Comments on: Holden Commodore Omega Review & Road Test

By: Jack

Jack — Fri, 02 Jul 2010 07:30:22 +0000

Honestly, in the sedans I’d happily take the XR6. Much nicer to actually live with. At those prices, I’d point it out to the Ford salesman…

Wagons, no comparison, it’s the Sportwagon. I’ll say one good thing for Holden, over many years they have offered a very full range across what they produce. Eg, Manual SV6 wagon, Manual V8 Berlina wagons of old, V8 Calais V wagon, SS wagon, Manual V8 on base model, SV8, individual suspension packages, Holden by Design, etc, etc. IT’s simply superior marketing.

With Ford’s wagons, the whole idea of providing different variations to capture more market share has died off slowly in the shadow of the Territory. Pity.

By: laura

laura — Mon, 01 Mar 2010 02:17:27 +0000

you people probably don’t know, the thing is , a stock factory BF XT series 2, with a 6 speed auto is more fuel economical than FG XT with 5 or 6 speed and both omega 3.0 and 3.6 sidi. Not to mention one fact and that fact is that if you get a chance to get your hands on a very last barra230 with 6 speed, that v8 is a nudge more fuel efficient than its brother i6 4.0, most will agree with me that you can thank its 500nm of torque , drive one and you’ll sere how potent it is from idle rpm towards 4000rpm, and who races their cars on the streets when the speed limit is anywhere between 40 to 110km/h therefore 500nm from as low as 2500rpm peaking towards 3500rpm still holding 480nm at 4000rpm is all you need from a car, and yet you still have 474nm at just 1500rpm and zero latency or lag in engine response when you touch the accelerator pedal, i’ve compared it to a g6e turbo and the 5.4l 3v beats all engine so far all the way up to 6.2l 325kw hsv for throttle response and part throttle, yet it only has 230kw and 500nm , but all focuses in the lower rpm register below 4000 where it counts and where you need it.

By: Andrew

Andrew — Fri, 12 Feb 2010 11:03:33 +0000

and in most cases better fuel economy, at worst slightly more.

By: Beer Muncher

Beer Muncher — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 21:19:29 +0000

34340!!! thats staff prices!

By: Rebecca

Rebecca — Tue, 05 Jan 2010 03:41:47 +0000

4 speed auto Falcons have a 1st gear of 2.49 which is substantially tall …. with a final gear ratio of 3.23

still …. they manage 92km/h in 1st at 5800rpm while this rubbish Omega has already changed in to 3rd gear because its week and has no torque, not much power either

its power is in the high RPM range , there is not enough torque , its thrashy and noisy

give the 6 speed omegas gearbox to a falcon and keep the same 3.23 and it will do 6.4s o-100km/h.

and how do i know that.

i know this from personal experience

i owned a BA for 6 years, last year decided to give it more life….

gave its 4 speed auto a 3.91 diff , which gives a car 60km/h in 1st, 110 in 2nd, 160 in rd and 220 in 4th

the thing flies now , its power and torque and i timed it do 6.4s 0-100km/h.

and what does this omega do with short legs??? 8-9s 0-100km/h.

slow! ,

put it on a 4 speed falcon gearbox and diff and it will do 11s 0-100km/h with its overrated propaganda driven direct injected crap of an engine.

go holden go better, ha ha ha

By: Raymond

Raymond — Tue, 05 Jan 2010 03:35:16 +0000

still. … a standard , cheap and currently OLD …. BA XT 2002-2003 4.0L port-injected DOHC VCT Falcon will beat this piece of crap with ease.

both BA/BF make 190kW/383Nm of torque.

BF only has an improved ECU which is packed in the same physical casing as the BA casing.

BFs ECU when the car is produced with 6speed ZF has slightly different tuning than a car with 4 speed …., yet power remains the same.

so a stock standard BA XT 2002-2005, BF 2005-2009 including Series III Wagon will beat this and match and in most instances beat 210kW version.

By: wogboy91

wogboy91 — Fri, 01 Jan 2010 18:36:49 +0000

people these fuel consumptions are done by independents not car makers, take it up with them.

Omega 7.8 seconds to 100km/h?, miss print right.

By: wogboy91

wogboy91 — Fri, 01 Jan 2010 18:31:42 +0000

Holden now has auto up all windows, something we will offer on our updates soon.

Also it wasn’t until BF we introduced lights on the window switches, not all had them.

By: Andrew M

Andrew M — Fri, 01 Jan 2010 10:38:13 +0000

Poohbear,
Since when was the Captiva make in OZ let alone on the same platform as the Commodore???
And above all that this chat was about Ute sales, and where did I try and Include Terry sales??

Shak,
Yeah I reckon the front end has aged better than the rear. The rear just looks too odd for me. GTS looks great though.
Interior and shocking 6′s (even the HI-PO) is what kept my money away from the general last time around.
At least they now have an acceptable 6cyl.
Oh and I thought the shocking visibility in the uses would wear thin with me quickly. To be honest I was over it by the end of the test drives.

By: Shak

Shak — Fri, 01 Jan 2010 10:23:53 +0000

Im a Holden fanboy and even i know that the only reason, Holden’s Commodore outsells the Falcon month on month, is because they have one of the best marketing teams in the country. At the moment, Holden has the inferior large car, but just as they have done for years, they will play the leapfrog game, and improve on what they should. The Interior quality is the only really big problem, the A-pillar is just a built in safety measure, and as for the outside, most people still think it looks very handsome.