Bill” is..
And by the way – go FPV!
I shall bet that wasn’t wheelnut…
I thought it was the late ninties Astra for a minute. Oooh! International for Australian Markets only!
Buy the 2.8urboed Insignia and leave it for dust.
Turboed Dummy!
Mad Max…..i only bag them because they are not as good as the competition……thats a fact. Whats the point of direct injection on a 3 litre when a Ford 4 litre gets almost the the same economy ? and the 3.6 gets worse economy than the Ford 4 litre ……so what has direct injection really done? Not much as it turns out. A 3 litre should get more than half a litre \100 k better economy than a non direct injection 4 litre. Problem is a V6 isnt as good as a straight 6………..
But is IS more economical than the Falcon’s 10.5, LSD. How much more economy do you want? A Mazda 6 does 8.7, a Camry does 8.8, a 407 with a 3 litre V6 does 9.9, a Jag X Type 10.5, a Chrysler Sebring 9.9…I think that’s enough for comparison’s sake.
They are BETTER than the competition. That’s a fact, because I’m reading through the 25 pages that I got those figures from right now. I venture to suggest that your fact is really just your opinion.
Golfie,
sure the falcon only gets 10.5L with the 5 speed, but when you also give it a 6 speeder it achieves 9.9L which is better than the 3.6L with all the tech on it.
if you level up the cogs to take that variable out, it leaves with out a doubt that the SIDI isnt that remarkable.
SIDI is a big ace to pull out, yet its only brought them up to level with their competitors.
What happens when the other large players in the Falcon and Aurion play their ace card???
Isn’t the problem with the I6 that it spews CO2?
The engine is now competitive but the Interior is crying out for an update and the exterior just requires a minor freshen up.Once they have done this the will sell again.
I noticed they have already discounted the MY10 SV6.I think that Holden not at least doing a minor freshen up(not even the wheels) will come back to bite them.
i’m in the g.m. stable but,
holden are charging another grand for a car which now cas the motor/trans it should of always had,less the front fog lamps,and the six stacker.call it 2 grand worse off.
Falcon with 6 speed auto is 9.9l\100k…….hardly any worse than an engine 1 litre smaller with pathetic torque…….the update 4 litre will be better…….
The six speeder’s an option. If you’re into selective quoting, how’s this one: a motor three quarters the size of the Falcon’s has just 5 kilowatts less power. Groovy, huh?
You know what else? Times have changed. Holden and Ford are probably selling half the number of large cars per month as in the mid to late nineties. Maybe the public has realised that large motors and large cars aren’t so necessary, particularly as the so called mediums are pushing the tape measure ever farther. Somebody had to give, and Holden lets us have it. If we want. Those who don’t want it or get it will buy the Ford.
Three litre motors aren’t a new invention and this is one of the very best, numbers-wise.
Can’t believe I just said that.
Anti-spam word “Mahindra” – that’s not a car, it’s a tuna can with a coal burner.
The above post is not me and no further posts on this story will be from the real Golfschwein.
GM playing catch up with inferior product. that exterior and interior are the things they should have spent money on…….who cares about a dollar a week fuel saving over the previous model? real world economy will be nowhere near what they say its economy is. Put 5 people and luggage in the 3 litre and watch the fuel guage plummet…..you have to wring its neck to get up a hill……
At least you can fit 5 people and luggage into the car.
Put that in any car and it makes life harder.
Yet despite what you think about Holden’s exterior and exterior etc- The fact remains that they are still selling more Commodores than Falcons – aren’t they?
Did I just read 2 different retail adverts!!!
Please don’t turn this Blog, into a Flog.
Car news isn’t about retail deals or Manufacturers who bring out a plate run outs or manufacturers who have spare parts they can’t get rid of, wrapped up as a “Special model”. Go to carsales.com.au if you want to check out special deals.
The idea of this article is to feed us people who want to fight or defend holden. I think it makes CA’s day.
Golfschwein……power means nothing …….its the torque that really matters and the GM 3 litre has bugger all for a large car. The Ford Turbo 2 litre will have bags of torque low down and make the Barrack Obama Holden 3 litre look outdated and gutless.
Good to see you you took my selective quoting bait, as I knew you’d come back to me on the torque. I did it too, see? It doesn’t have bugger all, at all. For a 3 litre (that means it’s smaller, right?) it’s very impressive. Compare with others to see what I mean. So what if it doesn’t have as much as the Falcon? Few cars have. It’s a smaller engine that gives buyers the choice, just like BMW and Mercedes have always done.
The car also manages to be nearly 1 second faster then the old omega which had more torque.
maybe it does have good torque when you divide it into the 3L’s, but then the argument only turns to it needing more L’s.
I also argue that the effort/expense of downsizing and adding tech is pointless if its not showing big gains.
Well it’s definitely showing BIG gains over the old holden 3.6L and seems to have surpassed the current Ford I6.
I do also think Holden must have something else left up its sleeve, tuning wise, as the VF update is only around a year away.
How much gain do you want in addition to the 9.3, Andrew M? Any further gain would place it firmly in the realm of 4 cylinder cars, such as Mazda 6’s 8.7. It’s not a 2.5 litre 4 cyl, it’s a 3 litre 6 cyl.
Holding back technology is something that Holden and Ford have historically done very well, but it would be inexcusable in the current environment to continue offering the 4 speeder with a bigger engine simply on the grounds of it being less expensive. You could offer that argument with every gain Holden and Ford have made against each other in 50 years, and you would never be justified eschewing the new, ultimately.
Finally, look at last month’s sales of Commodore and Falcon. 3329 and 2449. Sheesh! What’s more, it’s typical. Maybe a smaller engine is just what’s needed. It’s not like we haven’t had them before. I reckon Holden might have cracked it, and it’s here now. Ecoboost isn’t.
I don’t think highly of either Ford or Holden but the 3L is a great thing for the Commodore.
Today I saw a 337 HSV and can’t help but wonder if the owner never got praise as a child. Perhaps he was rejected by the Advanced Medical Institute as beyond help.
I see an ownder of the new 3L commodore and think – not my choice but respectable no less.
Finally something to like about Holden – thankyou. Direct injection is overdue in all petrol engines.
LSD
So many good cars for $35K… unless you need to tow or are obese there is no need to purchase one of these…
Or have kids or many other things that may require a bigger car.
Comfort is a major part of buying a car.
or unless you are an adult…..
to get comfort and good ergonimics you really have to go to a vehicle of this size.
The ergonomics in smaller cars is poor.
you have to have your seat all the way back to get leg comfort, but then you have to lean out of your seat to reach the dash or even sometimes the gears
Or if you just like the look and feel of a large good looking Aussie Sedan
Did I sedan? Forget sedan, I was speaking of Magda Szubanski!
They should have added the front fog lights as well.
I think any article which mentions Ford or Holden should have comments disabled.. becauase it turns into a brainless dribble fest each and every time, without fail.
Hi Everyone,
I have a choice of the Holden International Edition or the Ford G6 Limited edition. Both have good and bad points. I was looking for some opinions tho please.
Many thanks
Doc