I won’t get into a mud slinging contest with you.
You seem more interested in dropping your remarks here and there without actually putting anything decent together to debate.
Hell, if you’ve been reading anything from the UK about Skoda, you’ll find they think they’re a very good thing too. They’re essentially using all VW running gear.
I’m not obsessed with Holdens, that your interpretation.
I’m passionate about cars full stop, Euro’s, Japs, Americans, Aussies.. I’m not some Bogan who drives a Falcon either.
Put simply, I’m critical of Holden’s marketing to push cars out the door. I’m critical of any maker that makes stupid claims, including Ford…
I don’t normally get into debates about cars on here, its a waste of time but I felt strongly about this one. It proves a Hi-Po Falcon doesnt have to suck fuel like a hong kong hooker up the highway. 6.98L/100KM from a 270Kw/533Nm car is superb, as is the Maloo’s effort.

I’m signing off on this debate.

And the Maloo is a Family car that all Australians will aspire to own… o_O
We are comparing the 3.0L SIDI to the Turbo 6, the V8 isn’t in the picture at the moment. You seem to be floating all over the place with your Argument bent 8…first you mistake me for bringning the 3.6 SIDI into the debate and the you go and bring the V8 in.
The V8 is doing a great job, no doubt but c’mon- its not a familty car, its a ute that can’t even carry a decent load over its rear axles.
“Here at HSV, we see what the average cashed up aussie want when he spends 60K on a Hi-Po V8…economy is on the top of the shopping list…fo sho.” Now if we want to debate the GTS or R8, it would need to be running in the competition to compare wouldnt it

If this proves anything, Both cars are more powerful but yet seem to use not much more fuel then the the much smaller 3.0L SIDI.
Torque and gearing come into play hear methinks

Enjoy!

*rubs eyes*

Only a Holden fanboy would try to claim false comments.

For reference:
NZ Autocar October Edition
These guys found the Ford with a 5 speed faster, and more refined. Unfortunately, they didn’t test fuel consumption

MOTOR November Edition
These guys found the SV6 to be the fastest (in a time that no-one else has even come close) but in fuel consumption it was a mere 0.3L/100Km better, but they also found that the Falcon was 2 whole seconds faster around winton, showing the engines true power.

Wheels November (?)
Ford was faster, Holden better on fuel, but spent more time on highways with less luggage (as mentioned above). In the pro’s and cons, both cars had the engine listed as a pro, but in the con it stated that the SV6 can’t match the XR6 as a sports sedan. That was from Wheels, a known Holden biased magazine.
http://www.caradvice.com.au/44132/2009-large-car-comparison/
These guys found the commodore to be a joke as usual, and returned nearly 12L/100Km!!! I’ve gotten better than that out of a BF XR8!!! (11.5 )
http://www.smh.com.au/drive/motor-news/bathurst-1000–with-a-twist-20091009-gqou.html
Toby Hagon. Self confessed Holden fanboy, and possibly the most biased person in the automotive media… The Ford positively FLOGGED the Holden in economy… and lets have a few quotes:

“After more than eight hours and 60 laps, it’s clear there’s already a favourite among our team of drivers and it’s not the car that has dominated the sales charts for the past 13 consecutive years.”

“The Falcon is emerging as the more rounded package and it has nothing to do with the fuel gauge. The superior driving feel of the Falcon is making it the car our drivers are looking forward to sitting in.”

“There’s no way to sugar-coat it. The Commodore was thirstier. Despite the new direct injection technology, the Holden’s new 3.0-litre engine used 11.09L/100km of fuel (almost identical to the trip computer’s claim of 11.0L/100km). That’s not only 19 per cent more fuel than its official claim but 10 per cent more than the Falcon.”

“And enthusiast publication Wheels, recently recorded near identical fuel use for the 3.0-litre Commodore and the more powerful 3.6-litre version, with the Falcon only slightly thirstier.”

Is it all coming clear now? Are you starting to see the point that we have been making? The Holden is not catching the Ford in a hurry. These new engines are a step up from the old ones, but face it, a tightly wound rubber band would have done a better job than the Alloytecs, and engine that even Holden fanboys that I know regard as inferior to the ecotec it replaced.

So next time, before shooting off your mouth about facts you don’t know, read a few articles.

That would have made you proud of the VY’s economy