A rather dissapointing alloytec review

[Danv8]

From drive.com.au

With an all-new V6 engine one of the VZ's main selling points, we are somewhat disappointed in the powerplant. High-tech though it is on paper, in actual use it's not the great leap forward many have been hoping for.

At 3.6 litres, it's nearly half a litre shy of the Ford's 4.0-litre engine, but, like the Ford, it uses a twin-overhead-camshaft design for better breathing ability. It also has variable valve timing, even in the base model's 175kW format (there's a 190kW variant in the more expensive Commodores) and all-alloy construction.

Yet for all that, it doesn't feel like a dramatic improvement over the old Buick-derived pushrod V6 that was fitted to Commodores from 1988.

There's good mid-range flexibility from the new V6, but if you were expecting the smoothness and sophisticated feel of, say, a Toyota Camry V6, you'll be disappointed.

At lower engine speeds, the Holden is fine (although it still sounds disturbingly similar to the old engine) but rev it hard and it loses some of its composure. It revs freely enough but with a fair degree of unpleasant noise and vibration.

The Falcon's inline six-cylinder has zinginess to it that the Commodore's V6 simply can't match, and there's real refinement across the Ford's operating range.

The bald numbers -- 175kW of power and 320Nm of torque for the Holden and 182kW and 380Nm for the Ford -- suggest an edge for the Falcon, and that's how it pans out. Even though the Ford is 126kg heavier, it uses its torque advantage nicely from a standing start and produces more urge on the run.

The Falcon's cause is helped further by its four-speed transmission, which seems well able to second-guess the driver's intentions and deliver the right ratio (and hold it) pretty much all of the time. In contrast, the Holden's transmission is still a let-down, despite plenty of work being put into the carryover four-speed. But it can still be caught hunting for a gear and the quality of the downshifts is poor. It also lacks the Ford's manual-shift plane and is best left out of "Power" mode, where it's even less likely to pick an appropriate ratio or hold it when it does.

Holden does have an excellent, smooth-shifting five-speed automatic on the high-level variants, but unless you're spending a lot more money, the old four-speeder is your lot.

The counterpunch comes in the form of fuel economy: we recorded a reasonable (considering the driving style on the day) 11.5 litres per 100km in the Falcon, but the Commodore used just 10.2 litres per 100km over the same course at the same velocities.

Rest of the article (http://www.drive.com.au/news/article.asp?article=http://drive.fairfax.com.au/content-new/news/general/2004/08/12/FFXHV1ESRXD.html)

[SSbaby]

Yeah, the story seems a little deflating considering much was promised but that's one review, other reviews have been more favourable.

I hope you're right, DanV8, there had better not be a problem with the engine.

[chops]

Also, they are testing the low powered version with the old trans.
I for one would be more interested in their opinion of the 190kW version mated to the new A5.

[GM350]

Well the 190kw alloytec 6 speed will become my V8 since the petrol prices are so ridiculous, I couldn't justify spending every 2nd day filling up my LS2.
Will the alloytech make it's way to the Monaro?

[Ghia351]

Also, they are testing the low powered version with the old trans.
I for one would be more interested in their opinion of the 190kW version mated to the new A5.

Only problem is in a side bar comparo between XR6T and SV6 M6 they still quoted the same driveline harshness seen in the 175 kW engine. I know I'm a Ford fan however when I read this roadtest I had to double take these few paragraphs because from all tests written on the US based engine its smoothness was often discussed. Being as objective as I can be I really expected the new Alloytec to overshadow the Barra 182 in this particular factor and as the owner of one (BA I6/A4) I know how good this engine is throughout its entire rev range as a recent rush to the pharmacy late one night let me re-discover. Definitely not a result I expected and I guess it makes MKII BA a really smart move as for very minimal outlay the car won't be overshadowed in the pov pack range by the sounds of it (apart from fuel economy which will be a growing concern) and more can be spent on the next new model instead. I know its only one roadtest and the current Motor mag never discussed this factor but I sort of wished for a better beginning for the VZ to avoid any potential complacency from Ford.

[RICHO]

It's always a tough one...

The 175kw and 4speed is likely to make up the majority of Commodore sales thus the focus of their review

But just how long will it be before the 5sp and 190kw are across the range??

I'm looking at it this way....even though a Holden isn't on my shopping list ATM, the 190 + 5 speed is the direction Holden are heading....the 175 + 4 speed is the final remnant of their past drivetrain program.

And even from my slightly blue biased position the direction Holden are heading is looking pretty damn good!!!

I'll be watching with interest to see how the 190 goes in the Adventra

[RICHO]

I don't know whether this question has been specifically answered in any of the other threads, but what has happened to the Weight of the Commodore with the VZ?

Has it increased / decreased / stayed the same as VYII??

I tried checking the Holden sight but there is no technical data about the VZ just a key features section that talks about the new engine etc.

[Ghia351]

I don't know whether this question has been specifically answered in any of the other threads, but what has happened to the Weight of the Commodore with the VZ?

Has it increased / decreased / stayed the same as VYII??

I tried checking the Holden sight but there is no technical data about the VZ just a key features section that talks about the new engine etc.

The article quotes: VZ exec 1568 kg, XT 1694 kg and that VZ has 15" wheels (is this right?)

[exwrx]

I agree that the 190/5speed driveline will become standard across the range, probably with VE. Ford surprised many when it released the BA with the tiptronic auto and upspecced 6 across the range. They probably rememberd the AU 3.2 disaster.

You have to understand that reviewers drive all sorts of cars and are comparing the holden against falcon, camry and magna. The V6 in the camry especially is a very smooth and refined package, even though it has been around since 1997.

[Ghia351]

I agree that the 190/5speed driveline will become standard across the range, probably with VE. Ford surprised many when it released the BA with the tiptronic auto and upspecced 6 across the range. They probably rememberd the AU 3.2 disaster.

You have to understand that reviewers drive all sorts of cars and are comparing the holden against falcon, camry and magna. The V6 in the camry especially is a very smooth and refined package, even though it has been around since 1997.

I think thats EA 3.2L throttle body and it disappeared within months of release.

[SSbaby]

Being as objective as I can be I really expected the new Alloytec to overshadow the Barra 182 in this particular factor and as the owner of one (BA I6/A4) I know how good this engine is throughout its entire rev range as a recent rush to the pharmacy late one night let me re-discover. ...

I know its only one roadtest and the current Motor mag never discussed this factor but I sort of wished for a better beginning for the VZ to avoid any potential complacency from Ford.

C'mon Ghia, we know how over-rated the 4.0L six is...it's not exactly modern.

In the el-cheapo Exec, the Alloytec isn't exactly gonna make a silk purse from a sow's ear. If one reads the article in it's context, if they were comparing the higher end models, the results might have been reversed - "the slightly more expensive Commodore Acclaim and Falcon Futura". How so, I wonder? I fail to believe that the word "unpleasant" is used to describe an engine that has been around for a year, that all scribes have been raving about.

I just hope that the Alloytec is not a case of LS1 revisited in relation to it's manufacture.

[Roddy]

But just how long will it be before the 5sp and 190kw are across the range??



This is the key point; obviously the 175 "Poverty-tec" and clunker 4L60 are to keep prices down initially to compete with BA XT, as it is VZ exec is line ball or a few hunderd more, I guess with 190 and 5 speed it would be more like a couple of thousand.

Perhaps when more R&D costs are amortised the 190 and 5 speeder will be standard across the range, as they should be. As it stands, if I were looking for a brand spankers bottom of the range Aussie 6, it'd be the BA purely for their better driveline combo. :eek:

[RICHO]

C'mon Ghia, we know how over-rated the 4.0L six is...it's not exactly modern.

In the el-cheapo Exec, the Alloytec isn't exactly gonna make a silk purse from a sow's ear. If one reads the article in it's context, if they were comparing the higher end models, the results might have been reversed - "the slightly more expensive Commodore Acclaim and Falcon Futura". How so, I wonder? I fail to believe that the word "unpleasant" is used to describe an engine that has been around for a year, that all scribes have been raving about.

I just hope that the Alloytec is not a case of LS1 revisited in relation to it's manufacture.

After reading the article I think they thought the additional safety features offered std in the Acclaim would tip the balance in its favour. I assume the same issues as highlighted in the XT v Exec article re refinement would remain the same.

I'll be waiting for the reviews but I'm expecting a lay down the cards win for Holden when the Fairmont v Calais road tests roll out.

[paul05]

reading three write ups on the new engine all have conflicting veiws on the performance i'll wait a few weeks the company i work for ordered five

[Phido]

CV6 again?

I think it might, with monaro exports to the UK and concerns over fuel prices here I think they will sell more than last time. The 6 speed man or 5 speed auto are basically requirements over there as well.

Given the current lull in GTO sales to the US, there may be enough of a gap to sell the V6's.

Drives comments are interesting, as I recall they were fairly critical of the BA engine. And they were certainly pretty critical of the old 3.8L Ecotec. Maybe they just don't like engines?

[Ghia351]

C'mon Ghia, we know how over-rated the 4.0L six is...it's not exactly modern.

In the el-cheapo Exec, the Alloytec isn't exactly gonna make a silk purse from a sow's ear. If one reads the article in it's context, if they were comparing the higher end models, the results might have been reversed - "the slightly more expensive Commodore Acclaim and Falcon Futura". How so, I wonder? I fail to believe that the word "unpleasant" is used to describe an engine that has been around for a year, that all scribes have been raving about.

I just hope that the Alloytec is not a case of LS1 revisited in relation to it's manufacture.

It's irrelevant if the I6 is over-rated or not, I would have serioulsy bet that in whichever guise the new Alloytec came in it should have been easily more refined then the I6, so much so that even allowing for individual perceptions it couldn't be argued against. The reference to higher end models refers to th overalll outcome of which car is perceived as better, I'm ONLY refering to the claim in the article that the Ford I6 has better refinement across its whole rev range, which is repeated for the XR6T over the 190 kw aswell. Remembering back from articles you quoted taken from US tests of the Caddy's I just didn't expect such a claim in favour of the Ford could be made.

[markone2]

Will the alloytech make it's way to the Monaro?


Na :rolleyes: Most Fortunately Holden has discovered and used car pricing has proven beyond all doubt ,there are simply not enough :limpy: Hairdressers in Australia to warrant another wanna be Monaro.

[Venom XR]

Also, they are testing the low powered version with the old trans.
I for one would be more interested in their opinion of the 190kW version mated to the new A5.

Holden maybe disappointed there too.

Another Drive Review here (http://www.drive.com.au/news/article.asp?article=http://drive.fairfax.com.au/content-new/news/general/2004/08/13/FFXJ2DR7TXD.html)

In the above article, they summarise the other XT vs Exec review, but add the SV6 vs XR6 review. Believe it not, they still have the same grievances with the engine in terms of noise, harshness etc, even if the gearbox is better. XR6 N/A also wins by a narrow margin - they did throw the XR6T in there as well, but it wasn't required.

Interestingly, they noted the same 190kW engine/trans combo works much better in the Caddie. Being an older chassis design, does it not quite suit the Alloytec engines? You would expect that they have made the VE platform suit this combo perfectly though.

Funny though, drive is normally givin a hiding from FF members over perceived Holden-bias, especially from Josh Dowling - so very far from that here.

[Drewie]

The write up in today's Herald-Sun "Carsguide" is just the opposite, they gave it glowing reviews raved on about how good it is.

Quote: "But the sweet new six does a great job, particularly when you crack on past 6000 rpm, in most un Commodore style"

The above comment was for the 190kw version.

[Ghia351]

As I remember with the build up before BA release, the hype got so much especially when engine power outputs were known. Of course kerb weight was not mentioned until the last minute but by then the expectations were enormous. Maybe its the same with the VZ V6's, especially when you read US based reports of Caddy versions. Remember that they consider a GTO as BMW competition whereas we, I think, are a little less inclined to think this even though its a great car. It is the second review from the same Fairfax press whereas today's Drive from the Herald Sun mostly says good things (no direct comparo yet) and only mentions that the SV6 moves around too much on gravel. Horses for courses, personal opinion which only an individual roadtest by ourselves can give solve either way. One thought though on the claimed harshness and less sophisticated feel mentioned..could it be that the less taught bodywork of the VZ over a Caddy has some factor which the VE will rectify?

[HRT]

Damn, i didn't expect these kinds of results from the HFV6. I remember reading all the hype in WHEELS magazine, where a Holden engineer stated that they benchmarked Toyota, Nissan and Honda sixes for NVH and efficiency, and that they exceeded all their goals except the cost. Looks like this was all BS. I have read the DRIVE article, and they state that the HFV6 is nowhere near the Camry V6 or the Magna V6 for refinement. Looks like Toyota won't have to worry abotu releasing the 3.3L V6 VVT-i on the Camry anytime soon if this is the case. As for Mitsubishi, maybe a redesign of the Magna's exterior would be sufficient. No need to release the 3.8 V6 since the HFV6 doesn't seem to pose much of a threat.

[Drewie]

A bit more from the Herald-Sun ''Cars Guide" for the interstate guys that don't get it:

The Aisin six speed manual has well spaced ratios. The SV6 is definetly going to make life tougher for Ford's XRs.

We also tried the 190kw six-pack in a Calais, complete with touch change five-speed automatic. It was much smoother than we remember from earlier Calais models, with an automatic eagerness that was very enjoyable and refreshing.

The 190 V6 will easily twist the tachometer beyond the start of the red zone at 5500 rpm, but it also snaps through the ratios and is quiet and refined, with the instant fuel consumption reading often below 8 litres/100km at freeway cruising pace.

The tuning work on the 4-speed automatic has paid off and you would barely know the box from earlier Commodores. There is barely any flaring on downshifts and it doesn't jerk or clunk the way it did.

[Red CV8 R]

Ah I see Morley not only hates the Gen 3 but also hates the new HFV6. Doesnt suprise me.

[Ghia351]

The tuning work on the 4-speed automatic has paid off and you would barely know the box from earlier Commodores. There is barely any flaring on downshifts and it doesn't jerk or clunk the way it did.

I have to say this is so counter to the Drive.com.au article it's incredible...they feel that the A4 is no better at all....better check the number plates on the test cars to see if they were different.

[Ghia351]

Ah I see Morley not only hates the Gen 3 but also hates the new HFV6. Doesnt suprise me.

Maybe its time for a combined LS1/FF joint venture on a spreadsheet listing such things as roadtester thoughts, press employer, criticisms/praises and then compare them to see if they change their mind over the life of a model.

[Venom XR]

Ah I see Morley not only hates the Gen 3 but also hates the new HFV6. Doesnt suprise me.

Yeah, but Josh Dowling has been a known Ford-bagger before. Graham Smith used to be a Holden employee, which has explained some of his stunners in Cars Guide. It works both ways.

You're right, it's all opinion, and ye olde 'Holden lovers will buy Holdens, Ford lovers will buy Ford and the fence sitters will test drive em both and choose the best' adage still applies.

[Danv8]

Might as well call the VZ Commodore a Gunia pig for the new Alloytec engine. I really hope they sort it out with the VE model. Or even better the series 2 VZ.

[SSbaby]

Ah I see Morley not only hates the Gen 3 but also hates the new HFV6. Doesnt suprise me.

If I agreed with that statement, I'd consider myself biased. I'm more confused than anything... the engine (regardless of which Alloytec) should be a lot smoother than Ford's six, which is hardly the epitomy of engine refinement. Maybe there's a production problem somewhere that isn't apparent in the Canadian plant?

Anyway, for Drive to come out with the statement they have is really either going to damage their credibility or consolidate it. I'd like to think that Holden didn't have to pay Drive off for a glowing report of VZ...and Drive weren't exactly happy with Holden's lack of generosity... how's that for a consiracy theory?

[lizardmech]

I thought I6 engines are usually a little smoother than V6 engines?

[SSbaby]

I thought I6 engines are usually a little smoother than V6 engines?

These days, that's all a myth. Put it this way, if BMW designed a V6 they'd make it purr - nobody get's within a bull's roar of BMW engines for smoothness.

[Ghia351]

If I agreed with that statement, I'd consider myself biased. I'm more confused than anything... the engine (regardless of which Alloytec) should be a lot smoother than Ford's six, which is hardly the epitomy of engine refinement. Maybe there's a production problem somewhere that isn't apparent in the Canadian plant?

I agree on the expected refinement and smoothness of the V6 over the Ford I6 however I think you can water down your constant criticism of the I6's, I know they're not BMW killers but they seem to have the measure of the VZ. Isn't the Holden plant really more an assembly operation as not too much is cast or built here just yet while to consider early pilot probelms as a possible excuse not valid as they have been exporting for a long time...although I do remember one country switching their source from Holden to another HFV6 plant..is this a clue..?

[Knight Phlier]

I found it interesting that in this comparo article, they didn't mention the new features that come with the Alloytech 190, such as Brake Assist; Electronic Brakeforce Distribution; Electronic Stability Control Program; Corner Brake Control, as well as the 15000KM service intervals, over the previous 10K intervals.

I am not saying that these are going to make or break the 'verdict' on what these Journo's believe is the better car, but I would have thought that an Educated and unbiased Motor Jounalist would have pointed this out in a comparison.

These guys didn't even mention these features. Every other review has.

[SSbaby]

Swallow your pride Ghia because it's misplaced on this forum. Don't be patronising towards the Alloytec because of one negative article. If you think the 4.0L six is within cooee of being in the same class as the other domestic sixes (i.e. V6s) then you've got rocks in ya head!

You're right though, I can't stand the Falcon's 4.0L six because it's just a good boat anchor in these modern times. The Ecotec was also a boat anchor but at least it was economical, something the 4.0L six doesn't even trouble the LS1 on.

[Ghia351]

Swallow your pride Ghia because it's misplaced on this forum. Don't be patronising towards the Alloytec because of one negative article. If you think the 4.0L six is within cooee of being in the same class as the other domestic sixes (i.e. V6s) then you've got rocks in ya head!

You're right though, I can't stand the Falcon's 4.0L six because it's just a good boat anchor in these modern times. The Ecotec was also a boat anchor but at least it was economical, something the 4.0L six doesn't even trouble the LS1 on.

With all due respect I'll think you'll find in all my posts I said I would have wagered money on the VZ trumping the BA. I'm not gloating or patronising and of course its only bad press from the one media company, but lets face it they have all commonly criticised the same facet, smoothness and refinement of the engine. Maybe you should pay me a little more respect :stick: this time as I have made a point of being objective from post no.1. and as to pride, its seems like your pride is hurt..and before anyone else says it..maybe we'll both build a bridge and get over it.

[SSbaby]

Bridge built. I know you're a good bloke, always easy to share comments with ya! ;)

[Venom XR]

If I agreed with that statement, I'd consider myself biased. I'm more confused than anything... the engine (regardless of which Alloytec) should be a lot smoother than Ford's six, which is hardly the epitomy of engine refinement. Maybe there's a production problem somewhere that isn't apparent in the Canadian plant?

Possibly, but I still think Drive might be on to something when they wonder if the installation of the engine into the Commodore might be the source, considering the way they expected it to be from their Caddie experience.

[Red CV8 R]

If I agreed with that statement, I'd consider myself biased.

No, just like the general public journos have their likes and dislikes and can show bias in their reports, you only use these articles as refrence not as gospal. You know that anyway.

[Ghia351]

Bridge built. I know you're a good bloke, always easy to share comments with ya! ;)

I'm hiding in the study from my wife so she DOESN'T think I'm a good bloke at the moment. You and I both have passion, wish the Hawks could show it more on the field. Back on topic though, is there a vastly different engine mounting design on VZ compared to the the Caddys which I 'd imagine would have a s**tload of sound deadening etc.. to keep NHV down over say an Exec VZ and are there any features on a top spec Caddy engine left out of the 190kW V6 in particular?

[nickh]

can i just say having been one of a lucky few to actully drive this car prior to public display how wrong some of these comments are...

Now the std 175kw motor and 4 speed auto will be fine for all intened use it is ALOT smoother and refined than than that of the out going 3.8 which is so ruff that it almost feels painful when ur over 4900-5200 rpm(which my company cars see quite reguarly lol)

When i was out at lang lang these are my honest thoughts of these cars( i had driven these cars 2 weeks ago but i thought it was better not to give details at the time)

VZ with 175kw and 4 speed auto

The std car is so much enjoyable to drive than the current VY Series 2 exec it just feels alot more responsive and the transmisson feels alot smoother and dosent hunt anywhere near as much when ur coming into a corner...i think for a big rear wheel drive car its far improved from what visually looks like a VY series 3...alot of work was put into the underpinnings of this car .

VZ with 190kws and or 5 speed auto/6 speed manual

Now the pick of the bunch is the manual SV6 and in a on the roll run with a auto "SS" sedan the SV6 was with the "SS" from 60kms up to and just over 120kms.(to say that this surprised us and the "SS" driver which was me is a understatement) they say that the new V6's provide more than 90% of torque between 1570-5870 rpm which mean its on the roll accratetion is great and quite amazing.

the down side is that the Japenese made gear box is quite noisy from outside the car (or maybe this SV6 had just copped to much of a beating by sales ppl that carnt drive) and the in this guise the V6 shines like nothing before now .in the past it would have been a mistake to order the old V6 with a manual it was just a shocking thing...but now id place a order for a base ute with a 175kw and 6 speed manual...any day of the week...

i think once ppl start to drive these cars you will begin to appreciate how good these motors are..

on a side note with the whole i6 motor from the ford i trully dont think they have much more left in it (hence the xr6t) they had the upper hand for awhile but i just carnt seeing a base motor in anything (eg exec and xt) beening more than 200kw as think not more than 7 years ago it was a big deal to have a 185kw motor in a HSV.... i believe though that the 190kw is std across the VE range of motors..

And for those that are interested in some side facts

*VZ & WL development costs were $189 million these were started in the early months of 2002 .
*By the end of VZ and WL durability and testing program the cars racked up over 1,600,000kms in comparison the VY series 2 upgrade covered only 400,000kms
*46 cars where running since early may in a captive fleet for real world final validation.

[SSbaby]

Dunno, but I guess we're onto something. Go Roos! You poor Hawk supporter you! :lol:

[seldo]

I'd be very loathe to write-off the Alloytec engine just on the basis of a couple of journo's reports. Half of them wouldn't know a V6 from an I6 unless someone told them so I'd wait untill you drive it yourself or until some of the more knowledgeable guys pass verdict. Also, the cars they drove were what they call Pilot 3 versions which means they are cars produced in "practise runs" down the production lines. Once full production is up and running it may be quite a different story once they streamline the line. I really have more faith in GM's knowledge, expertise and R&D budget to think that the engine could be anything other than a pretty good thing, and they always bench-mark these things against known excellent products. Just relax guys - I think you'll find that all is not lost.
And as for the guys who are claiming that Ford's I6 is the be-all - hey, get a grip (or probably let go of your grip..) ;) . Sure, Ford have done a pretty good job of re-fettling a 40 year old clunker, but if you had to name the 20 best I6s in the world, it wouldn't get a look in. It's had more face lifts than Ivana Trump! But, to be fair, it does a damn good job for an old boat anchor. And as for NVH - why do you think Ford had to put a double skinned firewall in the BA? It sure wasn't just to make it weigh a bit more...

[Ghia351]

Dunno, but I guess we're onto something. Go Roos! You poor Hawk supporter you! :lol: O/T.. only saving grace is I'm old enough to have seen the wins in the 70's, 80's & 90's..and yes I'm gloating in this case..but the past is just that.

[Ghia351]

And as for NVH - why do you think Ford had to put a double skinned firewall in the BA? It sure wasn't just to make it weigh a bit more...

It started in the AU's...but you knew that :stick: and now I'm really joking ..the doubled skinned firewall was put in to kill sales of aftermarket strut braces...

[SSbaby]

seldo,

What's more worrying is the fact that the 4.0L six (at leat in turbo guise) is perhaps the best motor in the Ford world. Ford seem to lack a bit of engineering nouse since the Nasser era put a hole in the core business of product, for the sake of profit - engines in particular!

[Ghia351]

seldo,

What's more worrying is the fact that the 4.0L six (at leat in turbo guise) is perhaps the best motor in the Ford world. Ford seem to lack a bit of engineering nouse since the Nasser era put a hole in the core business of product, for the sake of profit - engines in particular!

Nasser's daily watch was worth more then my first house!

[seldo]

SSbaby: Yes, when I think about, I can't recall the last new engine that Ford built in any format.. About the last one i can remember is the Duratec modular range or the Zetec 4s. Having said that I'll be dumped on from a great height by all the Oval boys who will instantly flame me and prove me wrong..hehe. But you get that..

[lowriding]

I tend to agree - I'd be surprised if the drive review is typical . Here is another drive article which also has a rather negative spirit -
http://drive.fairfax.com.au/content-new/news/general/2004/08/13/FFXS0DR7TXD.html

Looks like Holden are in somebodys bad books again at Fairfax press .

Heres the Cadillac CTS article which totally contradicts what they are saying now .Go figure ??
Journalism is akin to prostitution, i reckon -I think i'll wait and see for myself.

CTS HFV6 (http://drive.fairfax.com.au/cgi-bin/drive/wrapper.cgi?article=..%2Fdocs%2Fcontent-new%2Fnews%2Fgeneral%2F2003%2F07%2F04%2FFFXGFK73PH D.html&make=&family=&desc=&IsDealer=&search_query=&result_query=&site_section=&cat=findarticles&subCat=&pType=searchresults&querytext=holden)

[Ghia351]

Journalism is akin to prostitution, i reckon -I think i'll wait and see for myself.

Nah..prostitution older.

[MARTY]

I think buying a car is akin to prostitution : all you are interested in is BANG FOR YOUR BUCK!!!! :D :D :D

[Swordie]

As far as the VZ goes I think its best people have a drive before passing judgement.

With the way cars depreciate I will not be rushing out to trade in my 18 month old VY for a VZ. I still think the 3.8 does a fine job.

[payaya]

who cares what the reviewers say about the new engine, if you go out test drive the 3.6L and find it contradicts what the reviewers are saying, what does it matter?

Its still early days, a couple of reviews doesnt really prove much.

But currently two reviews have mentioned the engine sounding harsh like the old buick motor.

Im a ford freak, im not going to judge a motor, from just a couple of short reviews. It does come as a shock as i though, as i thought this engine was going to be world class.

But i guess time would tell :)

[TriShield]

Barring any major programming or other changes to the engine for Holden cars, you guys should notice quite an improvement over the 3.8L Ecotec.

I have two Ecotec FWD cars here, and have driven a couple of different Cadillacs with the new V6, and as Drive wrote themselves, it's quite a jewel in that car. Quite comparable to the VQ used in the Infiniti G35 (Nissan Skyline) here in refinement and performance.

[seldo]

Well, today's Courier Mail (Brisbane) has a report on the VZ titled "One hell of an upgrade" and includes things like "Drive it and you will probably be totally consumed by the leap in quality, refinement and safety. The jump is so big the VZ may as well have come straight out of Germany".
So, there's a totally different opinion. I don't know who is right. I think maybe part of the problem is all the hype and build-up before the release - everyone is expecting miracles, and so it can be a bit of a let-down.

[payaya]

Barring any major programming or other changes to the engine for Holden cars, you guys should notice quite an improvement over the 3.8L Ecotec.

I have two Ecotec FWD cars here, and have driven a couple of different Cadillacs with the new V6, and as Drive wrote themselves, it's quite a jewel in that car. Quite comparable to the VQ used in the Infiniti G35 (Nissan Skyline) here in refinement and performance.

you'll be surpised how differnt engine can act under different circumstances, even if they are very similar.

So from the new review or going by the headlines does that mean the quality of the alloytech is very inconsistant?? :D

[payaya]

Well, today's Courier Mail (Brisbane) has a report on the VZ titled "One hell of an upgrade" and includes things like "Drive it and you will probably be totally consumed by the leap in quality, refinement and safety. The jump is so big the VZ may as well have come straight out of Germany".
So, there's a totally different opinion. I don't know who is right. I think maybe part of the problem is all the hype and build-up before the release - everyone is expecting miracles, and so it can be a bit of a let-down.

no one was expecting miracles. From the stated specs, new engine from ground up, we werent being too optimistic by thinking this new engine would be better than what some of the articles state.

[Swordie]

I would assume some of the journalists reviews depend on how close they are to car companies and whether they can afford not to piss them off.

[payaya]

so your implying The Courier Mail was being biased because they cant afford to lose the repport they have with holden?? :D

[Swordie]

I’m not implying any specific on any of the articles, it’s a general comment about journalists and when reading articles what to consider. If an article is going to be scathing of a car I’m sure the manufactures would be very pissed off and use their advertising budgets ECT to influence media.

Have a look at the Car Show on Channel 9, I welcome the show, it’s no where near BBC’s Top Gear in journalistic quality. When the show first started I sent them a message on this point.

[slickholden]

I read that, Motor,Carpoint,Heraldsun carsguide, All drove the VZ and didn't encounter the same problems as drive.com did with the new engines.
The main thing to remember is that these cars are only pilots, They are not the 100% finished product, So these pilots could have been mistreated and slapped together we don't know. But try the finished version and see if you like it. Don't go on 1 bad review when there are also 3 others that were positive.

[TriShield]

So from the new review or going by the headlines does that mean the quality of the alloytech is very inconsistant?? :D

I would think it would be just as good no matter where it was assembled. :(

[SASLS1]

Just note that the writer of the article "David Morley", is the owner of a ford xr6 ute, and with my many years of reading Motor Magazine (which he regulary writes in), I feel that he has always had a bais towards the blue oval. Have read heap's, of his articles, comparing the falcon/commodore, and some of the stuff he comes up with is just laughable.

He is just trying to down play the release of the all new alloy v6, and complement the "zinginess" of the blue oval inline 6, cast iron lump.

Its going to be very interesting, to what he has to say about the T56 Tremec 6 speed, going into the BA MK2, in up and coming Motor mag XR verses SS reviews. Just about every article he wrote on the T56 installed in holdens, he always mentioned the 6th gear ratio, and that you can't over take other cars on the hwy at warped factor 9. I got sick of reading the same crap over and over again in every article. Its not called a gearbox for nothing, and that 0.5 over drive ratio had a purpose, and that was fuel economy, get over it.

Only difference is the BA mk2 T56 will get different gearbox ratios and final drive ratios for the 6 and v8 models, if i read correctly. Going to be interesting.

[payaya]

I would think it would be just as good no matter where it was assembled. :(

i was joking dude! i know there isnt inconsistant engine builds, just making a joke how one reviewer can say something totally different to another.

[payaya]

Just note that the writer of the article "David Morley", is the owner of a ford xr6 ute, and with my many years of reading Motor Magazine (which he regulary writes in), I feel that he has always had a bais towards the blue oval. Have read heap's, of his articles, comparing the falcon/commodore, and some of the stuff he comes up with is just laughable.

He is just trying to down play the release of the all new alloy v6, and complement the "zinginess" of the blue oval inline 6, cast iron lump.

Its going to be very interesting, to what he has to say about the T56 Tremec 6 speed, going into the BA MK2, in up and coming Motor mag XR verses SS reviews. Just about every article he wrote on the T56 installed in holdens, he always mentioned the 6th gear ratio, and that you can't over take other cars on the hwy at warped factor 9. I got sick of reading the same crap over and over again in every article. Its not called a gearbox for nothing, and that 0.5 over drive ratio had a purpose, and that was fuel economy, get over it.


Only difference is the BA mk2 T56 will get different gearbox ratios and final drive ratios for the 6 and v8 models, if i read correctly. Going to be interesting.

so your basically saying the writer is biased and the alloytech is better than the cast iron lump from ford?

i'll mark your words :)

[JA SV8]

I read an article in my local papar "the manly daily" on the new commodore, and they praise the Alloytech engine.. so its odd to see so many conflicting arguments

[payaya]

yeah very odd to see all these conflicting arguments. So even if a unbiased article is put out on the alloytech, people still wont know what to believe.

Its very strange ive never seen a situation like this before!

[spank]

at the end of the day i dont think it really matters what the journo's say . i think most people who already arnt brand loyal will test drive all the cars in thier price range and decide what to buy on what they liked to drive vs features vs cost and the best deal they can negotiate at the time . i know plenty of people who buy different makes of cars depending on what deal they can get at the time , and replace them every three years or so and go from one make to the next :bash:

[slickholden]

Just note that the writer of the article "David Morley", is the owner of a ford xr6 ute, and with my many years of reading Motor Magazine (which he regulary writes in), I feel that he has always had a bais towards the blue oval. Have read heap's, of his articles, comparing the falcon/commodore, and some of the stuff he comes up with is just laughable.

He is just trying to down play the release of the all new alloy v6, and complement the "zinginess" of the blue oval inline 6, cast iron lump.

Its going to be very interesting, to what he has to say about the T56 Tremec 6 speed, going into the BA MK2, in up and coming Motor mag XR verses SS reviews. Just about every article he wrote on the T56 installed in holdens, he always mentioned the 6th gear ratio, and that you can't over take other cars on the hwy at warped factor 9. I got sick of reading the same crap over and over again in every article. Its not called a gearbox for nothing, and that 0.5 over drive ratio had a purpose, and that was fuel economy, get over it.

Only difference is the BA mk2 T56 will get different gearbox ratios and final drive ratios for the 6 and v8 models, if i read correctly. Going to be interesting.
Here is the Headline

FORDS ALL NEW T56 Tremec 6 speed IS A TOP SHIFTER A WORK OF ART FOR FORD, WE CAN'T WAIT TO TEST IT.

David Morley writes.

[vzsv6]

Just note that the writer of the article "David Morley", is the owner of a ford xr6 ute, and with my many years of reading Motor Magazine (which he regulary writes in), I feel that he has always had a bais towards the blue oval. Have read heap's, of his articles, comparing the falcon/commodore, and some of the stuff he comes up with is just laughable.


I agree ;)

Judging from the alloytec review and other articles of his in the past, I have come to the conclusion that I do not agree with David Morley.

Being on Ford's payroll, his mission is to degrade and damage the reputation of the alloytec V6 as much as possible to try and prevent it taking too many sales away from falcon.

[slickholden]

They put the SV6 against the XR6T and said it was fare cause the holden comes with 2 engines like the XR6??? Bull it does, they did that to try and make it look bad, The comments were the SV6 just ahead of XR6 but the turbo romped away easy DOOOOOH it does have 50KW more and turbo.
What a stupid comparison. But i bet no Falcon Barra182 has ever gone 0-100 in 6.9sec they wouldnt see past 8sec

[missile]

Must say that I felt that the review for the alloytec was a little harsh.

I suppose that a manufacturer has to leave room for incremental improvement for subsequent models.

Do they use cars of the same age/kms I wonder?

I am skeptical about weight figures since it was proven that Holden fudged the weight of the VY.

Again Holden does things better than the Blue Oval in some respects, but falls behind in others.

I look forward to see what either make will provide for the next evolution.

[BA$TAD]

I agree ;)

Judging from the alloytec review and other articles of his in the past, I have come to the conclusion that David Morley is a complete tosser.

Being on Ford's payroll, his mission is to degrade and damage the reputation of the alloytec V6 as much as possible to try and prevent it taking too many sales away from falcon.

I feel the same about Graham Smith from the Herald Sun.... :rolleyes:

[HSVMAN]

Overall most buyers dont pay a rats arse to what a journo says about a car so I wouldnt give Morley any credit although if he reads this forum its about the most attention his article will ever get!

[Merlin]

They put the SV6 against the XR6T and said it was fare cause the holden comes with 2 engines like the XR6??? Bull it does, they did that to try and make it look bad, The comments were the SV6 just ahead of XR6 but the turbo romped away easy DOOOOOH it does have 50KW more and turbo.
What a stupid comparison. But i bet no Falcon Barra182 has ever gone 0-100 in 6.9sec they wouldnt see past 8sec

Actually a stock XT with no LSD and lower diff ratio than an XR6 NA runs 0-100 in 7.11 seconds. Like to try again?

[HSVMAN]

Must have been down hill with a tail wind :lol:

[Merlin]

Must have been down hill with a tail wind :lol:

Or perhaps it was tested by a respected magazine using a proper timing device....the raw biasis of some people on here is amazing! Open your mind - "NAW MAN HSV IS FULLY SIK MOIT AND FORD SUX"

:bash:

[Swordie]

I'm no Mechanical Engineer, it appears the 4.0 has plenty of development left in it. Ford Australia should be proud they have not had plant from another country imposed on them. It's a pity the XR6T's motor hasn't got traction overseas yet. If the Americans had the thing imagine what their local tuners and aftermarket supplier would do.

I wonder if the 4.0 it one of the last of the Australian developed motors?

The BMW 6cyl often gets quoted as one of the best 6's in the world, unfortunately you have to pay a high price to get one. As a value for money proposition the motors Holden and Ford have are very good.

[lowriding]

Actually a stock XT with no LSD and lower diff ratio than an XR6 NA runs 0-100 in 7.11 seconds. Like to try again?


Mate seriously,I drive an BA XT auto everyday, and 7.1 secs 0-100 is *highly* optimistic IMO - is that a GTech thing ?I'd reckon low-mid 8's . Also since when does the XT run a lower final drive ? I'm bloody certain one of the few mechanical differences is the XR6 has the shorter diff ratio - i think it runs a 3.45 diff ( the XT has a 3.23).

regards

[HSVMAN]

Or perhaps it was tested by a respected magazine using a proper timing device....the raw biasis of some people on here is amazing! Open your mind - "NAW MAN HSV IS FULLY SIK MOIT AND FORD SUX"

:bash:
:lol: I own a BA xr6 NA hows that for an open mind? I payed full respect to it and gave it to my fiance to drive. Gee isnt it amazing that people on this forum are somewhat biased to Holden :rolleyes:

[Merlin]

Mate seriously,I drive an BA XT auto everyday, and 7.1 secs 0-100 is *highly* optimistic IMO - is that a GTech thing ?I'd reckon low-mid 8's . Also since when does the XT run a lower final drive ? I'm bloody certain one of the few mechanical differences is the XR6 has the shorter diff ratio - i think it runs a 3.45 diff ( the XT has a 3.23).

regards

Did I mention the word "auto" - the SV6 tested was the manual so why would you be comparing the manual SV6 time against an auto XT time????

No, not a G-TECH it wasnt me testing it, its actually in motor mag. XR6 runs a higher diff ratio than XT. (3.45 in XR6 to 3.23 in XT

[Merlin]

:lol: I own a BA xr6 NA hows that for an open mind? I payed full respect to it and gave it to my fiance to drive. Gee isnt it amazing that people on this forum are somewhat biased to Holden :rolleyes:

one of the only reasons i come to this forum is because i find generally people are pretty open minded unlike all the other holden forums. 2 years ago i would never have considered a holden - since discovering this site I now appreciate both brands and would buy either one - HOWEVER will still stick up for either brand should someone make a statement that isnt backed up by fact.

[plonkerchops]

Did I mention the word "auto" - the SV6 tested was the manual so why would you be comparing the manual SV6 time against an auto XT time????

No, not a G-TECH it wasnt me testing it, its actually in motor mag. XR6 runs a higher diff ratio than XT. (3.45 in XR6 to 3.23 in XT

getting picky here , but Ive read it a million times on this forum and it urks me every time :doh: , but the lower the number the higher the gear so in fact the xr6 has a lower diff ratio than the xt :)

[lowriding]

Did I mention the word "auto" - the SV6 tested was the manual so why would you be comparing the manual SV6 time against an auto XT time????

No, not a G-TECH it wasnt me testing it, its actually in motor mag. XR6 runs a higher diff ratio than XT. (3.45 in XR6 to 3.23 in XT

I wasn't comparing it with anything - i haven't seen a full test with an SV6 yet at all, also the manual XR6 i've driven wasn't that good so i'd still stick with the auto anyway- it's much better.Even in manual form ,i'd be suss on low 7's for a stock XT-again irregardless of magazine claims.Also you need to understand that if the XR6 runs a 3.45 , it has a lower diff ratio ,not higher. ie all things being equal , better acceleration . The 3.23 in the XT is taller , geared for more economy .

edit - plonkers beat me to it .

[all4ford]

I see, when the Alloytech receives a great review it is all good news, but when it receives a bad review "Who Cares What The Journo's Say, They Wouldn't Know Anything".

Open minded, Please!

[Merlin]

I wasn't comparing it with anything - i haven't seen a full test with an SV6 yet at all, also the manual XR6 i've driven wasn't that good so i'd still stick with the auto anyway- it's much better.Even in manual form ,i'd be suss on low 7's for a stock XT-again irregardless of magazine claims.Also you need to understand that if the XR6 runs a 3.45 , it has a lower diff ratio ,not higher. ie all things being equal , better acceleration . The 3.23 in the XT is taller , geared for more economy .

edit - plonkers beat me to it .

sorry for the mistake about lower/higher ect. still confuses me - point was XR6 is geared for better acceleration so if XT can pull a 7.11 then an XR6 should be even quicker.

Sorry to here about the manual XR6 you drove - mines stacks better then the lame auto - never lacking in acceleration (unless it goes up against an XR8/SS then of course it can be a different story :cool: )

[HSVMAN]

I see, when the Alloytech receives a great review it is all good news, but when it receives a bad review "Who Cares What The Journo's Say, They Wouldn't Know Anything".

Open minded, Please!

Without risking the need to drag the subject further I would say the same about any make or model when it comes to journo reports. With respect to those that earn their living writing, they are only that.... reports, not gospel or public opinion etc. I havent seen a bad report yet on either BA or VZ, its what you want to take from it that counts mixed in with some personal experience and maybe a little mechanical knowlege. I have my personal favourites too so naturally i can be biased!

[slickholden]

Actually a stock XT with no LSD and lower diff ratio than an XR6 NA runs 0-100 in 7.11 seconds. Like to try again?
The VZ must have rammed it hard lol :bash:

[slickholden]

Or perhaps it was tested by a respected magazine using a proper timing device....the raw biasis of some people on here is amazing! Open your mind - "NAW MAN HSV IS FULLY SIK MOIT AND FORD SUX"

:bash:
Who did the test ? David morley lol :lol:

[slickholden]

Did I mention the word "auto" - the SV6 tested was the manual so why would you be comparing the manual SV6 time against an auto XT time????

No, not a G-TECH it wasnt me testing it, its actually in motor mag. XR6 runs a higher diff ratio than XT. (3.45 in XR6 to 3.23 in XT
Good point there, But why would you compare the XR6Turbo 240kw againts a SV6 190kw, To prove it's faster we know that, to hang shit on it yes that why.

[payaya]

why did they use to compare the 5.0L in the XR's to the Gen 3's?? There was a massive margin in power there as well!

The closest rival to the XR6T is the SV6, thats why the comparo was done.

[lowriding]

why did they use to compare the 5.0L in the XR's to the Gen 3's?? There was a massive margin in power there as well!

The closest rival to the XR6T is the SV6, thats why the comparo was done.

Even so, the XR8 and SS were and are a direct comparison - they were similar in price and market, even with the power deficit . The XR6T is over $6000 more than an SV6 -20-odd% more expensive,and turbocharged , meaning insurance wise it's in another bracket too -it's closet competitor from Holden is an SV8 .

[Ghia351]

I feel the same about Graham Smith from the Herald Sun.... :rolleyes:

Except he was on Holden's payroll (as an employee) before working with the Herald Sun.

[slickholden]

why did they use to compare the 5.0L in the XR's to the Gen 3's?? There was a massive margin in power there as well!

The closest rival to the XR6T is the SV6, thats why the comparo was done.
I beg to differ there it's the SV8 or nothing i say.
A margin in power With V8's isnt anywhere near the power difference a turbo has over the SV6. Look at the VYI Clubsport R8 260KW VS the GT 290KW big margin but close in performence again. VYI SS 235KW VS the XR8 260KW difference again but still close in performence. 50kw power difference with XR6T over the SV6 is bad enough but the thing is turbo and it would hang it over it all day, It's a stupid comparison really.

(We chose to compare the new SV6 with the XR6 Turbo. Before Holden devotees protest, allow us to explain. The Commodore is available with a choice of two six-cylinder engines (a low output version for fleet models and a high output version for sporty models) and so is the Falcon. Drive.com<---)
You buy the exec you get the 175, you buy the SV6 you get the 190, There is no choice.

[Venom XR]

Just note that the writer of the article "David Morley", is the owner of a ford xr6 ute, and with my many years of reading Motor Magazine (which he regulary writes in), I feel that he has always had a bais towards the blue oval. Have read heap's, of his articles, comparing the falcon/commodore, and some of the stuff he comes up with is just laughable.

He is just trying to down play the release of the all new alloy v6, and complement the "zinginess" of the blue oval inline 6, cast iron lump.

Its going to be very interesting, to what he has to say about the T56 Tremec 6 speed, going into the BA MK2, in up and coming Motor mag XR verses SS reviews. Just about every article he wrote on the T56 installed in holdens, he always mentioned the 6th gear ratio, and that you can't over take other cars on the hwy at warped factor 9. I got sick of reading the same crap over and over again in every article. Its not called a gearbox for nothing, and that 0.5 over drive ratio had a purpose, and that was fuel economy, get over it.

Only difference is the BA mk2 T56 will get different gearbox ratios and final drive ratios for the 6 and v8 models, if i read correctly. Going to be interesting.

I think you're being overly harsh on Dave Morley.

Bob Jennings and Joshua Dowling wrote this (http://www.drive.com.au/news/article.asp?article=http://drive.fairfax.com.au/content-new/news/general/2004/08/13/FFXJ2DR7TXD.html) article, and neither are Ford XR6-ute owning Motor journalists. In fact, as I've said before, both have been accused at FF.com for being anti-Ford before. This article would be seen as worse than Morleys, because not only do they give the XT the nod over the new Exec, but the N/A XR6 gets the nod over the new SV6.

I've heard from another journalist that the Holden drive day for media was a bit poor. Not only was the organisation a bit lacking, but the majority of the VZs were V8s, which is a bit sad if you're plugging brand new V6s - what journo hasn't driven a GenIII of varying setups by now? Maybe that experience has translated in the sort of reviews we're reading (if they're not particularly glowing.)

[muzza]

There's only ONE review that really matters.

Thats the one you get when you drive the cars yourself.

Having said that, I do put some credence into Wheels or Motor back to back comparos and performance testing done on the same day/conditions etc.

I think the Age review was quite thin, as was the Herald-Sun one.

I agree comparing an SV6 and an XR6-T is just plain wrong and the Age was drawing a long bow to say they are competitors - they would not be on the same list for a shopper with a price in mind.

[SSbaby]

I think you're being overly harsh on Dave Morley.

Bob Jennings and Joshua Dowling wrote this (http://www.drive.com.au/news/article.asp?article=http://drive.fairfax.com.au/content-new/news/general/2004/08/13/FFXJ2DR7TXD.html) article, and neither are Ford XR6-ute owning Motor journalists. In fact, as I've said before, both have been accused at FF.com for being anti-Ford before. This article would be seen as worse than Morleys, because not only do they give the XT the nod over the new Exec, but the N/A XR6 gets the nod over the new SV6.

I've heard from another journalist that the Holden drive day for media was a bit poor. Not only was the organisation a bit lacking, but the majority of the VZs were V8s, which is a bit sad if you're plugging brand new V6s - what journo hasn't driven a GenIII of varying setups by now? Maybe that experience has translated in the sort of reviews we're reading (if they're not particularly glowing.)

So far only drive paints a negative picture of the Alloytec, irrespective of the journalist. These journos all work for the same publication, being Farifax.

Anyway, I think time will tell the real story. When the cars are released to the public we will be able to judge for ourselves.

[HSVMAN]

Absolutely! No-one is getting personal with the Journos. There are some promising reports from more credible mags however rather than the daily rag contributors. Cant wait to drive one i've been looking for a replacement for the missus' XR6.

[slickholden]

I love the SV6 so much i might change my mind on the VYII Calais.
:bash: <------ Maybe maybe not. Test drive won't hurt but.

[Ghia351]

So far only drive paints a negative picture of the Alloytec, irrespective of the journalist. These journos all work for the same publication, being Farifax.

Anyway, I think time will tell the real story. When the cars are released to the public we will be able to judge for ourselves.

We should also add that (I hope I'm safe in saying) the Drive article is the first comparison between the two brands whereas the other write-ups are Commodore only drives in isolation, which also puts the drive article on a different footing to the other press.

[slickholden]

We could also say they were pilot cars not the finnished product,
Did drive.com run the VY againts the AU in 2002 ?

[Ghia351]

We could also say they were pilot cars not the finnished product,

Except the engines have been exported for a year plus...so I don't know if thats really applicable.

[slickholden]

I think we know how a pilot car gets treated :bash: :bash:
I can't help but get the feeling holden didn't know drive.com were doing head to head, By the way they snapped when the XR6T was run against the SV6.
But everyone else who has drove the V6 doesn't share drive.com opinion on the donk they definitely didn't compare it to the old buick 3.8.

[HSVMAN]

Have spoken to several who have driven the SV6 including the pilots that will be sent to the crusher and all claim a marked inprovement over the 3.8 eng. Cant compare the Turbo BA with N/A 190 eng, but will be able to directly compare with the XR6 when I drive them both very soon

[slickholden]

It's really a insult to say it sounds like the old 3.8 harsh noisy.
give them this :booty: :lol:

[Carby]

I think you're being overly harsh on Dave Morley.

Bob Jennings and Joshua Dowling wrote this (http://www.drive.com.au/news/article.asp?article=http://drive.fairfax.com.au/content-new/news/general/2004/08/13/FFXJ2DR7TXD.html) article, and neither are Ford XR6-ute owning Motor journalists. In fact, as I've said before, both have been accused at FF.com for being anti-Ford before. This article would be seen as worse than Morleys, because not only do they give the XT the nod over the new Exec, but the N/A XR6 gets the nod over the new SV6.

I've heard from another journalist that the Holden drive day for media was a bit poor. Not only was the organisation a bit lacking, but the majority of the VZs were V8s, which is a bit sad if you're plugging brand new V6s - what journo hasn't driven a GenIII of varying setups by now? Maybe that experience has translated in the sort of reviews we're reading (if they're not particularly glowing.)


Pretty subjective test if you ask me. No figures to back up the performance claim - I mean the Old V6 more than held it's own against the Fords with only about 304nm of torque the new V6's have 320 and 340 and were probably very tight. I'd be surprised if the 6 speed manual SV6 doesn't beat the NAXR6 quite comfortably.

I heard from a dealer that they tested the car at Paul Morris's facility in Queeensland and that they were very highly received and that the EBD and ESP were absolutely brilliant on the skid pan.

[evanjames]

i have been fortunate enough to drive aan alloytech. The 4speed auto is crud. The engine isn't as refined as the fords but is not bad! The refinement (on the car I drove) was equal to ford up to 4500rpm but comfort-wise the ford nails it (even with the optional 280 dollar semisport suspension). After having new holdens (bought as personal and business cars) it is time to reconsider.

we used fords because they were bigger (in the 80's) in the 90's the power of the dollar made us switch to holden with its better resale (or changeover figure). We were immediately dissapointed with every commie owned over the last 11 years having oil leaks, shocking auto and nine out of ten using oil (including my own personal vr, vs, vt, vx and vy) I used to blame the sales reps. But I drive like a grandma and they still use it. The tick tick tick of the ecotec was irritating and the laughter inducing (from ford drivers) self dis-assembling interiors was too much. Our last fleet of ea falcons covered more kilometres with less downtime. the last straw was when we couldn't get a better price than 5000 dollars per car off a (just) 4 year old vtII.
Ford will bend over backwards to help us and our one au (series one) has done 380000kms and still doesn't use oil, the gearbox is fine and there are no complaints from use except the lousy lumbar support and general ugliness of the beast. The ba has knocked over 180000kms with no dramas (except brake discs replaced under warranty - they still lasted longer than the commodores!!!).
Unless the rest of the vz commodores drive alot better, I cannot see why I should shell out money for an only marginally improved driving experience (esp, extra 1000rpm aside).

This isn't a rant. Just getting a few things of my chest. And to think...my 1979 volvo 242gt has a redline of 7000rpm, 4 pot calipers, gets regularly thrashed, pulls mid sixteen second quarters, has 490000kms and has never had the head off, never used oil or got hot. I would feel more comfortable taking that around aus than the commodore. C'mon holden, you have the image back up the style with substance

[IIV8II]

I agree ;)

Judging from the alloytec review and other articles of his in the past, I have come to the conclusion that I do not agree with David Morley.

Being on Ford's payroll, his mission is to degrade and damage the reputation of the alloytec V6 as much as possible to try and prevent it taking too many sales away from falcon.

ha ha. Yep, he's on the Ford payroll alright - so how do you explain his Kombi?


Jeez, there's some funy sh*t in this thread....

[commomate]

If you think the 4.0L six is within cooee of being in the same class as the other domestic sixes (i.e. V6s) then you've got rocks in ya head!

Sorry I don't understand does a more technological motor have to be in a V configation and not in line?

[commomate]

I'd be very loathe to write-off the Alloytec engine just on the basis of a couple of journo's reports. I really have more faith in GM's knowledge, expertise and R&D budget to think that the engine could be anything other than a pretty good thing, and they always bench-mark these things against known excellent products. Just relax guys - I think you'll find that all is not lost.

Just like in the gen 3 oil burners and that fantastic IRS tyre wear systen

[commomate]

Here is the Headline

FORDS ALL NEW T56 Tremec 6 speed IS A TOP SHIFTER A WORK OF ART FOR FORD, WE CAN'T WAIT TO TEST IT.

David Morley writes.

I't probally will be it uses different ratois and shifter

[commomate]

I think we know how a pilot car gets treated :bash: :bash:
I can't help but get the feeling holden didn't know drive.com were doing head to head, By the way they snapped when the XR6T was run against the SV6.
But everyone else who has drove the V6 doesn't share drive.com opinion on the donk they definitely didn't compare it to the old buick 3.8.

But wouldn't they make sure the car was up to scratch before they let then out even if they were not going to be tested against the compation?

What it seems like when the cars are tested solo they compare them to the old 3.8 and seem to be better.
But tested up against the Falcon they might have not got it 100%

By the way I heard about 2-3 months ago from a engineer from Holden (who had a test car at the time, a VY with the 175 alloytec & 4A) that the VZ was not quite what a new model should be and wait for the VE

[slickholden]

I't probally will be it uses different ratois and shifter
It will be just like KFC, Same shit differnt bucket :lol:

[Ghia351]

It will be just like KFC, Same shit differnt bucket :lol:
...maybe the sixth "piece of chicken" in the XR's will be eaten a little earlier in the meal...sorry if it's too cryptic...my nearly 2 y'old felt it fine to wake up all night and now I feel like the aformentioned smelly stuff.

[Venom XR]

It will be just like KFC, Same shit differnt bucket :lol:

The Aston Martin Vanquish is a pretty damn impressive bucket. :D

[slickholden]

The Aston Martin Vanquish is a pretty damn impressive bucket. :D
So is the new mini bucket :nutkick:

[Roddy]

And to think...my 1979 volvo 242gt has a redline of 7000rpm, 4 pot calipers, gets regularly thrashed, pulls mid sixteen second quarters, has 490000kms and has never had the head off, never used oil or got hot.

Are you absolutely certain of this? The last 242GT I drove had a redline of 6000rpm, single pot calipers and would only pull mid 16's down a mineshaft. :confused:

[evanjames]

sounds like you've never seen a volvo. The b23e engine in the gt has a 7k rpm redline. orange starting at 6600rpm. A volvo with single pot calipers??? give me a break!! The worst spec caliper you could get (on the base base model 4 door carby 1.9 litre- which i am not even sure we got here) had twin piston 4 wheel discs. In 79' the 2.3 litre put out more power at the wheels (cheeck WHEELs magazine ind/ camparo) than the 265 valiant and 308 commo. It was faster than all the commies even 308 manuals and was over 2.5 seconds quicker over the quarter than the 3.3 manual. The brock vc was the first commie to outgun it over the quarter. Spencer martin and david mcKay raced a standard one at bathurst in 79 (a road registered, off the factory floor gt) on one set of standard uniroyal radial road tyres and they lapped in well under 3 minutes, with 220kph down the straight. This was as fast a 350 monaro on slicks.

I bought the gt because it was far superior to the aus cars at the time. It gets flogged now (as do the new volvo's ) but don't discount the solid engineering that went into them. When my vc v8 and vk v8 (personal road car) cracked the top of the strut towers it was a shock. When both they and the xd to xf sucked in dust on the dirt roads I was dissapointed. For the time they were not cutting edge (compared to euro stuff) but it took a while for a holden commodore six to match one. Even in outright conering grip (try 0.80g in 1980 on road tyres).

PS. 16.63seconds pb standard, with ipd volosport exhaust and airbox 16.12

[HSVMAN]

Lovely cars volvos untill you come to sell them!
Glad you enjoy it cos you'll be in it for a while mate :lol:

[evanjames]

yeah, my one owner 490000km 242gt is worth about as much as my one owner 350000km vtII. But still more reliable!!! For the vt Holden will give me 4K, private sale i should get 6 or 7 (considering the amount around for 8 or 9 or 10k with less than 200kliks. I've been offered 6k for the ovlov (beats me why!! but a good gt brings the dough regardless of kms probably because they are one of the few cars that can take high kms without driving like a bag of spuds and creaking and graoning and doors sagging). The sad thing is it was 14k brand new, my commie vt was 33k on raod (good deal espec with fe2 and abs). But i agree volvo fans are harder to find than commie fans.

[evanjames]

I guess it could be worse. I could have bought a hsv gts for near 100k on raod and now try to sell it for the price of an sv8 (note: inflammatory comment laced with humour not malice). Or even worse I might have bought a magna for 30k and try to get 3 grand for it now (my father's verada covered 310000kms and he only got 6k for it (although it was 8 years old).

[slickholden]

Bloody volvo drivers

[Swordie]

This is first I have herd of someone singing the praises of a Volvo on this Forum. If it does the job at a good price good luck to you. There are too many wankers around who drive around in cars for the image.

[slickholden]

This is first I have herd of someone singing the praises of a Volvo on this Forum. If it does the job at a good price good luck to you. There are too many wankers around who drive around in cars for the image.

Nothing wrong with driving a 550HP truck around town as my runaround wheels lol

[SSbaby]

From GoAuto (http://www.goauto.com.au/mellor/mellor.nsf/homepage/home?opendocument)...


"Don't miss our first drive of Holden's 175kW Alloytec V6 engine and ESP stability control system in the VZ Commodore Acclaim. Right here from this Thursday, August 19"

[HSVMAN]

Un bloody believable!! It took a Volvo driver to take everyone's mind off the original subject of this thread. :lol: Well done that guy! No one really means what they say about the swede mobile, honest! :p

[HSVMAN]

From GoAuto (http://www.goauto.com.au/mellor/mellor.nsf/homepage/home?opendocument)...

And I will also be able to give you a first hand review around the same time next week....

[seldo]

sounds like you've never seen a volvo. The b23e engine in the gt has a 7k rpm redline. orange starting at 6600rpm. A volvo with single pot calipers??? give me a break!! The worst spec caliper you could get (on the base base model 4 door carby 1.9 litre- which i am not even sure we got here) had twin piston 4 wheel discs. In 79' the 2.3 litre put out more power at the wheels (cheeck WHEELs magazine ind/ camparo) than the 265 valiant and 308 commo. It was faster than all the commies even 308 manuals and was over 2.5 seconds quicker over the quarter than the 3.3 manual. The brock vc was the first commie to outgun it ....
Whilst this is waaay OT, for the sake of the record I have to confirm most of what he claims. Just from memory, they had 104kw with a sohc that had .513 lift!! and revved to well over 7 with 4 pot fronts and 2 pot rears that were good enough that they are still often used on sports sedans of all sorts. And they were bullet proof as he claims. In Group E Production racing it used to regularly beat the RX7s, 280Zs, 302 Falcons, 308 Commies, GTV6 Alfas etc, so it wasn't a bad thing in its day. OK? Dunno about today though...
Now, back to the subject of the thread....the Alloytec V6 :burnout: :driving:

[Roddy]

Whilst this is waaay OT, for the sake of the record I have to confirm most of what he claims. Just from memory, they had 104kw with a sohc that had .513 lift!! and revved to well over 7 with 4 pot fronts and 2 pot rears that were good enough that they are still often used on sports sedans of all sorts. And they were bullet proof as he claims. In Group E Production racing it used to regularly beat the RX7s, 280Zs, 302 Falcons, 308 Commies, GTV6 Alfas etc, so it wasn't a bad thing in its day. OK? Dunno about today though...
Now, back to the subject of the thread....the Alloytec V6 :burnout: :driving:

Yep my sister happens to own an M4 '79 242 GT which I've driven extensively. My bad on the 4 pots, indeed they are, I shall beat myself relentlessly this evening after work with a Girling caliper. :bash:

But I question the 7000rpm redline, it's 6000 in her beast and the B23 makes 140hp at 5700rpm.....identical engine to that used on the 240 and 760 series. Biggest difference from the 244 apart from B23 was nice fat swaybars and highly attractive pinstriping.

Unfortunately I am hereafter banned from driving it, as I managed to destroy her M46 gearbox with a bit of axle tramp while doing a burnout. :)

[RAWCUS]

you cant expect miracles out of a 6 banger hey..... at the end of the day, this motor is for family saloons, to lug the kids to the footy on the weekend. If you expect a sports car, ****en buy an SS/HSV...... if your worried about fuel you musnt really want one, else you would go ****en buy one. Personally, yeh wicked new alloy V6 good to see, far better than the US inspired Buik, and hey compare the iron dinosaur from ford all you like, but they are to completely differant engines, with the HFV6 being far more advanced than the run of the mill falcon I6..Running a turbo 6 to a 190kw HFV6, come on thats like running an FPV GT to the clubsport (which the clubsport outpeformed) and with ford usinf DIN to measure their KW ratings is also not hugely publicised.

In the words of Wheels August 04 issue,

"There is no doubt the global V6 will make a world of differance to the way a commodore drives and to Holdens technical credibility. For more than half a century, Holden has given us pragmatic cast iron sixes. The elegant Alloytec is an eloquent opening to an ambitious new era for the maker of AUSTRALIAS FAVOURITE CAR"......................enough said

[Merlin]

you cant expect miracles out of a 6 banger hey..... at the end of the day, this motor is for family saloons, to lug the kids to the footy on the weekend. If you expect a sports car, ****en buy an SS/HSV...... if your worried about fuel you musnt really want one, else you would go ****en buy one. Personally, yeh wicked new alloy V6 good to see, far better than the US inspired Buik, and hey compare the iron dinosaur from ford all you like, but they are to completely differant engines, with the HFV6 being far more advanced than the run of the mill falcon I6..Running a turbo 6 to a 190kw HFV6, come on thats like running an FPV GT to the clubsport (which the clubsport outpeformed) and with ford usinf DIN to measure their KW ratings is also not hugely publicised.

In the words of Wheels August 04 issue,

"There is no doubt the global V6 will make a world of differance to the way a commodore drives and to Holdens technical credibility. For more than half a century, Holden has given us pragmatic cast iron sixes. The elegant Alloytec is an eloquent opening to an ambitious new era for the maker of AUSTRALIAS FAVOURITE CAR"......................enough said

What was the point of that post - besides making inflammatory statements without backing them up?

[Roddy]

:)
What was the point of that post - besides making inflammatory statements without backing them up?

Didn't read the post, was too busy looking at the avatar.

[RAWCUS]

wasnt intended to be"inflammitory" was intended to put the record straight, you make any figures no matter what they are peform to your advantage if you no how to manipulate the results (in business you do this all the time) so with the comparisons from variouse motoring journalists that have been gettin thrown around, have obviously got deeper meaning than the transperant results you are presented with as a consumer.

My post was basically to say, who cares if the HFV6 is slower, faster, would beat a BA, radi rah rah rah, they are not drag cars, they are not intended for track duty's, they are poverty pack run of the mill cars for your average Joe to run the family around in and should be treated as such. They are world class in terms of quality for $$ and i wouldnt have it any other way. If you are worried about how fast or powerfull the car is, or would like to have a play on the track, then unless the HFV6 is released in a turbo/super6 then the gen 3 or another manufacturer are you options.


My 2c

P.S everyone on every forumn i visit loves the tits, but it annoys me when people link to it for their own....grrrrr

[vzsv6]

Being on Ford's payroll, his mission is to degrade and damage the reputation of the alloytec V6 as much as possible to try and prevent it taking too many sales away from falcon.


ha ha. Yep, he's on the Ford payroll alright - so how do you explain his Kombi?
Jeez, there's some funy sh*t in this thread....

I was joking. But seriously some of the stuff he writes makes you wonder.


you cant expect miracles out of a 6 banger hey..... at the end of the day, this motor is for family saloons, to lug the kids to the footy on the weekend. If you expect a sports car, ****en buy an SS/HSV......

Exactly.

Why can't it be tested in the same manner in which it was designed for? They take a basic family car and then evaluate it as if it was a sports car or expensive luxury car. Seriously, who buys a Commodore executive to sit on 6000rpm all day?
I am sick to death of motoring journalists who expect everything to rev to 9000rpm and who complain about stupid and totally irrelevant things.

For instance, David Morley's comment: "The Falcons engine has a 'zinginess' that the Commodore's cant match."
WTF!! What an absolutely laughable comment. If I want zinginess I'll go to KFC!

[Ghia351]

For instance, David Morley's comment: "The Falcons engine has a 'zinginess' that the Commodore's cant match."
WTF!! What an absolutely laughable comment. If I want zinginess I'll go to KFC!...as KFC only sell zingers, not zinginess, you'll have to take a BA into the drive thru ( I'm joking too)

[Merlin]

wasnt intended to be"inflammitory" was intended to put the record straight, you make any figures no matter what they are peform to your advantage if you no how to manipulate the results (in business you do this all the time) so with the comparisons from variouse motoring journalists that have been gettin thrown around, have obviously got deeper meaning than the transperant results you are presented with as a consumer.

My post was basically to say, who cares if the HFV6 is slower, faster, would beat a BA, radi rah rah rah, they are not drag cars, they are not intended for track duty's, they are poverty pack run of the mill cars for your average Joe to run the family around in and should be treated as such. They are world class in terms of quality for $$ and i wouldnt have it any other way. If you are worried about how fast or powerfull the car is, or would like to have a play on the track, then unless the HFV6 is released in a turbo/super6 then the gen 3 or another manufacturer are you options.


My 2c

P.S everyone on every forumn i visit loves the tits, but it annoys me when people link to it for their own....grrrrr

Thanks 4 clearing that up ;)

[commomate]

yeh wicked new alloy V6 good to see, far better than the US inspired Buik, and hey compare the iron dinosaur from ford all you like, but they are to completely differant engines, with the HFV6 being far more advanced than the run of the mill falcon I6..the maker of AUSTRALIAS FAVOURITE CAR"......................enough said

What makes the V6 more modern just because its a "V"?
On the base model Falcon dosen't it have twin valve timing compared to the commodore which has only inlet valve timing??!??!??

And in the test I sure they say that the n/aXR6 would just get the nod over the sv6 anyway and not just the turbo which would go without saying

Yes Australia's FAVOURITE car............ not "Australia's BEST Car"!

[IIV8II]

This is first I have herd of someone singing the praises of a Volvo on this Forum. If it does the job at a good price good luck to you. There are too many wankers around who drive around in cars for the image.
Nah, I've done it before. I reckon Volvos are great. Top sleepers; top daily drivers. And when - if - the four finally dies, a V8 is a weekend fit.... if that's what you want

[Drizt]

What makes the V6 more modern just because its a "V"?
On the base model Falcon dosen't it have twin valve timing compared to the commodore which has only inlet valve timing??!??!??

And in the test I sure they say that the n/aXR6 would just get the nod over the sv6 anyway and not just the turbo which would go without saying

Yes Australia's FAVOURITE car............ not "Australia's BEST Car"!


i have noticed a lot of trolls in this thread :P

if u believe it better then good luck to you, you don't have to convince the world of your beliefs..

Lets all just wait till we drive the friggin thing ....

Having spoken to the janks they love the engine, and the 5 speed auto. (they dont have the aisin 6 speed yet)

one of the guys i spoke to said it revs cleanly all the way to redline and feels like it could do it for ever.

others have said it revs freely but is not a smooth at high rpms as say a toyota v6. He seems to think the induction roar gives it an impression of being noisy at high rpm. None the less he thinks its a top notch motor

How about we wait till we get a chance to drive it and make up our own minds..

i read in one thread some goon (ignostalga) or something like that saying that he believes the HFV6 HASNT lived up to expectations in the new commodore. FOR PETES sake it hasnt been released yet.

[HSVMAN]

What makes the V6 more modern just because its a "V"?
On the base model Falcon dosen't it have twin valve timing compared to the commodore which has only inlet valve timing??!??!??

And in the test I sure they say that the n/aXR6 would just get the nod over the sv6 anyway and not just the turbo which would go without saying

Yes Australia's FAVOURITE car............ not "Australia's BEST Car"!

Think you missed the bus there sunshine....... :bash: the test doesnt mean didly squat! I'm selling the XR6 cos its a tank. Yes I drive both. The XR6 has it over 3.8V6 only after 80km/h but we are not talking drag machines and anyone who wants to use them as that or test them as that is a complete tosser .
Studying the specs on the Alloytec its streets ahead technology wise and it should be its a new engine :rolleyes:
I like the open road handling of the XR6 but it certainly isnt "Zingy" the engine is a boat anchor.
The current V6 commy is reasonably quick off the mark for an iron clunker but didnt seem to like revving - dont like that engine much either.
After testing their new engine against all the competition prior to launch I doubt Holden would be releasing it if it wasnt superior in all or many ways.
The main requisites for todays "family/business car" is efficiency/economy, pulling power, acceleration, reliabilty etc. And from the manufacturers point of view they have to develop an engine that has a long expectancy in regards to future upgrading and increased technology/performance.
My bet is Ford will ditch the Barra for a V6 when the time comes!! Or take a leaf out of BMW's book....

[Merlin]

Think you missed the bus there sunshine....... :bash: the test doesnt mean didly squat! I'm selling the XR6 cos its a tank. Yes I drive both. The XR6 has it over 3.8V6 only after 80km/h but we are not talking drag machines and anyone who wants to use them as that or test them as that is a complete tosser .
Studying the specs on the Alloytec its streets ahead technology wise and it should be its a new engine :rolleyes:
I like the open road handling of the XR6 but it certainly isnt "Zingy" the engine is a boat anchor.


The Fords engine is a boat anchor? Hmm what an unbiased assessment. Just because the Alloytech has "better" specs on paper dosnt mean it will be superior - I thought a Holden man would know this from the experience with the LS1, considered a "dinosaur" engine by most but everyone knows it outperforms the BOSS (while using less fuel) and being lighter even though the BOSS is more "advanced". I seriously doubt you have ever driven an XR6 because I own one and it is the best car I have ever owned - the engine revs very freely and smoothly.



After testing their new engine against all the competition prior to launch I doubt Holden would be releasing it if it wasnt superior in all or many ways.


Holden don't have a choice - they take what GM gives them. Did Ford keep releasing the old 5.0L V8 against the LS1 - was it superior? HELL NO, it sucked big time in comarison. Car makers release what engine they can, not something that is all superior.



My bet is Ford will ditch the Barra for a V6 when the time comes!! Or take a leaf out of BMW's book


Yes Ford will ditch its inline six engine which has been touted as one of the all time greatest aussie engines built :bash: Then they will take a leaf out of BMWs book and build....inline six cylinder engines :lol:

[Drizt]

http://www.cadillacforums.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=3588&stc=1

the above dyno came from the cadillac forums

www.cadillacforums.com/forums

Check them out for more info on the 3.6 HFV6

[PepeLePew]

Come on all, we dont have to get bitchy. I'm probably more on the Ford side of the fence than the Holden, but yet I admit to being disappointed in the BA 6. My expectations were set by media comparisons to BMW etc... Its nice, but having owned an EL XR6 i still recognized a disappointing amount of feel of the old engine in it. Still, its a fair stretch ahead of the 3.8 in everything that counts. The Alloytec? Wait til you drive it....dont throw nuts until the circus starts.

[csv rulz]

i can't wait till the hfv6 comes out with 190kw n A5 it will be pretty good from what has been said. how can a lot of you guys judge it before it has been released tho? just because DRIVE didnt like doesnt meen its no good. MOTOR mag liked it the CARS GUIDE liked it. personaly i think it will be a much better engine than the barra. more power less weight to push better fuel economy. an extra gear. just wait till its realesed then we will c once n for all which is the better car/engine! because nothing is proven in one drive, it takes at least 30000km before you can c how the are. coz wear and tear can make a big impact on the engine. the ford has proven its self now lets give the holden a chance!!! although i have heard rumors that some barra's start to loose power after 40 thou km. and the turbo is worse. there just rumours i have heard come some one clear that up.

they said the problem was due to metal filings getting into the fuel system. :driving:

[csv rulz]

The biggest news for the VZ Commodore and the WL Statesman/Caprice family is the all-new Alloytec V6 engine, which finally gives the car a modern motor after more than 15 years with the old six-pot banger. It is smooth and powerful, with 175 or 190kW, depending on the model.

Few people outside the Holden family and fans will pick the VZ changes at first glance, but a quick drive will win over almost anyone.

The Alloytec V6 makes a world of difference, but there's also a smoother-shifting four-speed auto, a more compliant ride, sharper handling and extra equipment.

The long-running S-pack car has been replaced with the SV6, which will go head to head with the Falcon XR6 that has been crushing the Commodore.

Crucially, Holden has fitted the first electronic stability program on any locally made car and held price rises to less than 1 per cent on most models.

And there is a giant digital speedometer front and centre in every dash to prove the VZ was developed in the age of speed cameras.

"This is our lifeblood," Mooney says. "We have to get this right and we think that we have."

Holden spent $189 million on the upgrade, a job that took nearly two years and included building 46 test cars for 1.6 million kilometres of trials. There were trips to Sweden for tuning of the electronic stability control system. Work on the brakes involved trips to Germany and Korea.

The result is a car that Holden claims is the best Commodore yet, though the VZ is only marginally better at the petrol pumps and doesn't look much different from the VYII or even the VX.

STILL, the value is good and there is a lot of detail work on things such as the automatic gearbox and front suspension tuning. Value-added extras include the latest Bosch anti-skid brake controls, a tyre-pressure monitor on some models, LED tail lamps in the Statesman and Caprice, and front-parking radar.

Holden has switched the safety emphasis on the new Commodore from passive systems to protect people during a crash to active systems that can help to avoid a smash.

They include the stability control, a first for a passenger car, though Ford fitted it to the Territory, and electronic brake force distribution.

These features could be a tough sell because they are not as flashy as CD sound or satnav, but Holden has produced educational videos for showrooms.

But it's hard to avoid the Global V6 in any discussion of the VZ family, despite Mooney's talk.

"There is more than powertrain to talk about. We've also made some big improvements in safety," he says. "The average driver is going to be a much, much better driver."

ON THE ROAD

HOLDEN had a full family of Commodores to try at the VZ press preview over a range of roads near Newcastle, NSW.

All were good, some were better, and the V8-powered Calais was best, even if the focus was on the Alloytec V6 cars. The only disappointment was the SV6. For us, the front suspension tuning was too sharp, the nose moves too much over broken surfaces and there isn't enough bite when you turn.

But the sweet new six does a great job, particularly when you crack on past 6000 revs in most un-Commodore style, and the Aisin six-speed manual gearbox is good with well-spaced ratios. The SV6 is definitely going to make life much tougher for Ford's XRs.

We also tried the 190kW six-pack in a Calais, complete with touch-change five-speed automatic. It was much smoother than we remember from early Calais models, with an automatic eagerness that was very enjoyable and refreshing.

THE 190 V6 will easily twist the tachometer beyond the start of the red zone at 5500 revs, but it also snaps through the ratios and is quiet and refined, with the instant fuel consumption often below 8 litres/100km at freeway cruising pace. It also responds more eagerly, thanks in part to the drive-by-wire throttle system.

The tuning work on the four-speed automatic has paid off and you would barely know the 'box from earlier Commodores. There is barely any flaring on downshifts and it doesn't jerk or clunk the way it did.

The ride of all cars apart from the SV6 seemed a little more plush, and the six-cylinder cars felt to be around 50kg lighter over the front axle. That means a smoother ride and more confidence in corners.

We had no chance to test the electronic stability system, but the latest traction control and anti-skid brakes are fine if you don't mind a slightly mushy brake pedal.

The cosmetic changes to the VZ don't ring our bell, and the cabins seem barely changed at all, but Holden has held the price line and that will be more important to most customers.

[csv rulz]

vzsv6 you were exactly right with your comment on motoring journilists. they need to star evaluating the cars the way they were designed to be driven. the ge calais n berlina's n statesmans n expect them to drive like porsches. no one in the general public is going to drive those cars to there limit. GOOD CALL

[evanjames]

thanks guys for the feedback. I am the first to agree on volvo image. I am currently building a replica of brocks 85 grp a vk so please don't think i am bagging all gmh gear. and I still havent comme accross that many cars that beat the vt to 50kph (barring more grippy stuff). One last post on the ovlov and I'll shut up. The b23e in the gt runs a different cam and has less lowdown (below 2000) torque mut more up high. This is called the K-cam. the regulars had an h cam. On my tacho the orange line starts at just after 6500 (i'd say 6600) and red starts at seven. I am looking foward (not ford) to the day I find an excuse to turf the four for an all alloy gen 111. i used to want to put a p76 alloy eight or even a lexus alloy 8 but why bother with those the ls1 only weighing about 15kg more than my cast iron four it still wont upset the balance and 300is kw in a 1300kg car sounds like fun.

PS how did you blow up a volvo gearbox? Especially an m46 they can take some pretty stout 350 chevs without a hitch. Well done!

Anyone want my wife's vt 1. 236000kms always serviced pretty good nick. and this one doesn't use oil. What is it worth for a private sale???

[csv rulz]

Anyone want my wife's vt 1. 236000kms always serviced pretty good nick. and this one doesn't use oil. What is it worth for a private sale???

its done a lot of km for a vt! you can by vt's as cheap as $9000 now. it depends on how much you want and what some one is willing to pay for it. i know in the trading post a mate picked up a vt for $5500! but that was due to the previouse owner getting devirced n just wanting to get rid of it. i would say between $10000 n $13000 depends on its condition ;)

[slickholden]

I read somewhere else, That as standard form the barra6 has it over the Alloytech175, But as for the Alloytech190 that's a differnt story. They also said the SV6 was a real threat to the XR6 now.

[HSVMAN]

I read somewhere else, That as standard form the barra6 has it over the Alloytech175, But as for the Alloytech190 that's a differnt story. They also said the SV6 was a real threat to the XR6 now.

Reading very favourable reports on the Alloytec just now. Most advanced engine seen in a long time in any Aus produced car, variable valve timing on inlet and exhaust valve cams (175 inlet only) as well as variable intake manifold. 90 per cent of the torque is available from 1570 rpm to 5870rpm. There was much emphasis on reducing noise and vibration.
Holden will be building and supplying the engines to a world wide market with main emphasis being Europe with Opel, Alfa & Saab getting their own specifications of the Alloytec. The latter originally had a hand in the design stages with turbocharging the unit.

[slickholden]

When the turbo hits VE or i pray VZII It's going to shake the performance 6's. It's going to be great, Holden and ford with turbo's, I'd pay a entry fee to watch them go head to head, The return of the poor little XU6T.
Allot of ford guys forget that holden had 16 engineers work for 5 years on this engine with GM, They know every part of it as well as ford know there 6, So with that if this engine wasn't good for a commodore it wouldn't be any good for the Cadillac.
Holden has been driving around with this engine for about 1-2 years in a VX (A Rumor i herd). Since most of the development was done here and 2 other country's. Holden wouldn't get it wrong.

[Roddy]

PS how did you blow up a volvo gearbox? Especially an m46 they can take some pretty stout 350 chevs without a hitch. Well done!



Yeah, my mechanic was pretty impressed too.

Just dialled up 5000rpm, dropped the clutch, axle tramped like a bitch, BANG, cringe, call a towie, think of lame excuse for my sister, buy a carton.....in that order. :)

[HSVMAN]

Sh#t the resale of XR6 over here has really suffered my car is 18mths old and I got it for a steal then (bought an unwanted prize) but Im still gonna loose out if XR6 owners start running to the new SV6. Oh well I could have done worse and bought a volvo......... sorry couldnt resist heh heh
Bah the missus can keep driving the BA cos I got the V8 :D But I'm gonna be checking out the SV6 myself next week - the base units go on sale here early next month

[Swordie]

Its interesting the base motor is putting out 175 when only a few years ago the 5.0 was doing 165.

[slickholden]

Its interesting the base motor is putting out 175 when only a few years ago the 5.0 was doing 165.
True and now the alloytech190 has more power the the VS HSV Senator did in 95.
But even now the VZ SS 250KW Is the same as VTII HSV's had. And VZ monaro has more till VYI HSV, Then it's the same, This Alloytech190 could be the standard donk for VE base and a more powerful Alloytech205 Could be on the cards. + the alloytech275Turbo. By the time VE comes Holden should have made some $$$ on the engine plant, then they might use the 190 standard or wait till VEII.

[IIV8II]

Like I said before, there's some funny stuff in this thread... I am laughing at how some of you - dare I say it - clunkheads seem to define 'technology' and/or 'high-tech'. Especially with reference to the Ford I6, described by one or two on here as an old lump. If something with drive-by-wire, alloy head, variable intake tuning, double variable cam timing, double overhead cams, four-valves per cylinder, roller followers, yadda yadda isn't high tech, then what is? Just because the block is cast-iron and it doesn't have a V in it...

It may not be the highest-tech engine on the planet and I know there are other engines that are better - for alot more unit cost - but the stats stack up pretty well, do they not?

(Oh, and who was the anonymous sook who gave me a 'bad' because I asserted that David Morley wasn't on Ford's payroll? If you got proof, buddy, post it. Otherwise, keep your sooky mouth shut. Or did you not like the Kombi comment? :lol: )

[SSbaby]

Like I said before, there's some funny stuff in this thread... I am laughing at how some of you - dare I say it - clunkheads seem to define 'technology' and/or 'high-tech'. Especially with reference to the Ford I6, described by one or two on here as an old lump. If something with drive-by-wire, alloy head, variable intake tuning, double variable cam timing, double overhead cams, four-valves per cylinder, roller followers, yadda yadda isn't high tech, then what is? Just because the block is cast-iron and it doesn't have a V in it...

It may not be the highest-tech engine on the planet and I know there are other engines that are better - for alot more unit cost - but the stats stack up pretty well, do they not?


Fair points IIV8II.

Perhaps I've been guilty of inciting the commotion in this thread with my original post where I was perhaps unduly critical of the Ford donk.

To compare a modern engine like the Alloytec to the DOHC 4.0L with origins that date back to the 60's, albeit thoroughly modified and modernised over time, is a little disheartening to read that the Ford donk is (still) superior. As you point out, there are better engines around than the 4.0L six and I'm sure that if Ford started with a clean sheet they'd follow a similar path mapped out by Holden by designing a compact engine with V-configuration, all-alloy block with a revised bore-stroke relationship.

Let's face it, the Falcon 4.0L gets the job done - reliable, torquey and reasonably smooth but it also has a few deficiencies: thirsty, heavy (around 50kg heavier than Alloytec) and not so compact. I'm sure that if diehard Ford fans would like to address some issues with Falcon they'd wish for a lighter, more powerful, more efficient engine that would rival the Japanese sixes for smoothness. Holden have tried and we await more reports to find out if they've managed to have all the boxes ticked.

I hope that I have explained myself more clearly in regards to my original comments and I apoligise to the Ford faithful if my comments were construed as derogatory.

[HSVMAN]

Yes I concur with SSBaby in that my own comments were somewhat harsh in referring to the Barra engine as a boat anchor. It is after all a proven engine and yes it does have some pretty good technology (outside the eng block)and I have enjoyed driving one many times.
However if one does require a boat anchor it is suitably capable of performing to the task very well. For all intents and purposes I refer to all large older cast iron engines as boat anchors.
And no an engine does not need to have a V in it to be deemed "hi tech". Mind you I can always go home lift the bonnet of the BA and put one in it with a very large axe.

[slickholden]

Everyone defends the 4.0lt, But what about the poor old V6 that got canned from here to the moon, And that old bugger gets the job done even today still, My mate's VR berlina is a dream to drive and thats before ecotec which is much better, It's not high tech it's pushrod but hey so is the gen3 and that thing does it nice,
So why should the fords 6 be deffended when the good old V6 never was,

[Danv8]

Everyone defends the 4.0lt, But what about the poor old V6 that got canned from here to the moon, And that old bugger gets the job done even today still, My mate's VR berlina is a dream to drive and thats before ecotec which is much better, It's not high tech it's pushrod but hey so is the gen3 and that thing does it nice,
So why should the fords 6 be deffended when the good old V6 never was,


I have a soft spot for the 3800 V6 engine when I had my VP V6 wagon it was reliable, economical and was cheap to service. Also it had pretty good midrange torque so you didn't have to redline it often. The real let down on the V6 was its poor NVH. But in the US turbocharged 3800 in grand nationals are weapons.

[slickholden]

That's right kick it in the guts and it goes, Runs 24/7 runs cheap reliably from A to Z. But it still got canned all the time and i love it. I wouldn't give the VYII calais the flick for it but i might have the V6Supercharged engine ?

[seldo]

IIV8II, SSb, and HSvMAN, I think you've all capitulated too soon without thinking it through. The Ford I6 and Boss engines as well as the GM 3.8 V6 are all boat anchors! Sure, Ford have been clever in tarting up both the I6 and the Boss by sticking high-tech heads on them, but, "high-tech engines"...Nah. It takes far more than just bunging some good heads on a boat-anchor to qualify for the label of high-tech. There's the cast-iron factor for a start. And archaic bore-stroke ratios, and thin-wall construction, and light-weight :eyes: and fuel efficiency, and low-friction internals, and low recipricating masses, and simplicity and integrity of construction, and high rev-limits etc. A pretty good cobble-up, yes. And do they do a fair job - yes. But high-tech - Huh. In yer dreams. There are any number of I6s and V8s (both with and without fancy heads)from European and Japanese (and maybe even USA)manufacturers that could justifiably carry the mantle of high-tech, but I'm sorry, the Barra and the Boss and the Buick V6 sure ain't any of them. Tarted up boat anchors that do a pretty fair job for what they are, is the kindest you can be.

[seldo]

Roddy and evanjames: Psst! I love yer old Volvos more than you will ever know, but read the title of the thread...

[lizardmech]

IIV8II, SSb, and HSvMAN, I think you've all capitulated too soon without thinking it through. The Ford I6 and Boss engines as well as the GM 3.8 V6 are all boat anchors! Sure, Ford have been clever in tarting up both the I6 and the Boss by sticking high-tech heads on them, but, "high-tech engines"...Nah. It takes far more than just bunging some good heads on a boat-anchor to qualify for the label of high-tech. There's the cast-iron factor for a start. And archaic bore-stroke ratios, and thin-wall construction, and light-weight :eyes: and fuel efficiency, and low-friction internals, and low recipricating masses, and simplicity and integrity of construction, and high rev-limits etc. A pretty good cobble-up, yes. And do they do a fair job - yes. But high-tech - Huh. In yer dreams. There are any number of I6s and V8s (both with and without fancy heads)from European and Japanese (and maybe even USA)manufacturers that could justifiably carry the mantle of high-tech, but I'm sorry, the Barra and the Boss and the Buick V6 sure ain't any of them. Tarted up boat anchors that do a pretty fair job for what they are, is the kindest you can be.

I guess the BMW M3 engine is a boat anchor too seeing as it is undersquare and iron.

[IIV8II]

I guess the BMW M3 engine is a boat anchor too seeing as it is undersquare and iron.

... BEAT ME TO IT...!

[Ghia351]

I guess the BMW M3 engine is a boat anchor too seeing as it is undersquare and iron.
It's not a boat anchor because Ford don't make it...badge blindness..can't find it in any medical journals but its as widespread as Labour vs Liberal....

[seldo]

I guess the BMW M3 engine is a boat anchor too seeing as it is undersquare and iron.
Try revving the Barra to 8K + and you will see the difference between high -tech and boat anchors :lol: Just wait until I can stand well clear...:lol:

[lizardmech]

Try revving the Barra to 8K + and you will see the difference between high -tech and boat anchors :lol: Just wait until I can stand well clear...:lol:
I bet if I spent as much as BMW on engine internals it would rev to 8000 rpm.

[IIV8II]

Badge blindness and rev fetishes.... similar narrow-minded outlook. It's like boost fetish for the ricers: "emmuchboosduzzit run, moit?"

If you want to go down that path, EVERY passenger car engine is low-tech, because they don't rev as far as some motorbike engines. Who cares what the tacho says?

[RoadScraper]

A good friend of mine is a mechanic at a Holden dealer here in Adelaide, he was having a chat about the new V6 with the other mechincs at the dealership, they all told me that they are expecting piston slap and oil consumption issues with the HFV6, just like the Gen 3.

Plenty of comments about the apparent lack of technology in the Ford motor compared to the Holden, with bugger all in the way of examples, What are these significant technological advantages you are referring to?

As far as I have read the 190 HFV6 has only just caught up to the specs of the Barra 182 released in 2002.

[Dacious]

Try revving the Barra to 8K + and you will see the difference between high -tech and boat anchors :lol: Just wait until I can stand well clear...:lol:

I don't believe I am actually doing this but you also have to view the context. The Ford DOHC motors are an achievement, especially from a company arguably less free to do what it wants than GM-H. Stopgaps in the techno war maybe. But still good examples of big passenger car engines for street use.

The M3 is a street-fighting production racer, much smaller and lighter, so it can afford to give away some bottom end torque for 200km/h+ performance. It is also streets away for component quality and construction in general, but it costs three times a XR6Ts' cost. It certainly isn't three times as fast. Enough M3s have grenaded in the US - over 100 at last count - to show even BM is not imune from fault. M5 V8s even had their own reprise of LS1itis, which BMW also tried to pretend didn't exist. 'Yes sir, 2.5 litres of oil in 10,000km is perfectly normal!'

Ford may have been blindsided into the modular 4.6 thinking GM was going small-cube Northstar for all it's V8s, but the s/c US versions and the local 4-cammer are a pretty good on-the-fly response to the LS1/6. Give credit where credit is due - at least they're in there fighting with a serious effort instead of laying down and dying. If the new HFV6 is a success, the author is partly Ford and the bar they set.

I think in the coming years we'll see some excellent motors from this new arms race. GM with it's big-bore but physically small and light OHV V8s, and Ford with the smaller displacement but more complex modular engine. Who's right? We'll find out.

We're all the winners.

[Swordie]

A good friend of mine is a mechanic at a Holden dealer here in Adelaide, he was having a chat about the new V6 with the other mechincs at the dealership, they all told me that they are expecting piston slap and oil consumption issues with the HFV6, just like the Gen 3.

Plenty of comments about the apparent lack of technology in the Ford motor compared to the Holden, with bugger all in the way of examples, What are these significant technological advantages you are referring to?

As far as I have read the 190 HFV6 has only just caught up to the specs of the Barra 182 released in 2002.

From what I hear there has been allot of testing on the motor by local Holden Engineers. Testing has indicated the motor will hold up very well. I think they would of learnt from the Ls1 issues. Also asits being built locally Holden will have more control of the manufacturing process.

[Merlin]

Fair points IIV8II.

Perhaps I've been guilty of inciting the commotion in this thread with my original post where I was perhaps unduly critical of the Ford donk.

To compare a modern engine like the Alloytec to the DOHC 4.0L with origins that date back to the 60's, albeit thoroughly modified and modernised over time, is a little disheartening to read that the Ford donk is (still) superior. As you point out, there are better engines around than the 4.0L six and I'm sure that if Ford started with a clean sheet they'd follow a similar path mapped out by Holden by designing a compact engine with V-configuration, all-alloy block with a revised bore-stroke relationship.

Let's face it, the Falcon 4.0L gets the job done - reliable, torquey and reasonably smooth but it also has a few deficiencies: thirsty, heavy (around 50kg heavier than Alloytec) and not so compact. I'm sure that if diehard Ford fans would like to address some issues with Falcon they'd wish for a lighter, more powerful, more efficient engine that would rival the Japanese sixes for smoothness. Holden have tried and we await more reports to find out if they've managed to have all the boxes ticked.

I hope that I have explained myself more clearly in regards to my original comments and I apoligise to the Ford faithful if my comments were construed as derogatory.

Agree completley ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ :)

[slickholden]

I don't wanna sound like a smart arse, So forgive if i do, But how could a S.A Holden dealer mechanic know something more then the alloytech engineers.
The gen3 oil issues will never rise in this new V6.
It's why the LS2 isn't in VZ-I

[slickholden]

GM-H.
Naughty boy there is know more GM-H just Holden Ltd :cheers:

[HSVMAN]

Time will tell for all guys, with the Alloytec what you have is the result of millions of dollars of technology and testing over last couple of years to produce a Global product Holden seem more than happy with.
Happy enough to accept the responsibility of manufacturing hundreds of thousands of high tech (yes high tech) power plants for use all around the world.
Think about it for a minute......
A couple of aussie journalists and someones pet dog says its a failure and suddenly some of the best engineers on this planet have all got it wrong :lol: :lol:
Those that know what you're talking about mechanically understand the design, technology and performance stats.
Those that dont clutch at straws claiming your aunt Cath's neighbour's cousin said this or that so it must be right.
For you Ford supporters, its painfully obvious you are hurting and I offer support and understanding cos I own one too. In time Henry will offer another option for the Barra. They are testing both I6 and V6 in US as Falcon will be sold there however they are rehashed earlier designed engines at this stage.
Maybe the General will sell them a version of Alloytec......

[BA$TAD]

Time will tell for all guys, with the Alloytec what you have is the result of millions of dollars of technology and testing over last couple of years to produce a Global product Holden seem more than happy with.
Happy enough to accept the responsibility of manufacturing hundreds of thousands of high tech (yes high tech) power plants for use all around the world.
Think about it for a minute......
A couple of aussie journalists and someones pet dog says its a failure and suddenly some of the best engineers on this planet have all got it wrong :lol: :lol:
Those that know what you're talking about mechanically understand the design, technology and performance stats.
Those that dont clutch at straws claiming your aunt Cath's neighbour's cousin said this or that so it must be right.
For you Ford supporters, its painfully obvious you are hurting and I offer support and understanding cos I own one too. In time Henry will offer another option for the Barra. They are testing both I6 and V6 in US as Falcon will be sold there however they are rehashed earlier designed engines at this stage.
Maybe the General will sell them a version of Alloytec......

Mate get your hand off it. It is a great step for Holden but it ISN'T the be all and end all of engines. :rolleyes: I ain't hurting and why would I? My I6 is ultra smooth and at 550km to a tank of fuel I am happy why would I want to swap it? ;)

[HSVMAN]

Mate get your hand off it. It is a great step for Holden but it ISN'T the be all and end all of engines. :rolleyes: I ain't hurting and why would I? My I6 is ultra smooth and at 550km to a tank of fuel I am happy why would I want to swap it? ;)

No-one said it was the be all of engines..... If you werent hurting you wouldnt have posted this thread :lol:

[BA$TAD]

No-one said it was the be all of engines..... If you werent hurting you wouldnt have posted this thread :lol:
haha me hurting no i'm not just laughing at the idiotic ignorant comments in this thread such as yours. Can't wait to see the disappointment on your face when you actually drive a car with this V6. While it is an improvement over the previous V6 (esp the top end of the engine), it is still rough in patches esp at idle. I honestly hope this engine succeeds well. Why? Because it is being made here, Holden employ Aussies...

[PepeLePew]

A good friend of mine is a mechanic at a Holden dealer here in Adelaide, he was having a chat about the new V6 with the other mechincs at the dealership, they all told me that they are expecting piston slap and oil consumption issues with the HFV6, just like the Gen 3.

Plenty of comments about the apparent lack of technology in the Ford motor compared to the Holden, with bugger all in the way of examples, What are these significant technological advantages you are referring to?

Please tell us how this 'information' could be regarded as reliable or meaningful?

Seriously, this thread is seriously degenerating into he said she said, how about we get back on track with some useful discussion?

[HSVMAN]

Exactly! My case rests....
I will have the opportunity to contribute some first hand, mechanically qualified opinions next week after getting the opportunity to drive both the 175 & 190 in varying conditions and competitively comparing the various models :D

[Drizt]

Exactly! My case rests....
I will have the opportunity to contribute some first hand, mechanically qualified opinions next week after getting the opportunity to drive both the 175 & 190 in varying conditions and competitively comparing the various models :D


we look forward to your review mate
:cool:

[Knight Phlier]

haha Can't wait to see the disappointment on your face when you actually drive a car with this V6. While it is an improvement over the previous V6 (esp the top end of the engine), it is still rough in patches esp at idle...

And who are you quoting that the engine is 'rough in patches' ?

Have you taken this car/engine for a drive YOURSELF or are you going on what the drive.com.au journalists (Joshua Downling and Bob Jennings?) are saying? I don't hear of any other publication being 'dissapointed' other than those that are Fairfax journalists...

[Danv8]

[QUOTE=BA$TAD]haha me hurting no i'm not just laughing at the idiotic ignorant comments in this thread such as yours. Can't wait to see the disappointment on your face when you actually drive a car with this V6.

And what if it does not dissapoint HSVMAN ? Left with egg on your bonnet? :D

[slickholden]

What's this I6 stuff, And what's with, Is it only high tech because it's V ? Are they saying cause it's a V we say it's high tech i haven't seen anyone say cause it's V6 it's got to be higher in technology. Can someone tell me where all this mumbo jumbo came from.
Cause you sit back and read you get holden's boys looking at the good side of the reviews there are plenty only 1 bad review. Then you have the ford boys throwing spanners in there doing there own reviews on the engine, Then accusing Holden's fans of being biased, (IT IS A HOLDEN FORUM) Expect that sometimes. As you should in a ford forum.

[SSbaby]

IIV8II, SSb, and HSvMAN, I think you've all capitulated too soon without thinking it through.

It's also poor form to rubbish the other team's product.

The 'truth' about the Alloytec will eventually surface and I have no doubt about which engine of the two protagonists is technically superior. BUT, in the case that the Alloytec is overrated, it would say very little for the integrity of the impending LS2, as we have learnt from the LS1 experience.

I'm just keeping an open mind at this stage.

[seldo]

At risk of perpetuating this one-eyed defence of the supposed high-tech :lol: Barra and Boss engines, let me just repeat what I have previously said. The Barra and Boss are both very good engines and do a damn fine job for what they are. But they are both very old low-tech designs which Ford has dragged into the 21st century by the clever substitution of some high-tech cylinder heads. To call them high-tech engines is like saying a bloke wearing some fancy shoes with his trackies makes him well dressed. On the other hand the Alloytec is a high-tech engine and represents pretty-much the best of current engine technology throughout. That makes it a high-tech engine. Having said that I am certainly not saying it makes it a great engine, because neither you nor I can pass judgement on that yet because we haven't even seen it, let alone driven it yet. And I do not place much faith in the opinions of a couple of daily rag journos who wouldn't know if they had a variable-phased cam placed where it made for great discomfort when sitting.. Until the Alloytec engine has had at least 6 months in the market, and at least until we have driven it,none of us can make any valued judgement on it. So try to redeem some credibilty and acknowledge that Barra is not a high-tech engine. It is a damn good engine, but high-tech..Nah

[RAWCUS]

At risk of perpetuating this one-eyed defence of the supposed high-tech :lol: Barra and Boss engines, let me just repeat what I have previously said. The Barra and Boss are both very good engines and do a damn fine job for what they are. But they are both very old low-tech designs which Ford has dragged into the 21st century by the clever substitution of some high-tech cylinder heads. To call them high-tech engines is like saying a bloke wearing some fancy shoes with his trackies makes him well dressed. On the other hand the Alloytec is a high-tech engine and represents pretty-much the best of current engine technology throughout. That makes it a high-tech engine. Having said that I am certainly not saying it makes it a great engine, because neither you nor I can pass judgement on that yet because we haven't even seen it, let alone driven it yet. And I do not place much faith in the opinions of a couple of daily rag journos who wouldn't know if they had a variable-phased cam placed where it made for great discomfort when sitting.. Until the Alloytec engine has had at least 6 months in the market, and at least until we have driven it,none of us can make any valued judgement on it. So try to redeem some credibilty and acknowledge that Barra is not a high-tech engine. It is a damn good engine, but high-tech..Nah

If your a lawyer, you just one your case mate, couldnt agree more!!!!, good to see there are still a few die hard Ford faithfulls still living in the glory days of the GT, and who knows without Ford, we wouldnt have the Great peformance race in the first place, and would still be putting around in 202's with fancy heads (and calling them high tech :lol: ) but i think its fair to say that Holden are offering better engines in lighter cars with better handling, fuel consumption, better availability of aftermarket peformance parts and greatest of all HIGHER RESALE VALUES....GAME OVER :lol:

[SSbaby]

I agree (as I have stated many times) the Ford donk isn't exactly 'state of the art' - an engine that has carried the company under various guises for the last 40 years. Holden have at least updated their 6s throughout the same period - from the old 189 and 202, VL 3.0L, Ecotec V6 to Alloytec.

It's OK to be constructive but let's not get carried away by making over-the-top comments just because some of the dark-siders give us a bit of 'needle' from time to time. We should be focusing more on GM's engines than worrying about Ford's, regardless of how certain journo's choose to write up their 'appraisal' of the Alloytec.

[slickholden]

You guys wanna see some wheels have a cap cook at this. The old 3.0lt at work here.
http://www.ultimatecarpage.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=43665

[XA coupe]

FFS .. anyone that believes a journalists opinion needs their head read.

[Knight Phlier]

You guys wanna see some wheels have a cap cook at this. The old 3.0lt at work here.
http://www.ultimatecarpage.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=43665

slickholden - Can't access the link / picture...

[slickholden]

slickholden - Can't access the link / picture...
Yes how do i do that mate ?

[evanjames]

would it be possibel to purchase a hfvd form holden??? Seems like a light and free revving thing to me (ideal for an engine transplant). What does it weigh???

It seems to have some potential too.. There are a few 3.5 ish litre dohc sixs producing well over 200kw at around six thou rpm. try 350z or even......porsche. Their 3.6 (i know it's a flat 6) produces great torque and power without massive revs, event the merc 3.7 has enough torque to pull a sailor of your sister and then make 200kw at lower revs. Methinks holden will have many un upgrade for this beasty as time goes on. 3.8 went from 125 (vn) to 152 (vx) how about a 210kw sv6???

[slickholden]

would it be possibel to purchase a hfvd form holden??? Seems like a light and free revving thing to me (ideal for an engine transplant). What does it weigh???

It seems to have some potential too.. There are a few 3.5 ish litre dohc sixs producing well over 200kw at around six thou rpm. try 350z or even......porsche. Their 3.6 (i know it's a flat 6) produces great torque and power without massive revs, event the merc 3.7 has enough torque to pull a sailor of your sister and then make 200kw at lower revs. Methinks holden will have many un upgrade for this beasty as time goes on. 3.8 went from 125 (vn) to 152 (vx) how about a 210kw sv6???
That's a good question,
.................................................. .................................................. .................................................. ...................... Not sure would be hard to get one new from holden. Maybe i smashed one with low kays be the best deal.
Also remember this engine is detuned like Pavarotti on weed so it's got plenty more maybe 240kw-260kw potential

[SSbaby]

Here's another VZ review but not much said about the new engine... GoAuto (http://www.goauto.com.au/mellor/mellor.nsf/story2/EAC0CA5EB0D6A635CA256EF5001C9CE3)

[SSbaby]

Drive's VZ/Alloytec video review... here (http://media.drive.com.au/?rid=14510&sy=drive&source=drive.com.au%2F).

[IIV8II]

I agree (as I have stated many times) the Ford donk isn't exactly 'state of the art' - an engine that has carried the company under various guises for the last 40 years. Holden have at least updated their 6s throughout the same period - from the old 189 and 202, VL 3.0L, Ecotec V6 to Alloytec.

It's OK to be constructive but let's not get carried away by making over-the-top comments just because some of the dark-siders give us a bit of 'needle' from time to time. We should be focusing more on GM's engines than worrying about Ford's, regardless of how certain journo's choose to write up their 'appraisal' of the Alloytec.

Various guises for 40 years? Um, righhhhhht! I challenge you to identify any component or technology from 40 years ago that is used in the current Falcon engine. Its had five new heads, totally new architecture several times, cranks, cams, management, oil pump .... Nothing is the same except the bore spacing and that's a manufacturing consideration that has nothing to do with 'technology'.


Rawcus, seldo and a couple of others - To me, your posts display an ignorance of both what 'technology' means and a lack of knowledge of what specs these engines actually carry... if dual VVT, DOHC, four valves, alloy head, variable intake tract, deep skirted blocks with cross-bolting, internally balanced cranks, a rough facsimile of displacement on demand (coolant loss protection) and TC/vehicle stability ability etc thanks to FBW throttle control isn't a fine use of currently available technology, then I don't know what is...

About the only thing I can think of that isn't state of the art for passenger car engines is alloy block with etched one-use-only bores

Get over the iron block and rod length blabberings - it works very well for its intended purpose. Design 101 will learn ya that the best design/technology is the stuff that is best for the job. I've never seen 8000rpm towing a 2100 Lewis ski boat and pig iron is good for block architecture stability... err, in clunkspeak, that means 'durability' and 'long life'

Feel free to respond... :D
EDIT: Forgot the structural sumps..

[SSbaby]

Various guises for 40 years? Um, righhhhhht! I challenge you to identify any component or technology from 40 years ago that is used in the current Falcon engine. Its had five new heads, totally new architecture several times, cranks, cams, management, oil pump .... Nothing is the same except the bore spacing and that's a manufacturing consideration that has nothing to do with 'technology'.


Only bore spacing, you say ... Um, righhhhhht!


How about it's basic design like bore/stroke ratio?
Why is the block still iron (don't tell me the iron block has nothing to do with technology as alloy blocks are a manufacturing challenge)?
Why is it so heavy-(heavier than the LS1)?
Why is it not compact (which most modern engines seem to be) and
tell me why it uses more fuel than any other six (and has always done so, even when VT was heavier than AU)?

That'll be my challenge to you!!! :D

[seldo]

IIV8II: Phew! We are a little thin-skinned today...Everyone agrees that it has a good modern cylinder head and most of the other stuff is current fuel system technology although claiming DOD is stretching the facts a bit... Just wondering though, if it's had 5 different heads in its life and it isn't an old technology basic design, it must have been way ahead of its time 40 years ago :lol: But don't be so precious about it old mate - most people agree that it's a pretty good engine, I just laugh when you lump the whole engine into the high-tech basket. Apart from the bolt-ons, from the block face down, it's an old clunker. Face it. But, quite a good old clunker..;) Most of the stuff you are claiming as such leading technology was incorporated in the Jag XK series engine of the '50s (except I don't believe the Barra has the standard total loss oil-leakage system that the Jags had :lol: ) Mind you, some would claim that's not such a bad thing to be compared with, and yes, they did use those in Dennis fire engines for all the same long-stroke, slow-revving, good lugging reasons too. I can see it in 20 years time you'll still be claiming that the Mackerel (or whatever the Barra has morphed into by then) is still a high-tech engine with its 5 valve variable inlet, DOD (real, at last), direct injection, twin turbo etc putting out 350kw at an earth -shattering 5000 rpm and the poor arthritic old bottom end saying "I knew I could, I knew I could"...(apologies to Thomas the Tank engine) :)

[RoadScraper]

I don't wanna sound like a smart arse, So forgive if i do, But how could a S.A Holden dealer mechanic know something more then the alloytech engineers.
The gen3 oil issues will never rise in this new V6.
It's why the LS2 isn't in VZ-I

Never said they did mate, It was a comment I heard while standing around with 20 or so mechanics(including my mate) I didn't say it, they did.... and given that they work all day on cars and I don't I tend to think they are more qualified to comment than say a bunch of guys on the internet who have no contact mechanically with the cars at all.

I bet the engineers who made the gen 3 in the states weren;t expecting oil consumptions issues, just the same as Holden weren't expecting issues with the transfer case on the cross trac awd system...

Honestly other than an alloy block what does the Alloytech have that the Ford motor hasn't had for 2 years? I mean some people here seem to say it is so much further advanced etc etc but looking at the specs it just doesn't seem to add up, so perhaps some examples.

[Ghia351]

Only bore spacing, you say ... Um, righhhhhht!


How about it's basic design like bore/stroke ratio?
Why is the block still iron (don't tell me the iron block has nothing to do with technology as alloy blocks are a manufacturing challenge)?
Why is it so heavy-(heavier than the LS1)?
Why is it not compact (which most modern engines seem to be) and
tell me why it uses more fuel than any other six (and has always done so, even when VT was heavier than AU)?

That'll be my challenge to you!!! :D

I hope for all you Holden fans sakes the next BA vs VZ roadtest is a resounding vistory to the VZ otherwise not enough anti-depressants or psychologists will pull you out of your despair.

Seriously SSbaby, bore centres and an iron block are all you can argue successfully on. You really have taken one article to new heights of sourness. I'm sure with more roadtests and more importantly individual drives we will all discover that the Alloytec can in fact surpass a 40 year old boat anchor..it better, otherwise I'm going into the drug business to produce some anti-depressants. If GM Powertrain didn't develop the HFV6 what would Holden have done...tried to build their own...I don't think so.

I don't know of any inline six of 4 litres that is considerably shorter then the Barra 182, I didn't know the VT was ever heavier then an AU and an engines fuel efficiency is directly effected by the mass it has to pull so unless we stuck a Barra in a VZ or placed enough ballast in a VZ to match a BA how will we ever know which engine is more efficient? Any way, you drive a V8 so why the rather continuous and boring hang up with Ford's I6. I'm waiting with baited breathe for the next comparison.

[seldo]

Ghia; You may well be correct. There is certainly nothing wrong with the Barra - it does a damn good job, and, who knows yet, it may turn out that in a back to back test that an old clunker I6 is seen to be a better thing than the latest GM high-tech V6. After all, there is no substitute for capacity.

[RoadScraper]

Drive didn't seem real impressed with the motor..Certainly didn't say it was crap, but he did say...."dissapointing for an engine thats meant to be world class"

Maybe he's on the Ford payroll as well?

[Merlin]

but i think its fair to say that Holden are offering better engines in lighter cars with better handling, fuel consumption, better availability of aftermarket peformance parts and greatest of all HIGHER RESALE VALUES....GAME OVER :lol:

Better engine: The Ford engines hold their own against the Commodore ones - the new V6 isnt even out yet your still using a Buik engine from the 50's.

Lighter cars: Got me their

Fuel consumption: Directly related to lighter cars

Better handling: :lol: Your a joker mate, dosnt the Commodore suspension date back to the eighties?

Higher resale values: BA have higher resale values than Vys

GAME OVER - Toss on..... :bash:

[vzsv6]

BA have higher resale values than Vys

Err, I don't think so buddy.
http://www.ls1.com.au/forum/showthread.php?t=28136

[Ghia351]

Ghia; You may well be correct. There is certainly nothing wrong with the Barra - it does a damn good job, and, who knows yet, it may turn out that in a back to back test that an old clunker I6 is seen to be a better thing than the latest GM high-tech V6. After all, there is no substitute for capacity.

Cheers Seldo, although as I posted somewhere before, I would still expect the Alloytec/A5 combo to be a better powertrain then the BA I6 until a BA is A6 equipped and then it will be really interesting Sooner or later Ford will have to consider a change of the block construction if nothing else and as is widely agreed the BA/I6 combo shows the best chassis balance of all the range which makes the turbo an even more special beast.

[Ghia351]

Err, I don't think so buddy.
http://www.ls1.com.au/forum/showthread.php?t=28136

I don't think posting a link to another thread on this LS1 forum suddenly proves or disproves the resale point with all due respect. And the VYII has been in discount from release also forcing Ford dealers to sharpen their pencils and lets not even mention Magna's.

[seldo]

Cheers Seldo, although as I posted somewhere before, I would still expect the Alloytec/A5 combo to be a better powertrain then the BA I6 until a BA is A6 equipped and then it will be really interesting Sooner or later Ford will have to consider a change of the block construction if nothing else and as is widely agreed the BA/I6 combo shows the best chassis balance of all the range which makes the turbo an even more special beast.
Well, you'd certainly hope that after spending $167M developing the engine that it should work out ok, but it is no guarantee. The A5 will/should? also make a difference and you would think that the combination should give Ford something to aim at for their next up-grade. We will soon see...As I said in another thread, with the new A5 cars running a 2.78 diff it might be a good time for all you guys with useless 3.07s under your bed to dust them off ready for the VZs after-market.. :cheers:

[seldo]

[QUOTE=Merlin]

Higher resale values: BA have higher resale values than Vys

QUOTE]
Depends whether you own a BA or or a VY..:lol:

[Ghia351]

Does anyone know when dealer stock of VZ arrives or if any Melb. dealers already have something yet.

[Ghia351]

Well, you'd certainly hope that after spending $167M developing the engine that it should work out ok, but it is no guarantee.

I may be wrong however the quoted $167 million I thought referred to the whole VZ development as the HFV6 engine factory in Fishy bend is a $400 million dollar investment alone.

[IIV8II]

IIV8II: Phew! We are a little thin-skinned today.. :)

Thin-skinned? Nah, just healthy discussion. Lovin' it. And I like opening clunkheads' and ricers' eyes and brains (!) to a few facts every now and then. Okay - so you and others reckon (or imply) the Ford Barra is not 'high tech' despite the fact it uses just about every mass-market technology trick in the book... so what is high tech? (Not leading-edge.... as you say) And what engines on sale in Oz are 'high tech' and what additional technology do they use that the HF Holden/BA Falcon doesn't? Lexus? Benz? Daewoo?

[slickholden]

Never said they did mate, It was a comment I heard while standing around with 20 or so mechanics(including my mate) I didn't say it, they did.... and given that they work all day on cars and I don't I tend to think they are more qualified to comment than say a bunch of guys on the internet who have no contact mechanically with the cars at all.

I bet the engineers who made the gen 3 in the states weren;t expecting oil consumptions issues, just the same as Holden weren't expecting issues with the transfer case on the cross trac awd system...

Honestly other than an alloy block what does the Alloytech have that the Ford motor hasn't had for 2 years? I mean some people here seem to say it is so much further advanced etc etc but looking at the specs it just doesn't seem to add up, so perhaps some examples.
All i said was how could they know more then Holden engineers that's it, To be honest they would know about as much as us what they read from specs thats about it till they see it in the flesh. And i didn't say anyhting about the ford engine.
And oil problems with gen3 they knew but what can you do scrap it and start again no way they spend billions on develepment, they just couldn't exsplain why it did it in engine 1 and not engine 2.

[Merlin]

Err, I don't think so buddy.
http://www.ls1.com.au/forum/showthread.php?t=28136

Source Drive.com.au
BA XT 2003 Model
Private sale $20K-$24K

VY Exec 2003 Model
Private sale $17K-$21K

BA Falcon XR8 2003 Model
Private sale $33K-$40K

VY Commodore SS 2003 Model
Private sale $31K-$38K

I know its off topic but I hate being right all the time :lol:

[BA$TAD]

And who are you quoting that the engine is 'rough in patches' ?

Have you taken this car/engine for a drive YOURSELF or are you going on what the drive.com.au journalists (Joshua Downling and Bob Jennings?) are saying? I don't hear of any other publication being 'dissapointed' other than those that are Fairfax journalists...

I have taken a ride on a VZ ute.

[vzsv6]

Source Drive.com.au
BA XT 2003 Model
Private sale $20K-$24K

VY Exec 2003 Model
Private sale $17K-$21K

BA Falcon XR8 2003 Model
Private sale $33K-$40K

VY Commodore SS 2003 Model
Private sale $31K-$38K

I know its off topic but I hate being right all the time :lol:

Source: drive.com.au - That just says it all.

If you think you're so right about this then I'll give you a little challenge: Go through the classifieds and find me an 03 VY Exec under $20K :D :bash:

[vzsv6]

I have taken a ride on a VZ ute.

So that means that you can't really judge, being 'on' the ute rather than inside it. :D

[Ghia351]

Source: drive.com.au - That just says it all.

If you think you're so right about this then I'll give you a little challenge: Go through the classifieds and find me an 03 VY Exec under $20K :D :bash:

I searched the following limiting to dealers only and found 4 so private sale should have more....http://www.carsales.com.au

[BA$TAD]

So that means that you can't really judge, being 'on' the ute rather than inside it. :D
:rolleyes: ok well spelling mistakes aside i took a ride IN a ute on July 14. It was a black 175kw 6 sp manual. you want to know the exact time?? it was 21:45.

[vzsv6]

I searched the following limiting to dealers only and found 4 so private sale should have more....http://www.carsales.com.au

Yeah, 4 VY's at $19,990. Wow, a $10 difference. That really adds strength to your argument. There were no private sale VY's under $20K at all.


Source Drive.com.au
BA XT 2003 Model
Private sale $20K-$24K

VY Exec 2003 Model
Private sale $17K-$21K

So much for this bulls**t

[Ghia351]

Yeah, 4 VY's at $19,990. Wow, a $10 difference. That really adds strength to your argument. There were no private sale VY's under $20K at all.



So much for this bulls**t

I didn't make any such claim, just took up your challenge..I'll let your comments pass as you only just joined this forum and will gain wisdom with time...

[Drizt]

:rolleyes: ok well spelling mistakes aside i took a ride IN a ute on July 14. It was a black 175kw 6 sp manual. you want to know the exact time?? it was 21:45.

ummmm theres no such vehicle...

maybe u mean 5 sp manual

[Emre]

OMFG...

The same people that were defending OHV over DOHC a couple of months ago, are now jumping on the technology bandwagon.

Yeah, Barra 6 is a boat anchor, because it has an iron block. :rolleyes:

Melbourne Clown Central Registry must envy some of the talent on this board.

[PepeLePew]

Padlockin across the universe......

Where is that darn thing when you need it!

Too many barbed comments, not enough review of the actual technology (sorry to those who did post said content). Come on guys, the OHV vs DOHC threads were actually a reasonable read. 'Boat anchor' is not a technical term. Help us all learn by keeping the thread constuctive.

[RICHO]

To be honest if I WAS going to anchor a boat, have to say I'd go for the I6.

Those damn alloy engines are just too bloody light, boat would get dragged even on a gentle tide.

[Knight Phlier]

:rolleyes: ok well spelling mistakes aside i took a ride IN a ute on July 14. It was a black 175kw 6 sp manual. you want to know the exact time?? it was 21:45.

Hmmmm.. Whilst I do respect your opinion that the 175 isn't the most advanced engine in the world - May I ask why both you and the drive journalists have only compared the Alloytech 175 with the old clunker gearbox and not the new Alloytech 190 with all the new engine technologies and gearboxes?

This is probably why so many ppl here think there are biased opinions....

So let me ask - what do you think the SV6 should be compared to - The XR6 or the XR6 Turbo?

[RICHO]

IMO (as an FF) it's all pretty simple, you compare models based on features and price and not on engine power. Therefore:
Exec v XT
Acclaim v Future
Berline v Fairmont
Calais v Fairmont Ghia
SV6 v XR6
???? v XR6T
SS v XR8


Off all those comparions, IMO the biggest gaps exist in Holden's favour exist at the Calais and Acclaim levels. Exec v XT is still damb close, SV6 and XR6 is still fairly close though swinging slightly to Holden, Berlina v Farimont swings to Holden because of the 190kw engines + features (I think the Berlina gets the 190kw engine??) SS v XR8 has traditionally been a Holden win IMO but I'll wait to see what impact Ford's new 6 speed and different diff ratios has there and Holden simply don't have a direct competitor for the XR6T at this stage. After all feature wise they may be close the XR6T is about $5-6k more expensive than an SV6 and has significantly more power and torque, so IMO it's in a different market to the SV6.

Features on the Accliam lift it above the Futura reagrdless of an "issues" with how smooth the new 175kw V6 is, and features AND performance on the Calais lift it above the Fairmont Ghia.

Just my 2 cents of course

[SSbaby]

Seriously SSbaby, bore centres and an iron block are all you can argue successfully on. You really have taken one article to new heights of sourness. I'm sure with more roadtests and more importantly individual drives we will all discover that the Alloytec can in fact surpass a 40 year old boat anchor..it better, otherwise I'm going into the drug business to produce some anti-depressants. If GM Powertrain didn't develop the HFV6 what would Holden have done...tried to build their own...I don't think so.

I don't know of any inline six of 4 litres that is considerably shorter then the Barra 182, I didn't know the VT was ever heavier then an AU and an engines fuel efficiency is directly effected by the mass it has to pull so unless we stuck a Barra in a VZ or placed enough ballast in a VZ to match a BA how will we ever know which engine is more efficient? Any way, you drive a V8 so why the rather continuous and boring hang up with Ford's I6. I'm waiting with baited breathe for the next comparison.

Forgive me for being an enthusiast and responding to your original post where you were hoping that the Alloytec would be better than some reviews suggest, just so that it keeps Ford honest.

So far the only real criticism of the Alloytec is that it sounds like the old engine and is rather noisy at the top end - could it be induction roar? Nobody has said that the engine is unwilling to rev or lacking grunt. A back-to-back test will reveal all.

Why the continuous hang up with the Ford's I6? Personally, I would feel peeved if I were a fan of the FoMoCo for failing to invest in a totally new engine at least once in 40 years. If you are happy to have Ford manufacture an engine that appears to be good enough rather than 'state of the art', an engine that could be exported to other parts of the Ford world and power various vehicles, not to mention create new jobs in Australia, then you are looking at Ford through rose coloured glasses.

You have to be ultra competitive in the automotive industry. I'm sorry if you don't see things that way.

[Phido]

Executive v XT
Acclaim v Futura
Berlina v Fairmont
Calais v Fairmont Ghia
SV6 v XR6
SV8 v XR6T
SS V XR8

Thats how I see the lineup. Holdens fighting the Turbo with the SV8, which although not exactly the same deal, are the closest fit. Holdens betting that its buyers would perfer the V8 (burble etc) over any forced six.

No maker really has a across the board advantage. Holden has a strong premium lineup with Calais, Acclaim and even Berlina which have clear advances over the Ford lineup. Ford will do ok with XR6T and XR8 and XT, but the rest of the lineup is falling behind because of the nonexistant MkII update.


I would feel peeved if I were a fan of the FoMoCo for failing to invest in a totally new engine at least once in 40 years.
Hmm but in that time the I6 has been reasonably competitive. Its not like Holden spent big dollars developing new six cylinders over the past 40 years. In the E series years the Ford held quite a advantage in power and torque.

Ford does export I6 engines to be use in other vechicals, like the manta. It is a good engine, it much better than any other Ford six cylinder engine out there and suits its application. Sure its a bit oddball, but its not bad. Its one of the reasons Ford didn't even really look at the 4.6L engines, because our 4.0 was so close.

New engines don't mean better engines. Holden went from the 3.0L Rb30E and Rb30ET engines to the 3.8L and that certainly wasn't better, power hardly rose, NVH was much worse, transmissions were worse etc, there is no way someone can claim the supercharged 3.8 had anything on the turbo 3.0..

The ford six doesn't create new jobs because it was always built here. Claiming holdens engine is much better than Fords because the old one was imported and they now make them here, to fords that was always made here seems silly. How much of Holdens engine is made here? Block? Nup. Cams? Nup. Transmissions? Nup. Thats a fair hunk of the engine that ford all makes here and Holden imports. Thats about as Australian as the Nissan RB30E engine (heads made here almost everything else was imported).

The real disapointment for Ford is the Mk II update. Ford should have included stability programs and didn't, should have tweaked power and didn't, should have got new autos but didn't. On some models Ford has a 30kw deificet and lots of features missing yet doesn't seem concerned.

[Danv8]

New engines don't mean better engines. Holden went from the 3.0L Rb30E and Rb30ET engines to the 3.8L and that certainly wasn't better, power hardly rose, NVH was much worse, transmissions were worse etc, there is no way someone can claim the supercharged 3.8 had anything on the turbo 3.0..

Although the 3800 had more torque than the RB30 engine plus parts were cheaper to get for the 3.8 and the heads don't crack as easily. Even the auto trans were stronger than the jap units used with the RB30 engine. The RB30T does have an excellent advantage producing more power with modifications. But the RB30 non turbo was pretty average in stock form best thing about it was it was smooth but rather down on torque.

[Swordie]

If the 175 is being compared to the VY 3.8 in terms of noise, I disagree that the 3.8 is noisy. Most driving conditions do not require the motor to be reeved out. The motor is quite smooth and refined in most situations. The motor if flattened is noisier, what do you expect?

I don’t understand how people get these perceptions about noise. Is it because a journalist said so or could it being they had an earlier version of the 3.8? If people are driving LS1’s and Fords how do you come to this conclusion?

The LS1 when first released by Holden was criticized for being to quite by some, some people buy V8s over turbo charged 4s and 6s because they love the V8 sound.

It’s certainly hard for Holden to please everyone. If you look at the sales figures the public have voted with dollars.

[slickholden]

Also VYII and VZ can push the price down on a VYI very easy compared that to the BA which is still in it's first series, When BAII comes you will see the price come down fast. I don't think it's a fair comparison at this time.

[Dacious]

Ford does export I6 engines to be use in other vechicals, like the manta. It is a good engine, it much better than any other Ford six cylinder engine out there and suits its application.

Not really. The current all-alloy Ford Duratec V6 in the Jaguar produces 3kw less and barely less and torque from 3 litres. The Jaguar weighs several huindred kilos less and performs pretty much on par with the n/a Falcon. From a much smaller and lighter -not to mention shorter engine. It is due out in 3.5-3.8 litre size next year. Economies of scale will possibly sound the deathknell for the straight six, especially if the FTA goes through. Seeing as this motor is already used in the potential replacements for the Falcon (Mazda 6, US Fords) you're not on strong ground here.

This is likely the motor the next gen Falcon will have - whether it's on the Mustang/Lincoln/Jaguar chassis or the '1959' local job or comes as a big Mazda 6. If that is the case, likely wave bye-bye to local manufacture. One of these potential 'Falcons' would be front wheel drive, at least for lower spec models....


How much of Holdens engine is made here? Block? Nup. Cams? Nup. Transmissions? Nup. Thats a fair hunk of the engine that ford all makes here and Holden imports. Thats about as Australian as the Nissan RB30E engine (heads made here almost everything else was imported).

Holden makes lots of 4 cylinder motors - 3 million by 1997 - for Oz and overseas and has for years. Far more than Ford does 6's. Ford gets it's performance manual trans from Mexico, like Holden does. Maybe all of them if the FTA kills the Oz transmission plant.

The local company which provides castings to Holden is Ion, the same company which provides castings to Ford - presumably for cylinder heads and trans. This company is tooling up to provide V6 blocks from 2006.

'The plant has three machining and sub-assembly lines for the engine's block, crankshaft and cylinder heads. The engines are then built on a common assembly line before being sent to domestic or export customers. The layout allows for the removal of internal forklift usage, an important employee safety initiative.'

Doesn't sound like they import a fully machined block to me....

Ford's plans for local engine manufacture include ....... and ........... ?:confused:

[slickholden]

Not really. The current all-alloy 3 litre Ford V6 in the Jaguar produces 3kw less and barely less and torque from 3 litres. From a much smaller and lighter -not to mention shorter engine. It is due out in 3.5-3.8 litre size next year. Economies of scale will possibly sound the deathknell for the straight six, especially if the FTA goes through. Seeing as this motor is already used in the potential replacements for the Falcon you're not on strong ground here.

This is likely the motor the next gen Falcon will have - whether it's on the Mustang/Lincoln/Jaguar chassis or the '1959' local job or comes as a big Mazda 6. If that is the case, likely wave bye-bye to local manufacture. One of these potential 'Falcons' would be front wheel drive, at least for lower spec models....



Holden makes lots of 4 cylinder motors - 3 million by 1997 - for Oz and overseas and has for years. Far more than Ford does 6's. Ford gets it's performance manual trans from Mexico, like Holden does. Maybe all of them if the FTA kills the Oz transmission plant.

The local company which provides castings to Holden is Ion, the same company which provides castings to Ford - presumably for cylinder heads and trans. This company is tooling up to provide V6 blocks from 2006.

'The plant has three machining and sub-assembly lines for the engine's block, crankshaft and cylinder heads. The engines are then built on a common assembly line before being sent to domestic or export customers. The layout allows for the removal of internal forklift usage, an important employee safety initiative.'

Doesn't sound like they import a fully machined block to me....

Ford's plans for local engine manufacture include ....... and ........... ?:confused:
In the last 5 lines on the bottom was that about ford or holden ?

[Dacious]

It's from Holdens' corporate info page describing the new V6 plant at Fishermans Bend.

[slickholden]

It's from Holdens' corporate info page describing the new V6 plant at Fishermans Bend.
Ohhh it's a good read. :)

[XA coupe]

damn there is drivel flowing here. As usual, the select few have turned it into a slanging match crapping on about the barra 6 instead of discussing the new engine. I dunno why I expected any different.

[HSVMAN]

damn there is drivel flowing here. As usual, the select few have turned it into a slanging match crapping on about the barra 6 instead of discussing the new engine. I dunno why I expected any different.

Its all good reading with a bit of crap slung here and there which just happened to start from non Holden supporters :shock:
So to get it thrown back on a forum full of pro holden people all eager to here nice stuff about their beloved's new power plant shouldnt come as a surprise my friend :)

[SSbaby]

damn there is drivel flowing here. As usual, the select few have turned it into a slanging match crapping on about the barra 6 instead of discussing the new engine. I dunno why I expected any different.

What part is crap XA? Seriously, if we are to address some of the concerns of the Ford faithful, wouldn't a new all-alloy donk appease them by shedding 50kg in vehicle mass. Wouldn't an improvement in economy (given the Ford donk has always been the most thirsty six) also make the Ford owners happier?

Like it or not, these are the areas where Holden seem to excel in over their arch enemy. The same argument applies to their respective V8s...but that's another story.

IMHO, they're all valid points. I can also understand how some might take it the wrong way but that's not the intention in my comments.

[RICHO]

Getting a bit off topic I know but Holden are where they are because GM were astute enough to realise where their RWD expertise lay. And that was right here in Australia!!

As a consequence, more money, more latitude and far more investment for the future has flown from GM to Holden than has been received by FoA.

Don't get me wrong, Holden earned that position but a little luck helped like the rest of the GM world going to FWD even in their large US sedans, a whole lot of factors contributed to where Holden are now.

Ford Head Office on the other hand, are insular, couldn't see past the borders of the US to save themselves, and as a result Ford Australia has been forced to create parts bin specials to deliver what it's local market wants. That they have managed to stay as competitive as they have is impressive in its own right. But their poor cousin treatment by HO is starting to take a toll.

There enough of that drivel.

Now as an FF I would love a newer engine, but only if it offers more than the DOHC I6. Just like you LS1 guys really, sure a DOHC V8 would be nice but why bother when the existing option is at least as good as good if not better than the solution.

As for a 50kg weight saving on an alloy engine...I'll definitely take that!!!

Besides between that and the 50kg the Commodre will gain with a proper IRS the two cars will weigh the same again...

[SSbaby]

Great comments RICHO!

[Phido]

Not really. The current all-alloy Ford Duratec V6 in the Jaguar produces 3kw less and barely less and torque from 3 litres.

Slow down there a bit.. The 3.0L duratec as used by Ford, makes 220hp in the ST220 mondeo or 201 Hp in the Taurus verse the 244 hp of the basic I6. Sure if Ford started fitting jaguar engines like the supercharged V8 etc etc things wouldn't be too bad. But thats not going to happen.


The Jaguar weighs several huindred kilos less and performs pretty much on par with the n/a Falcon. From a much smaller and lighter -not to mention shorter engine.
That and its a far more expensive car and built out of completely diffrent materials, on a completely diffrent platform and is completely diffrent size and class from a company that is completely unprofitable. Yeh obivously apple to apples. Why make the commodore when the corrvette is lighter and faster! Why not just make 4 door low cost Corrvettes here?!


It is due out in 3.5-3.8 litre size next year. Economies of scale will possibly sound the deathknell for the straight six, especially if the FTA goes through. Seeing as this motor is already used in the potential replacements for the Falcon (Mazda 6, US Fords) you're not on strong ground here.
Where is this 3.5/3.8L Duratec V6? I haven't seen any reports on it yet? What cars is it used in?


This is likely the motor the next gen Falcon will have - whether it's on the Mustang/Lincoln/Jaguar chassis or the '1959' local job or comes as a big Mazda 6. If that is the case, likely wave bye-bye to local manufacture. One of these potential 'Falcons' would be front wheel drive, at least for lower spec models....

Ok this seems like a big wrong right there. So your saying the 2008 Falcon is going to be V6 only, FWD! Not likely.. Why not just make it a four cylinder too.. Why not just import the 500 or the Mondeo why bother with a Falcon at all. You better call Tom Gorman too, he just said Fords commited to the Falcon platform.. and China looks like comming aboard as well. Not to mention the US is looking at a varient of the new Falcon platform for US manufacturing.


The local company which provides castings to Holden is Ion, the same company which provides castings to Ford - presumably for cylinder heads and trans. This company is tooling up to provide V6 blocks from 2006.

Its not happening as of today.. Today holden imports the blocks.. Sure in a while that may change, or may not. 2006 is a long way off, anything could happen. If Fords going FWD then I guess Holden will too..


'The plant has three machining and sub-assembly lines for the engine's block, crankshaft and cylinder heads. The engines are then built on a common assembly line before being sent to domestic or export customers. The layout allows for the removal of internal forklift usage, an important employee safety initiative.'

Doesn't sound like they import a fully machined block to me....

Read it again, they do some machining here no casting. They import the block. Ford does some work on the 5.4L here, that doesn't mean they make it all here.

[Ghia351]

Why the continuous hang up with the Ford's I6? Personally, I would feel peeved if I were a fan of the FoMoCo for failing to invest in a totally new engine at least once in 40 years. If you are happy to have Ford manufacture an engine that appears to be good enough rather than 'state of the art', an engine that could be exported to other parts of the Ford world and power various vehicles, not to mention create new jobs in Australia, then you are looking at Ford through rose coloured glasses.

You have to be ultra competitive in the automotive industry. I'm sorry if you don't see things that way.

In an ideal world of course you are right, I would love FoMoCo Oz to build a new I6 (or what ever config.) because they have the ability given the budget to produce an engine as good as the tech. specs of an Alloytec. Lets rememebr it was GM's product plans of the late 80's & 90's through FWD only cars that have created the niche that Holden is now filling, giving them the chance to actually "clean sheet" a new VE floor pan rather then modify an Opel design. And again GM has given the HFV6 to Holden because the business case added up. Holden have earned the right and I hope they succeed with as much autonomy as GM can give them. This is probably my only concern, can Holden be allowed to make an Australian car and still meet export requirements without compromising too much. Ford Oz has too many US made products to compete with and it would need a major HQ change of policy to allow Ford Oz to supply cars into export markets where Ford US already supplies. Imagine if GM decided that they would now build and supply Statesman type cars into Holden's export markets...it would put huge pressure on future LWB Holden plans.

Sorry for the long post but this is (when discussed in a civil manner) one of the better threads.

[Ghia351]

Not really. The current all-alloy Ford Duratec V6 in the Jaguar produces 3kw less and barely less and torque from 3 litres. The Jaguar weighs several huindred kilos less and performs pretty much on par with the n/a Falcon.

Just so it set straight
Jag V6 3.0 L
179kW @ 6800rpm 300Nm @ 4100rpm

Ford Barra182
182kw @ 5000rpm 380Nm @ 32500rpm

I would suggest this is a big torque difference and nearly 1000rpm lower so the Jags ability to rev higher aids it power output and all alloy body construction aids performance/economy..don't think it would help a BA.

[Ghia351]

:rolleyes: ok well spelling mistakes aside i took a ride IN a ute on July 14. It was a black 175kw 6 sp manual. you want to know the exact time?? it was 21:45.


ummmm theres no such vehicle...

maybe u mean 5 sp manual

Holden has launched its VZ Commodore Ute, Crewman and One Tonner range - and we've already sampled its Alloytec V6 and standard six-speed manual. Watch this space from Tuesday, August 24, for the full story

I'm confused: http://editorial.carsales.com.au/mellor/mellor.nsf/homepage/home?opendocument

"it was 21.45"...Hey BA$TAD, don't you hate it when your "mates" bring round the "new one" after dark.....(I presume this was the case in your situation.)

[Dacious]

Where is this 3.5/3.8L Duratec V6? I haven't seen any reports on it yet? What cars is it used in?


Ford Duratec Article (http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Ford%20Duratec) Read all about it here.


Ok this seems like a big wrong right there. So your saying the 2008 Falcon is going to be V6 only, FWD! Not likely.. Why not just make it a four cylinder too.. Why not just import the 500 or the Mondeo why bother with a Falcon at all.

Why indeed? But it is not up to me. I prefer homegrown. I hope the pundits are wrong.

Keep your panties on. Note I said all the way through MAY and POSSIBLY. But many authoritative sources in the US say the decisions are in play, and in fact are probably made. Some options included basing future Oz and US Fords off the Mazda 6 platform, which uses the Duratec and is already made in the US in Michigan. This already has LHD and RHD versions and is FWD.

There's also the possibity of the DEW98 chassis as per Jaguar and Mustang - there is a push for this to happen and have the car be the same as the Taurus/ Crown Vic replacement. Again, it is also made in LHD and RHD versions and mounts the Duratec.

Thirdly there is the current Falcon chassis, which like the engine has roots in the middle of the last century - not necessarily bad, but times and needs change. If it were designed with an integrated IRS the Control Blade fixtures wouldn't likely weigh 50kg.

It has no LHD version currently. It is engineered and sized for a l-o-n-g 6 cylinder engine unique to one continent and only just made in six figures. I am not being criitical, the sum is more than the parts of the total. Ford did what it had to and did it well.

If option one or two above win, the odds of local assembly would have to be rated as marginal. For the record, IMO the worst result for Oz motorists would be if Ford stopped making cars here and became an importer.

Now, viewed purely from a business perspective, and going on widely quoted sources (Forbes business and Wards auto) what would you say the cheapest. simplest and most obvious decision for multinational Ford, regardless of nostalgia and emotion to make is?

I hope for local enthusiasts' sake Ford Oz can pull a rabbit out of the hat, and produce another competitive version. But it'll need to address size, weight and economy issues. It is hard to see how the current platform can do that. If they build a new engine it needs to be smaller/lighter so the car can be. If petrol goes down to 50c a litre it won't have to. Is this likely to happen? Otherwise the new Holden is just 'round the corner. It is likely to be both lighter and stronger than the replaced platform, as it should being two decades younger.


Read it again, they do some machining here no casting. They import the block. Ford does some work on the 5.4L here, that doesn't mean they make it all here.

And I never said they did. I said they don't import a machined block. And they don't - the block and crank are machined at Fishermans Bend as the current Motor HFV6 article makes clear, including pictures.

Five minutes searching on the web and you can find an article stating that Ion has the contract for '06 to supply HFV6 castings. Given Australia has some of the best bauxite in the world, this is a good thing.

I merely answered your assertions that the Barra I6 was some kind of 'miracle' motor that is irreplaceable - it isn't. It is a good motor today and has earned success. But not the answer to Ford Oz' long term problems. Sooner or later they'll need something more compact and especially lighter, especially if fuel prices keep going up.

I also answered your tired old Furphy about 'whose Oz content is bigger' and employs more Aussies making motors.

Look, I am not anti-Ford. I hope they are good and strong in future years, because that is in everyone's interest. The BA Falcon, for the record, IMO is the ultimate expression of the inline 6 RWD familiy car which has been probably unique to Australia for 30 years and the most important vehicle class here for 50 years. Until 2004 it is arguably a contender for the best domestic car in Oz and no disgrace to its' maker. But in two or three short years it is not likely to be so. Time marches on. Ford can't stand still. I believe they can still pull a rabbit out of a hat - and if that rabbit is competitive or better than Holden's rabbit, more the good. Competition breeds advancement.

BMW stuck with inline sixes in its' small coupes. But then it stuck with the boxer twin in its' motorbikes, too. No-one else does either anymore. There's a reason for that.

[RICHO]

Ford Duratec Article (http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Ford%20Duratec) Read all about it here.


Now, viewed purely from a business perspective, and going on widely quoted sources (Forbes business and Wards auto) what would you say the cheapest. simplest and most obvious decision for multinational Ford, regardless of nostalgia and emotion to make is?


BMW stuck with inline sixes in its' small coupes. But then it stuck with the boxer twin in its' motorbikes, too. No-one else does either anymore. There's a reason for that.

I hope that's not true!! If it is, then there would be absolutely NO automotive manufacturing in Australia from Holden, Ford or any other manufacturers. Why?? Because labour costs here are between 4 and 10 times costs through India, China, Vietnam, Indonesia.

Holden may survive longer because they are better placed as the RWD platform experts within the GM Empire, but a Commodre produced in any of the countries I mentioned above and sold anywhere would make more profit for GM than an Australian produced car.

Will it happen?? Unfortunately yes, just as soon as the ongoing costs of domestic operations exceed the cost of establishing new plants in Asia. We're all kidding ourselves if you argue otherwise.

As for BMW........

Could it be perhaps that no-one else managed to get it soooo right???

After all betamax was better than VHS, yet everyone went with VHS. And there are plenty of other examples of better technology being trumped in similar ways.

V6 engines exist purely because they made FWD cars feasible. It was a packaging decision, with FWD and a shorter V6, a car could have more interior room, transmission tunnels can be avoided etc etc etc.

V6 and RWD is a compromise that exists purely to meet the needs of an ever decreasing group of customers. And it kills me to say it!!!

[Dacious]

Not wanting to scare anyone, but someone I know came back from China. Toyota is building a Camry factory there capable of turning out millions of cars a year. Raw materials and components go in one end and a worldwide supply of finished cars come out the other.

How long will Toyota plants in Australia and the rest of the world last when that happens?

Back on the Holden vs Ford stuff. I think the saving grace for both is that their parents are losing money 'round the world and the Oz operations aren't. That has to give Ford Oz some latitiude to argue for keeping its' own designs. It would be a huge negative in this market to drop to importer.

But the next Falcon 6 has to be exportable to more than NZ. And if that means a Duratec or some other motor, then there's no shame in that. It's a proven and fine motor.

Could the Falcon XR6T or XR8 sell in the US? Absolutely, even as a limited special.

[BA$TAD]

"it was 21.45"...Hey BA$TAD, don't you hate it when your "mates" bring round the "new one" after dark.....(I presume this was the case in your situation.)

they had it for one night then it was to be returned. as far as i remember it had the 6pd manual in it...and also unless the clutch was fully depressed the car wouldn't even turn over. Like trying to start an auto in drive.

[XA coupe]

What part is crap XA? Seriously, if we are to address some of the concerns of the Ford faithful, wouldn't a new all-alloy donk appease them by shedding 50kg in vehicle mass. Wouldn't an improvement in economy (given the Ford donk has always been the most thirsty six) also make the Ford owners happier?

Like it or not, these are the areas where Holden seem to excel in over their arch enemy. The same argument applies to their respective V8s...but that's another story.

IMHO, they're all valid points. I can also understand how some might take it the wrong way but that's not the intention in my comments.

If the holden engines excel so much, why is there a need to bag the ford engines in a thread about the alloytec ?? is it relevant ?? :bash:
I suppose at least the status is quo ... there is always one and it seems ot's always the same one. :rolleyes:

[Phido]

I don't understand. The BA platform is the newest platform in the Ford world. Its low cost, hugely flexable, makes the widest number of varients, fits any engine, has remarkable abilities for its segment and is extremely strong and is very modern. Ford has tried utilising other smaller platforms and scaling them up and they have usually failed.


There's also the possibity of the DEW98 chassis as per Jaguar and Mustang - there is a push for this to happen and have the car be the same as the Taurus/ Crown Vic replacement. Again, it is also made in LHD and RHD versions and mounts the Duratec.

Witness the failure of DEW98.. which was hailed as the next big thing, which all rwd cars would be made of.. First up new mustang, with in a few weeks they knew a DEW98 platform mustang was never going to be feasable, so they tossed it out and developed its own unique platform.. Now its doubtful if DEW98 will ever see usage outside of the Jag and Lincon twins. All hail the death of DEW98. Mustang doesn't use it too expensive, to slow to produce, to complicated and not flexable enough...

The falcon platform can fit any engine Ford can make. Its the only one in the entire ford empire. It could reasonably use anything from a 4 cylinder to a V10 or V12. Alloy or iron. Petrol, diesel or even LPG. Turbo'd or supercharged, and easily pass crash tests too. Ford spent $500 mill on BA and $500 mill on Territory. I don't really see how ford would blow Billions on a platform that is not going to live onwards, upwards, and replace it with a older, inferior, heavily compromised one that is unsuitable. DEW98 had problems even fitting the more compact V8's.. Forget about wedging some 5.4L donk in there..

Even more rub in the wound, the FPV GT laps faster than a S-type R jaguar.. Some even claim better handling feel and better comfort.

I honestly don't see the falcon platform dying off in two years. If Ford wants to can the I6 well, thats another issue, the Falcon platform can easily accept a V6 of any capacity or any type. Ford has much worse engines than the Falcon's.. Like the vulcan series, OHV, 3.9L crud. Its a notoriously evil engine ford should have scrapped ages ago. Yet they still churn them out.. Stick them in a million mustangs and awe at its feebleness.

The main advantage of the Falcon engine is its cheap to make, quick to make, proven, and a entire industry is setup for them. While Ford could kill it, they would either have to retool ford OZ, costing hundreads of millions, or cut losses on all that new expensive machinery they bought for the BA engine production and lose hundreads of millions. Ford can afford to put VCT units on both inlet and exaust cams, while holden cannot, because the Falcons only got 2 cams, the HFV6 has 4. Twice the cost for holden.. Sure they could kill it, but replace it with what? Which six cylinder engine makes 240kw? or 550Nm of torque? or has 182Kw in a commerical low cost ute with 4 valves per cylinder and twin VCT.

Plenty of platforms are made for less than <100,000 cars.. Fords OZ profitable doing this, and if it can partner another country to manufacture as well (china will do nicely where the low cost falcon benifits and technology will work) it will be very profitable.

I honestly don't buy this BS that the Falcon platform is completely unable to be converted to LHD. It just takes money. Ford HQ does want Ford OZ to have RHD capability just yet. Holden only got LHD manufacture because of a secret operation with Buick which when GM found out, killed it.. Afraid no doubt of causing problems.. Problems like having Holden run its rwd platform..

The Barra I6 in my opinion is superior to the Duratec V6. Its bigger, cheaper with more suitable charateristics for Australia and the falcon. Its a improvement on Duratec, the head is superior, valve action is a improvement, VCT is superior.. You could even call it a Duratec motor if you want in I6 formation.

However you don't need the I6 engine in the falcon. You could make Falcons in the USA, with a 4.6 SOHC modular and 4.6L DOHC modular. You could make them in china with 2.3L 4 cyl, 2.5 and 3.0L V6 duratecs.. With such small engines you would have plenty of room for a LHD conversion. Also cutting weight.

It infact wouldn't suprise me if Ford China purchased all of Ford Oz's tooling, and made Falcons, LWB, Territories in china but using several diffrent local components. While Ford Australia moved ahead with its all new platform, another evolution off the old. The two wouldn't be in competition, Ford China would still get pretty sweet cars, Ford australia would get what they want, and both could work together on many shared projects.