re: new vs old.. which is better?

[red_vb]

hi all im just wondering or wanting a explanation as to why guys/girls are going to the newish models? i guess vn onwards? its just that i personally think all people are doing is buying these cars putting on new rims (not chrome) and thats is, or paying people to do stuff. sorry if sound like a stupid question i guess im curious why people are turning there backs on the oldies and its not just holdens...

[Astranomical]

Mostly because newer cars are coming down in price, and for a lot of people, if they can get into a newer car for not much more than it costs to buy/maintain an older car, it may be worth it. Not to mention that old cars are well, old, and can be quite a handful to maintain, and quite expensive compared to the purchase price of a newer car, especially if you're paying a mechanic or someone to do the repairs.

[MikesCalais]

newer is GENERALLY safer, older cars are more likely to stuff up sooner. of course there are always exceptions to the rule.

and as goVZ said, new (newish) cars are coming down in price.

I know I'd rather be in a newer car rather than an older one.. I've been ready to trade up from my VT for over a year now, even if it means going from a calais down to a berlina

[stocky]

newer cars arent always cheaper to maintain. my VN and VR, the parts havent really been expensive. most of them can be found at the wreckers, while newer models would have to deal with ridiculous holden prices. replacing a clutch costs what, $1-2,000 for an LS1? while i can do the same with mine for less than $500. a lot of people are well educated with these slightly older models as well, so its easy to get a lot of good information about them, while i couldnt really say the same about the newer ones. newer cars are full of more electrics that seem to fail quite a lot, and just cause more headaches, so i dont really see the need to upgrade any of my cars any time soon.

[E-T-H-A-N]

yer i spose what all of the above but i would rather an older car i like the look of them the ve is posibly the uglyest car ive ever seen no affence 2 people that like it but it looks exactly like the newest ford eww. but yer people instantly think newer = better and thats not always the case

[greenfoam]

The early Commodores in most parts of Australia where it still rains are stuffed and they never had any rust protection in the first place so that's one good reason to go VN onwards, VN-VZ all have fairly weak bodys and are not safe (air bags help) but they are still not a strong car by modern standards, most of the better 4 cyls hatchbacks built in the last few years get much less bent and are much safer in crash testing, that's another reason . If I had a family I wouldnt' have them in any Commodore apart from a VE and a VE is a barge so I wouldn't have any

[greenfoam]

Go to sleep Morton

[Morton]

I personally stick with older models - nothing post VP. The early stuff is cheaper to mantain, and more reliable.

I can rebuild my entire engine for $1500 - in comparison, that would only JUST pay for labour for someone to change the timing belt on a V6 Vectra

[Morton]

Go to sleep Morton

You bastard, how did you get in there before me

Also, I just woke up! Going to work soon

[red_vb]

its just that you dont see many of the oldies,im pround as to have a vb im the second owner the first was a old lady who would go between melbourne and geelong, i guess i was kinda thinking that yeah new cars have the better saftey but what can you do to them without paying a arm and leg for someone else to do. yeah my car cracks it every now and then but i will never get rid of it, and most cars onthe side of the road to melbourne are newish im kinda glad that if it f***s up i can just sit for a while to figger whats wrong mayb fix it (hopeful) drive off, not the computer not letting me over something stupid, also why are younger guys turning there backs on early models opting for 4cly fart box? im sorry to all out there who drive them, personaly the original is a subbie.

[Reaper]

hi all im just wondering or wanting a explanation as to why guys/girls are going to the newish models? i guess vn onwards? its just that i personally think all people are doing is buying these cars putting on new rims (not chrome) and thats is, or paying people to do stuff. sorry if sound like a stupid question i guess im curious why people are turning there backs on the oldies and its not just holdens...

lol...... I'm not sure how you could possibly consider VN newish. After 20 years most cars have been either smashed or warn out. VL and older are becoming very few and far between. Give it 5 years and VN/VP/VR will be the same. 10 years and they will be all but extinct.

Reaper

[Reaper]

The early Commodores in most parts of Australia where it still rains are stuffed and they never had any rust protection in the first place so that's one good reason to go VN onwards, VN-VZ all have fairly weak bodys and are not safe (air bags help) but they are still not a strong car by modern standards, most of the better 4 cyls hatchbacks built in the last few years get much less bent and are much safer in crash testing, that's another reason . If I had a family I wouldnt' have them in any Commodore apart from a VE and a VE is a barge so I wouldn't have any

Lol..... Betchya a VT-VZ shell would be many times stiffer and safer than any VN-VS, and for that matter VB-VL.

Reaper

[Calaber]

I think a lot of guys fall into the old trap that "they doln't build them like they useta."

Well, that's true, they don't and we should all be thankful for that fact.

Do any of you really believe that each new model is not a safer, better designed and engineered car than the one it replaced? And when I talk about design, I don't mean how it looks, I'm referring to how it was designed to go together.

Early Commodores, and by that I mean everything prior to VT, were weak structurally, almost totally lacking in the sort of primary and secondary safety that we take for granted these days. If a VE can just manage five stars for safety, how many do you think a VB to VL would score? Probably two, if it was lucky.

You can spend $5000 buying and building up a pretty decent VB, but all you really have is a nice VB - thirty one years old, live rear axle, ancient engine and transmission, really shithouse interior materials and dodgy electricals. Cheap to maintain and repair? Yep, sure. Safe? Nope, not really. And unless you modify the engine or replace it with something more modern, you have to use premium unleaded with additive every tankful. What a pain in the arse.

For the same money you can buy a half reasonable, high mileage VT, with mayber 200,000 on the clock that is still a far stronger, safer and better handling car than the $5000 VB. It mightn't look like much, but it's a great start and parts are now much easier to get than VB parts.

There is definitely a place for modified earlies, always will be, but they are like old traditional Holdens - getting hard to find, difficult to source some critical parts and requiring fuel that is no longer available.

Later models are now so cheap and offer so much more for the money. I think that has to be a major reason for the situation raised by the OP.

[stocky]

i dont see why my car is not safe compared to yours. only real difference is you have a whole lot extra weight, so you hit objects with greater momentum, traction control, and a few extra airbags. i still have ABS, and after upgrading, the exact same brake system as you. the driveline has barely changed since a VP compared to a VZ, and i dont see what drastic changes were made to the bodies that make mine so weak compared to yours.
as for dodgy electricals and shit interiors. that can be said for any model commodore, and i know that i prefer a vq interior to any cloth interior in later model cars.

[Calaber]

i dont see why my car is not safe compared to yours. only real difference is you have a whole lot extra weight, so you hit objects with greater momentum, traction control, and a few extra airbags. i still have ABS, and after upgrading, the exact same brake system as you. the driveline has barely changed since a VP compared to a VZ, and i dont see what drastic changes were made to the bodies that make mine so weak compared to yours.
as for dodgy electricals and shit interiors. that can be said for any model commodore, and i know that i prefer a vq interior to any cloth interior in later model cars.

Stockly

Like it or not, your VR or VS was still based on the VB floor pan. Yes, by VR, it was substantially upgraded, but by comparison with the VT shell, it is far weaker. The cheap method used by Holden to get the wider body for the VN, by simply basing it on the VB floorpan, meant that the basic structure suffers from mid 1970's engineering technology, when crash protection and avoidance was still a dark science for Holden. It was a cheapskate way of getting a wider body on the old "architecture" - that's why the VN always looked too wide for its suspension - it had basically VB components under a wider shell. Much of the VB suspension, such as the rear control arms, brakes, struts, can interchange from VB to VS - I know, because I've done it, and so have many others.

The VT was a much later design, deliberately heavier because it was mucyh stronger. Yep, you can have ABS, IRS and a few other safety items in a VR/VS, but the basic shell is much less rigid.

This isn't meant to be a criticism of your car, or any other early model, it's just a statement of fact. (Note - not my opinioon - fact)

As I said in my earlier post, every subsequent model is a genuine improvement on the model it replaced - if it wasn't, Holden would have gone out of business long ago.

[stocky]

actually the suspension setup changed on the VR. try fitting VR struts to a VP

[Cobez]

Maybe they don't LIKE the older models?

I bought mine because:

A) I love VS HSV's

B) I couldn't afford the old Holden i would like (VK SS blue meanie )

[Reaper]

i dont see why my car is not safe compared to yours. only real difference is you have a whole lot extra weight, so you hit objects with greater momentum, traction control, and a few extra airbags. i still have ABS, and after upgrading, the exact same brake system as you. the driveline has barely changed since a VP compared to a VZ, and i dont see what drastic changes were made to the bodies that make mine so weak compared to yours.
as for dodgy electricals and shit interiors. that can be said for any model commodore, and i know that i prefer a vq interior to any cloth interior in later model cars.

Stocky: I enjoy both the new and old cars - including the great VP and some much, much older ones as well. To be sure, prang one and you will find out. Believe me - you will be much better off in a VY over a VS.

actually the suspension setup changed on the VR. try fitting VR struts to a VP

True but the platform is a carry over dating back to the VB. That said, parts of the VT-VZ go back that far too however the body structure is light years ahead.

Reaper

[red_vb]

lol...... I'm not sure how you could possibly consider VN newish. After 20 years most cars have been either smashed or warn out. VL and older are becoming very few and far between. Give it 5 years and VN/VP/VR will be the same. 10 years and they will be all but extinct.

Reaper

gee i think mines going ok for a 30yo(1 year older than me). you know i never really tought about the vn and old, i guess coz mine is just older thats all, but yeah they are so commen that i have found wreakers are only stocking from vn onwards then what am i going to do?

[red_vb]

hi all hope everyone is going along good,good. will holden ever kill off the commodore like they did in kingswood, torana? do all car names have a time line? and sorry to bring up fords but would you think they will kill the falcon?

[Calaber]

actually the suspension setup changed on the VR. try fitting VR struts to a VP

Yeah, I'm well aware that the VR front end was revised. I have spent 8 years owning a VN and a VR so I'm very familiar with both. The point is, under a VR or VS, unless you have IRS, the car was about 80% VB. Even if you have IRS, the car is still about 60% of the old model underneath. This is hardly a sound basis for a modern, safe car.

[stocky]

Yeah, I'm well aware that the VR front end was revised. I have spent 8 years owning a VN and a VR so I'm very familiar with both. The point is, under a VR or VS, unless you have IRS, the car was about 80% VB. Even if you have IRS, the car is still about 60% of the old model underneath. This is hardly a sound basis for a modern, safe car.

but a VT-VZ is hardly that much different underneath compared to an IRS VR-VS

[red_vb]

sorry im lost underneath mentally not physically hahaha sorry thought it was funny, should i think about doing a vn conversion? or stick with this straight six? or go old school v8?

[Calaber]

sorry im lost underneath mentally not physically hahaha sorry thought it was funny, should i think about doing a vn conversion? or stick with this straight six? or go old school v8?

What condition is your car in? Is it mechanically and bodily sound or does it need work. If it needs work, how much?

It's easy to convert a VB six to an eight, but quite a bit more involved fitting the mechanical components from a VN, because the later engines had fuel injection and more involved electronics than the first series of Commodores and you have to ensure that all these things are installed correctly.

Then , if you upgrade things like the engine, you need to ensure that your suspension, steering and brakes are up to the task. Four wheel discs are a basic need as the old disc/drum combo on your VB won't be good enough. All suspension bushes should be replaced and the steering rack overhauled to remove any worn bushes or tie rod ends, which are very common wear points on Commodores of all vintages.

In my opinion, the old Holden six isn't really worth working up these days because of the fuel problem. They won't run on unleaded unless it's premium with an additive, or you run them on LPG. They don't really put much power out and the transmission choices are limited.

[Calaber]

but a VT-VZ is hardly that much different underneath compared to an IRS VR-VS

Stocky

In some ways, they might look alike, but the later models are wider, longer and have greater stiffening in the chassis rails. They are built for right hand drive, instead of being adapted from left hand drive (eg. handbrake location moved over to correct side on VT onwards). The bodies were about 75kg heavier, all additional weight to provide a stiffer frame. In fact, the first VT's were criticised because they were so much heavier than the VS and the performance of the standard V6 suffered as a consequence.