Skip navigation
14788 Visits Today

Holden Commodore VF VE facelift

  • image

    Enhancements to the VE are likely to be mainly under the surface...improvements designed to lift fuel economy and further develop the company's ‘Ecoline’ strategy.

The Holden VE II ? or VF ? will be the VE Commodore's first facelift since its introduction in 2006.

The new car is hiding more under the skin than on top.

A new, high-tech direct-injection V6 could be destined for the big sedan late this year when the car gets a refresh. The VF Commodore is likely to get a range of improvements designed to lift fuel economy and further develop the company's ‘Ecoline’ strategy.

Visually the car may also borrow some design elements from Holden's Coupe 60 concept car, like the repeaters in the rear view mirrors, deeper grille and restyled lower bumper air intake to give a smoother look to the front end.

The interior is also likely to get a styling make-over to better compete against the FG Falcon's stylish interior.

GM-Holden is not revealing details yet but the company has a choice of two DI engines of either 3.0-litre or 3.6-litre capacity that substantially reduce emissions and improve fuel economy.

The 3.0-litre delivers 190kW/298Nm, which is 15kW more than the current 3.6-litre Commodore engine but 27Nm less torque.

The bigger 3.6-litre DI engine delivers 225kW/369Nm and is available in GM's Cadillac models.

However in an effort to respond to changing consumer tastes, GM-Holden may also choose to downsize the Commodore V6 by introducing a smaller capacity 2.8-litre version of the Alloytec engine that could be badged ‘Ecoline’, part of Holden's solution to tackling fuel efficiency.

The entry engine could be available as a ‘fleet’ model on the base Omega to help bolster Commodore sales.

A 2.8-litre V6 with variable valve timing is available in some General Motors vehicles and generates 151kW at 6800 revs and 246Nm at 6300 revs.

More economical V6s are just some of the initiatives GM-Holden chief, Mark Reuss, is instituting to lure buyers back to the Commodore and ensure the car rebuilds its credentials from the current car slump.

These include E85 ethanol engines, dedicated LPG cars and frugal turbo-diesels.

The DI engines could be mated to six-speed automatic gearboxes to deliver sub-10.0 litre/100km fuel economy.

GM's direct injection technology not only improves fuel economy but quietness.

Rubber isolators are used with the fuel rail to eliminate metal-to-metal contact that would otherwise transmit noise and vibration from the high-pressure fuel system.

Along with direct injection, the 3.0-litre gets variable valve timing to improve power and economy.

GM-Holden is confident the new engine technologies for the V6 can deliver fuel economy comparable to some of the larger capacity Japanese four-cylinder engines.

The facelifted Commodore may also have gone on a diet to help improve economy.


GM-Holden's high-feature Alloytec V6 is truly a world-class engine...

Apart from powering a family of Commodores, versions of the company's Fishermens Bend engine finds their way into various Cadillac, Saab and Alfa Romeo models.

The Saab engine is a single turbo 2.8-litre variant developing 188kW/350Nm. A 294kW twin-turbo version was developed for the Saab Aero-X concept car.

Alfa Romeo's 190kW/322Nm 3.2-litre version of the Holden V6 is heavily modified and uses direct injection and lean-burn technology.


Comments on this story

Displaying 3 of 51 comments

  • The problem with all you ford lovers is that you can't Handel the power of the 6 lt in the Holden's so I say drive one and you will see that they are what they say and do not like the other car makers . Get some power in to you , you ford dreamers ?

    Simply ssv 6.0 lt of Keysborough Vic Melbourne Posted on 11 July 2012 8:24am
  • Bahahhh... you are dreaming. Check all of the above cars power and tourque figures. then go and test drive them all. A magna bits are missing dont even fall at the feet of the other two. I have a bfmkII wagon and blew a knob in a vz sv6 with a big exhaust and who know what other mods. My car is stock. Cant beat straight 6 tourque with small capacity v6's and its all in the NM's...

    fords dont die. of aus Posted on 15 December 2011 9:12pm
  • I have a VE sportswagon SS V8 and it goes well!

    Luke Wyatt of canberra australia Posted on 22 November 2011 1:38pm
  • Why don't you all get into the modern world and get a Skoda Octavia VRS. Get it chipped and say goodbye from the lights and never see a Ford or Holden again... well only in your review mirror that is!

    forget ford / holden of Adelaide Posted on 06 October 2011 6:15pm
  • First of all a friend of mine has a vz Sv6 and he completely blows both bf and ba xr6 sedans off the road. They are both friends and of his and agree the Sv6 is a much faster car. I myself own a 2002 Magna and that has more acceleration than a standard ba xr6. Brad, you have no idea.

    J.J of melbourne Posted on 28 April 2011 5:09pm
  • Ford are Australia's answer to Hyundai. Once upon a time they used to take pride in their cars now they build ugly rubbish. The new falcon looks terrible and us built like a pie tray. And why have they had that dreadful bubble roofline for so many years? The BA would have been a nice looking car if it had a smoother more tapered roofline, and the FG would benefit from the same, as well as a wider stance and less of a setback in the front axle. Falcons unfortunately are largely just rep mobiles these days.. Does anyone remember the days of hardtops? And shakers? And GTs that actually meant something?

    Brad of NSW Posted on 15 March 2011 10:57am
  • Jim, a standard BA XT is as quick as the brand new 210kW SV6, not to mention that its a lot stronger in part throttle responses especially when the third and fourth gears go in to the limp mode as the torque converter locks up the clutch on the four speed automatic models. SV6 210kW has more power on paper but at 1400rpm more too and anywhere between idle to 5800rpm where this is the absolute shift point for all BA/BF XT 4.0L DOHC Falcons the SV6 simply has no chance, it only has some chance by a small 3-4% above 6000rpm, yet up to 5800rpm the BA/BF XT petrol variants simply leave it for dead.

    Dennis of brissy Posted on 22 September 2010 5:06pm
  • Joel, no one needs to comment on your post. The Magna and othe Japanese models dont really compare to the Aussie RWD's. How are you going to Compare Big Aussie RWD sedans with sporty handling to mid size FWD cars with no sporting interest? You wont beat the local cars for value

    Dave Posted on 19 July 2010 5:27pm
  • In 2008 I bought a FG Falcon XR6, and it's great. Tried the rest, and bought the best of that class/price. It tows more, uses less fuel, costs less and has a powertrain that wins on performance. For the money, they're pretty hard to beat. The third Falcon purchased in 15 years, and they've all been great reliable machines. Maybe just lucky. In the end, you buy what you like. Pointless buying a Holden or Mitsubishi when you like a Ford, and vice-versa. My money went where my mouth is, and it has been money well spent.

    John Posted on 17 July 2010 4:27pm
  • The person who claims that the 6 speed auto falcon beating the SIDI sv6 210 kw has got his facts wrong obviously!! From what I've seen and having driven both cars the SV6 is noticeably quicker than the FG xr6 but not by much . I'm not Holden or ford fan but i just don't see the point of people who haven't driven both cars can make claims from what they read from a magazine. Drive the real thing and you will see. Jerry S we don't need your biased opinion, take it to the ford forums

    Jim Posted on 07 July 2010 5:23pm
  • No-one comments on what I said yesterday do they? LOL! Can't bring Magnas or any other Japanese cars into it can we? Nooooo... that would be unfair since they are so superior to Commodores and Falcons!

    joel Posted on 24 June 2010 3:31pm
  • Stock standard Falcon BA XT 4.0L makes 360-365Nm of torque at just 1500rpm or 345Nm at just 1000rpm or 330Nm at idle. That is more torque than what any V6 commodore makes so far at their peak RPM. No car will ever be able to be as drive able as a BA-BF-FG Falcon, in fact BA/BF make more torque between idle-2000rpm than FG 4.0L, but only by 5-10Nm and around 5-10kW more of power across the reve range to approx 5000-5500rpm where at around 5800rpm FG 4.0L N/A takes over in towards 6500rpm where it shines the most, while BA-BF 4.0L make more power across the RPM range generally from 600rpm to 5500rpm, just below absolute shift point at 5800rpm if a 4 speed auto variant is looked at. So a manual BA XR6 N/A might feel stronger despite 11Nm of torque less than a 4.0L FG either auto or manual all the way up to around 5500rpm, after 5550rpm FG 4.0 N/A will take over , but in reality the difference is just 0.1 to a max of 0.2 of a second, so if you are a good driver in a manual XR6 5 or 6 speed BA/BF you can blow an FG XR6 manual or auto 4.0LN/A or he can blow you, no real difference in real life seriously.

    Tony of Darwin Posted on 24 June 2010 12:33am
  • This is laugh. In real life, and this is a fact of an objective nature a stock standard say BF Falcon with a 6 speed ZF eats a 210kW/350Nm VE SV6, that is a stock factory BF or a BFII 4.0L in stock trim aka TAXI trim beating a 210kW Direct Injected VE SV6 or a Calais. This is a fact in every way. At least the stock standard now ancient BA XT with a 4 speed auto and a stock standard petrol 182kW/380Nm Barra engine still keeps up 999/1000 instances matches the performance of a 210kW/350Nm V6 and in real life despite teller gearing, less gearing and a tall 3.23:1 single spinner diff can still pull a maximum of 3200kg or safely 2300kg with a proper towing pack than any V6 Commodore or an older generation 5.0L Commodore including the stroker 5.7 and including all Ford's previous gen 5.0L V8's. This is a fact. Get yourself a nice BA Fairmont GHIA 4.0 auto do the ECU tune, get it to 202kW/410Nm and you got yourself a cruiser or better get the 5.4L 3V, tune it , get it to 235-240kW/500-520Nm and you're set, or look for a BF/BFII Fairmont Ghia 5.4 6 SPEED ZF and tune it , get it to 253kW/545Nm of torque;) think about it. Ford all the way!

    jerry s of perth Posted on 24 June 2010 12:24am
  • Really when it comes down to it Commodore and Falcon are as bad as each other. For example, back in the nineties one of my mates had a VS Commodore which had radiator problems, blown head gasket just about every couple of months. My other mate had an EL Falcon wagon - it had gearbox, suspension and shock problems, the park brake never worked properly and it occasionally rolled backwards when he got out to open the gate... and they were always going on about Ford and Holden. I was the smart one out of the 3 of us and bought a brand new Magna Altera in 98... never a single problem at all and the 3.0 6 in that was excellent, purred like a kitten. Unlike bloody mates EL Falcon where all you can hear is the stupid automatic gearbox whining away.

    joel Posted on 23 June 2010 8:35pm
  • I work for Holden the alloytec actually does not run a balance shaft and maybe u should try and drive a new sv6. i used to drive a BA Falcon 6 great engine can't lie there but I do think the new sv6 is much better just my opinion

    ben of sydney Posted on 20 June 2010 11:41pm
  • I think what we are getting at as mechanics is reliability not power and economy ect.

    joel Posted on 19 June 2010 9:15pm
  • Obviously u idiots don't drive a ford falcon all day. Engine is only 3000kms old and already it is noisy and tappety. So don't tell me fords 4 ltr is better. It's a lemon motor and that's why they can't sell them. Quality of a great wall.

    Tom of Vic Posted on 18 June 2010 8:47pm
  • @ Luke and Joel, I too own a VE Commodore, a V8 Calais actually. I find it very hard to believe that any mechanic would rate Holden V6's over Ford's straight six, which is superior in just bout any measure (Power, Torque, NVH, Economy, Sound). Not to mention the natural harmonic balance that a straight six enjoys over a V6 and the fact that it doesn't have to run power robbing balance shafts. Actually... are either of you REALLY mechanics? Put simply, at the moment, Holden V8 is better than Ford's V8. Ford sixes are better than Holden V8s. For me the recent purchasing decision was either a Ford six or a Holden V8. Ford V8 and Holden six were not an option for me - both are poor engines when compared to the competition. Best engine? Ford's Turbo six. That's just an opinion from somebody who likes Australian RWD sedans, be they Ford or Holden.

    Pete75 of Sydney Posted on 16 June 2010 11:15pm
  • 2011 Holden Commodore: SIDI-Ethanol 2.8-3.6L V6, Gen V 6.2L V8 = WINNER 2011 Ford Falcon: Ecoboost 4-Cylinder Twin Turbo, Direct Injection LPG I6, Duratec 5.0L V8 = WINNER Holden this, Ford that... at the end of the day all you idiots should put your money where your mouth is and go buy one when they become available...

    Rocky Balboa of Vic Posted on 15 June 2010 4:12pm
  • i am also a mechanic and i fully agree with Luke.

    joel Posted on 05 June 2010 3:44pm
  • The new face lift will be a great turn aorund for the Commodore which will mean that they will go back to the top in the sales again. The new engine sounds like a great add to Holdens family that will power this wonderful car. Can't wait for this new VF Commodore to come out later this year.

    Keiran nancarrow of Nsw Posted on 27 May 2010 12:59pm
  • Taxis are Falcons because of reliability and cheaper servicing and parts eg. brake pads last just a few thousand k's more than Commodore's... over a high milage year it all ads up. Toyota Avalons were tried but failed - on reliability and service cost... I have 5 cabs running... had a Commodore and an Avalon... no more... now just Fords.

    Quinn Nestor of Melbourne Posted on 27 May 2010 1:42am
  • Go Holden. Can't wait to see the new VF. I'm a mechanic - bought a VE second hand absolutely love it. Found the Holdens are a bit better than Ford Falcons in build quality and Ford should get rid of the aging straight six. The new era is V6. I'll praise Ford for making a fantastic 6 cylinder but that's half Fords selling problems. Holden's alloy tec are very good, much better than the eco tecs. Holden change alot. I really think Ford are scared to play catch up and trying to put an auto gearbox with more gears ain't playing catch up, that's just an upgrade. They need to change the whole platform of the BA to FG with a good rear drive V6 and a better V8. That boss engine is shocking. I've always said it... Holdens are a better car than the Ford but I can't see Ford lasting. I think Ford have lost the plot. Holdens are just getting better. But another thing I'll say - not as good as the old faithfull Kingswoods. Sorry Holden but the old ones are just too strong compared to the new... same with Ford - the old ones are better.

    luke of whittlesea Posted on 19 May 2010 6:35pm
  • ve means evolution because it is way better then previouse models and as good as bmw and audi and completely leaves falcon behind plus who cares if valiant used it i didnt even know that till you said.

    Joel Wilson Posted on 22 January 2010 5:01pm
  • Taxi's are generally Falcon's because the interior is slightly wider. Even if this is not so with the current model it takes years to change a mentality. It probably dates to the XD falcon being wider than the VB commodore and has been set in stone since.

    David Reid Posted on 15 January 2010 8:55pm
  • If your car's properly maintained then the engine will last. Whether it's a commodore or a falcon.

    Jason Davies of Burpengary, QLD Posted on 04 December 2009 1:19am
  • did holden know that VE and VF where valiants not holden so why dont you a VD model that was never used that would make a good holden model

    shaun david of melb Posted on 01 November 2009 9:50pm
  • Also taxi drivers by falcons because they know they last, they get them past 1 mill kms its insane

    David of gold coast Posted on 26 July 2009 1:58pm
  • I drive both a EL falcon and a BF mk2 fairmont, fords have much better engines that last a lot longer than Holden's v6 and i am speaking of experience. i drive both a EL falcon and a BF mk2 fairmont, the EL has done 452000 Kms and yes the head gasket issue happened and it is a well know fault but that's the only issue it has had, it was also second hand when i bought it at 150000kms well worth 13k. the BF i wont comment on cause its only done 29000kms. My mates had a VT/VX and a VE commodore. there VX/VT have done between 170,000 and 200,000 kms and both had had issues throughout the cars life. my mates ve has had issues with the electronics and alternator at 20k kms. i have more faith in falcons than commodores

    David of gold coast Posted on 26 July 2009 1:56pm
  • I drive both a EL falcon and a BF mk2 fairmont, fords have much better engines that last a lot longer than Holden's v6 and i am speaking of experience. i drive both a EL falcon and a BF mk2 fairmont, the EL has done 452000 Kms and yes the head gasket issue happened and it is a well know fault but that's the only issue it has had, it was also second hand when i bought it at 150000kms well worth 13k. the BF i wont comment on cause its only done 29000kms. My mates had a VT/VX and a VE commodore. there VX/VT have done between 170,000 and 200,000 kms and both had had issues throughout the cars life. my mates ve has had issues with the electronics and alternator at 20k kms. i have more faith in falcons than commodores

    David of gold coast Posted on 26 July 2009 1:55pm
  • MY DREAM HOLDEN ENGINES IN VF MODEL- 2.8litre VVT standard in omega and 'ACCLAIM' model, 3.0litre direct injection in BERLINA with optional 3.2litre 'HIGH OUTPUT', 3.6litre current 'HIGH OUTPUT' engine standard in Calais with optional new 3.6 direct injection, 3.6litre direct injection standard in SV6 with optional bored and stroked 3.8litre version, Cylinder deactivation 6.0litre with Holdens NEW LPG sequential injection engine on Calais, Berlina and SV8, 3.0 diesel on OMEGA and ACCLAIM and 3.6 diesel on all other models, HSV- LS9 6.2 supercharged engine with HSV new LPG sequential engine (more power and better fuel economy) on all models except GTS with LS7 and GTS-R with pontiac gxp street 7.4 litre engine, 4.2 litre duramax diesel on all models with optional (high output) 6.6litre duramax turbo diesel (300kw and 700+ NM torque, better fuel economy than current petrol 6.2litre's and better performance).

    Holden 4 life of NSW Posted on 26 July 2009 12:06pm
  • With regards to David from Gold Coast. You obviously have no idea about quality. Well I believe that none of the major companies actually build quality its really pot luck with what you buy. Sometimes you get a good one (Holden, Ford, Toyota etc etc) that gives you no trouble at all but sometimes you get absolutely lemons. Now speaking from experience I was lucky enough to get a good one that didn't given no trouble at all.(VY Commodore) but I have heard endless problems with BA Falcons, BF Falcons but still probably a bit too early to hear about the FG Falcons. BA Falcon XR6 Story No.1 Had a mates Falcon at Ford in Lilydale was blowing smoke something shocking from the exhaust. They plugged the diagnostic computer into the car and the diagnostic computer said that the car was functioning within normal limitations. Another one. Mate had a gearbox issue within 20000 KMs. Horrid clunking in the gearbox (Solanoid I think) Ford charged him $12000 for a new gearbox saying that they don't fix them. They just throw them out and put a new one in. He has had his brake discs replaced 4 times. Should I start with the Straight Six and its HEAD Problems? Continuously doing there heads. EA, EB, ED, EF, EL, AU, (Still haven't got it right) Although I think they might have resolved it with the BA Falcon (FINALLY) I guess what I am trying to say yeah all brands are built to a price but and it is a bit of pot luck what you get at the end of the day but overall I hear no where as many problems with the COMMODORE brand that I do with the FALCON brand and that will always win my money.

    Mark of Melbourne Posted on 11 July 2009 10:15pm
  • This new engine they are getting for the commodore is still shit compared 2 the falcons Australian built straight 6. It wont be long before ford get direct injection and get even better fuel economy and performance

    David of Gold Coast Posted on 09 July 2009 11:14pm
  • The 225kw 3.6L V6 sounds exciting. The VF(If that what it will be called), My 08 SV6 is a VE9 so a VE series II is out of the Question, will probably get repeaters on the mirrors instead of the guards. New headlights, front bumpers etc. Interiors need some work. The biggest change will be mechanical. New engines & possibly a diesel? I wonder if they will have digital ready radios? Holden spent a lot of money developing the VE. This platform will be in use for the expected 10 year life cycle.

    Filmore of Adelaide Posted on 23 June 2009 3:06pm
  • badly in need of an update......long overdue

    shane peters Posted on 22 June 2009 3:59pm
  • Can't wait.Wish'd they hurry up. Interior really in need of an update as does Exterior. Engines, well get rid of 4-speed auto. Thats a milestone if they do Anyway, Ford thinks they can beat Commodore in the sales race, but some minor changes aren't going 2 work. Ford better watch their back, cause the lion will roar & i mean ROAR! Go Holden smile

    BP 93 Posted on 19 June 2009 8:10pm
  • About time for a facelift.Interior needs some work,even in Calais-V it still looks so 2006. Maybe a new dash would help. Outside, better look for front/back & more difference between models. Engines. 3.0 for Omega/Berlina 3.6 for SV6,Calais & Calais-V. It so exciting. Ford Falcon will suffer deeply. The minor updates of Falcon won't even be near enough for what Holdens got in store.Go HOLDEN!

    Byron of Nambucca Heads Posted on 19 June 2009 7:42pm
  • That takes care of Wheeels mag's covers for the next 12 months

    Ged Bullbar Posted on 19 June 2009 1:28pm
  • There's maybe one thousand words on this blog re: the Commode facelift, a subject that can be adequately addressed in one: "irrelevant".

    N. O. Bogan of Sydney Posted on 17 June 2009 1:57pm
  • Hey, if they were really green, they would do a diesel. My Mondeo 2.0L diesel is so fuel effecient, 900+ per tank!!! Ford use the Pug diesel brilliant!!

    David of Gold Coast Posted on 16 June 2009 5:23pm
  • All I have to say is "Chapter 11". When parent companies keep saying "NO" to inavitave idea's all the time it will put companies behind the leader's. The biggest culprit of this example and I don't know why they haven't learned is from Chrysler and what they did to Chrysler Aust in the 70's with the VH range. What they made them work with. For eg. What is wrong with Ford not taking our falcon and replacing it with that stupid Crown Victoria of theirs. Also why cannot Ford U.S. Use our turbo in line 6 In their truck Market??? American patriotic pride they have dissappeared so far up their own behinds they can' see anyone else's anymore. G.M. canning Pontiac the most inavitive part of GM. Why Holden Australia doesn't make massive leaps forward is cause they have to use sourced powerplants and up till the VE, bodies. Look what they turn out it isn't because we havn't got the talent it is because the Boards of these companies have no forsight. They have strangled the companies so much so that now they have no money to put into the tech needed. Athough they have had the tech for years eg. EV1, Fords Lincoln Mercury Hybrid SUV, Chrysler Jeep 600Hp hybrid and other cars we don't hear about from them. When the Bush administration had 3 States in which the U.S. made Hybrid cars available or "enviro friendly" and the rest unavailable it will certainly can your local market to build more fuel efficent cars especially when it is cheaper to put out trucks that don't have to meet 48mph not kilometers, miles, crash tests nor environmental legislation. Bearing all this in mind that is why our car industry falls behind europe when we have to start with a new model. As For the european market i don't think the Astra is a good example of a bench mark we should be aiming for especially when you change your brake pads you will more than likely be changing rotors like our company had to after 60k kms along with timing belts. As for the Ford Mondeo 120k kms for a timing belt and rotors, well still on the car. As for the rest of the arguments on here about fuel and the variants of them. Remember with LPG it is still a gas that has to mined from the ground already, offers no more fuel economy than standard petrol and in som cases worse and what they don't tell you is that you will be up for new compression rings in about five years so the money you saved will be spent on a new engine if you have any intention of keeping the car that long. Deisel engine's are dirty and need various filters and antipollutons gear to make them clean and actually produce more NO2 gases than a modern Jet engine. So if it was viable for Chrysler to produce the Jet car or turbine car it would've been a lot cleaner to runaround in than a deisel. As for the direct injection petrols "great" Instead of wasting it on the V6 they could throw the Tech into the Northstar V8 which has brilliant fuel economy and power already. So what am i saying after all this well think before you speak. There are good cars from both companies and more. Remember there were three companies here at one stage and it was Chrysler that up until 1969-70 outsold and out powered Ford and Holden in Australia. So you wouldn't be having your silly Ford Holden rivalry only for them.

    Burning chook 84 (A.D. Thomas) of Melbourne Posted on 16 June 2009 3:37pm
  • err... to AJ of Brisbane. Your lack of knowledge re the VE's extensive development is quite clear in your comments. Buy a motor or wheels mag from the time of its release, and you'll be able to see how much was done for so little money. On an international level, the VE has been lauded for its sophistication and tortional integrity. PS before you comment, I am a long time Honda driver, I have only ever had one Holden - a company car. They aren't behind as much as you think, and in a country with such a small population the designers and engineers should be applauded not derided by the under-informed

    Paul Rogers of Australia Posted on 16 June 2009 1:10pm
  • FINALLY, Holden are getting the message about engine capacity... Seriously, as an everyday car, who the hell needs 3.6L for sitting in traffic? Our Mazda6, with it's 2.3L petrol engine is more than powerful enough to tackle hills fully-laden with people and luggage, and flies superbly when overtaking on the motorway. Having a whopping-great V6 or V8 in an everyday car is like having a wrestler lifting 1kg weights - it achieves nothing. All it does is cost more in fuel than it really ever should. At least now they're starting to put more efficient engines in them. What about a ~2.5L 4cyl for the base model? for people smart enough to realise that 3.6L is utterly useless for roads with a top limit of 110km/h?

    Kieran of Brisbane Posted on 16 June 2009 12:51pm
  • Holden & Ford the only reason they are now thinking about putting advanced Euro technologies into there cars are because no one wants old out dated crap that cost to much to run. Commodore only having 4-speed autos when the euros are up to 7speeds robotised gearboxes VW do not even use the old automatic torque converter style transmissions anymore, there to inefficient, and Commodore are just starting to think about the old 6 speed auto’s for there cars. Holden & Ford Australia deserves to go bankrupt because they are constantly trying to serve up old out dated crap. I know where I will be putting my hard-earned money.

    HT Posted on 16 June 2009 9:38am
  • To Paul - The reason why Holden is behind in technology is that they don't need to spend the money on it, Australians will blindly buy Holdens. Their marketing department should win awards! I still reckon most of the Billion dollars that went into the "Billion dollar baby" was in advertising! New panels and dashboard surely would have not cost a Billion dollars...

    AJ of Brisbane Posted on 14 June 2009 9:49am
  • Liquid LPG across the range please, especially HSV. Available on Auto and Manuel, either duel fuel or dedicated. Duel Fuel should be an E85 base engine, and not automatically cut from LPG to Petrol on high rpm's. I'll take two now.

    omn1potent of Melbourne Posted on 14 June 2009 12:05am
  • 225kw DI v6 sounds good :-DGood to see some of these engines coming out. Paul, the reason why no turbo v6 is coming is because of what's happened with Ford. The turbo 6 is quicker than the v8, which no one is buying anymore. Also, there is no real fuel economy benefit to the turbo 6 over the V8. That being said, a twin turbo version of either the 3.0L or 3.6L would really move (maybe an HSV version?).

    John Xenos of Sydney Posted on 13 June 2009 5:54pm
  • You obviously dont pay much attention to the whole Ford vs Holden rivalry or your just a blind Ford fan with that comment, wheres fords version of AFM or a DI 6 cylinder??? So whose late there?? they been doing this for years, ford bring out 1 thing Holden do something else. They need to keep doing this so they both stay viable, because the falcon is going before the Commodore if things get worse.

    Rick Posted on 13 June 2009 4:58am
  • Holden doesn't need a turbo they have an awesome v8 something ford doesn't

    Daniel w Posted on 13 June 2009 2:13am
  • Consistently a decade behind Europe in terms of technical innovation. No wonder Holden don't want the (Opel) Astra here - it'd show them up. C'mon Neil, spare us the propoganda about the Alloytec V6 being a "world class engine". It's an inanimate block of metal that those other carmakers have developed out of recognition.

    Mark's ruse Posted on 12 June 2009 6:58pm
  • why is holden always late on technology? For example look at falcon they brought out the six spd auto and holden are late and wheres the turbo on v6

    paul min Posted on 12 June 2009 6:02pm
Read all 51 comments

Add your comment on this story

Indicates required

We welcome your comments on this story. Comments are submitted for possible publication on the condition that they may be edited. Please provide your full name. We also require a working email address - not for publication, but for verification. The location field is optional.

Share your feedback