Interesting reading for open-minded Holden fans

[cliffo78]

I yesterday stumbled across a site "trueblueford.com" (which I believe I found via a link in a post on this forum). As a die-hard Commodore fan that is willing to give other manufacturers credit where it is due, I have been intently reading information on this site specific to the AU Falcon:

AU series 1 Falcon - An Introduction

Now I consider myself to be very open-minded and fair when it comes to Ford. I admit that I take great comfort in the fact that the Commodore has more or less held the no.1 spot in this country since the first VT's started rolling off the production line. But I also concede that the dominance of the VT and (to some extent due to the damaged Ford brand image) later Commodore releases is as much about how poor the AU Falcon was as it is about the fact that the VT was the right car at the right time for the Australian public.

The Commodore in my opinion has been consistently behind world standards in terms of engine technology and refinement from the VN right through to the VY - the introduction of Alloytec V6's in VZ finally bringing it (just) up to current world standards. And it has also been criticised for its fairly low-tech IRS setup until the revised setup that appeared in VE.

But with Holden's terrific marketing and product placement, the Commodore (and the Holden brand itself) has become an iconic Australian product, which has built on the VT's success to become a universally accepted and acclaimed product in export markets.

So while I am all for reading about the AU Falcon's good points, bad points and why it did not prosper, I find it mildly entertaining that the author found himself continually defending the Falcon with insubstantial claims, and even resorting to Commodore-bashing to try and take some attention away from how poor some of Ford's decisions regarding the AU really were.

For example the author repeatedly defends the AU's styling by stating that "the conservative Australian market was not ready for such a radical design" and "the design was ahead of its time". In response to these comments, I say firstly that Australian motoring enthusiasts (and commuters alike) are not conservative, they are in fact becoming increasingly discerning. Secondly I still haven’t seen any other cars that have design cues similar to AU nearly 10 years after its release. How far ahead of its time does the writer think it was?

The author also finds himself failing to remain objective, by constantly comparing the AU with the VT where the AU has an advantage, but failing to illustrate the whole picture. For instance, he claims one area where the AU was superior was in its IRS suspension - comparing the VT's “flawed IRS” with the AU's more sophisticated IRS. Yes I agree it was superior, but was it standard across the range? No – and in fact it was never even an option on the wagon variant. Which means the majority of VT Commodores on the road today handle a darn site better than the majority of AU’s on the road.

This guy spent so much time trying to justify the shortcomings of the AU by comparing it to the Commodore (and often inadvertently highlighting the fact that the Commodore was superior) that by the end of it my opinion of the AU Falcon had actually diminished slightly.

Furthermore I find there is an extraordinary number of references to Commodores in a website supposedly dedicated to the Falcon.

Anyway, will leave it to any like-minded JustCommodores forum members to have a read and share any comments you have on this topic.

[Morton]

That is, compared to the Commodore (dare I say it) many felt the GM offering was the easier car for first time entry with a more accomodating door opening - something GMH had spent quite a considerable amount of time on during it's developement (or so they claimed). <-- LOL, man, that made me laugh out loud ^^ This guy is trying WAY too hard

what a clockspank ^^

Just one point, cliffo... you said "Secondly I still haven’t seen any other cars that have design cues similar to AU nearly 10 years after its release."

... well, you're kinda wrong there.



... but the public LOVED that car, right?


afterthought: is this guy a diehard ford fan or what? he has NO pride lol, even most people around here have the perspective to admit that VLs rust, VNs fall apart, and VTs were slow.

[sganro]

'The Falcon was ahead of the Commodore in almost every way except one - sales and general public acceptance'


Hence proving the AU was a bad model?

That is the most one-sided report i have ever read. I dont even think ford could have given it that much of a wrap. They would have realised that the poor sales meant it was a dud.

[jules]

the AU was ugly. i heard the barrel ar*se was jack nasser's idea and he overruled everyone and common sense in insisting on it.

[Torquen]

i like the AU with the round headlights but the other model/bodyket is terrible (only like the utes tho). but yes very biased report.

[cliffo78]

... well, you're kinda wrong there.

(Pic of Olivier-nosed Magna omitted)

... but the public LOVED that car, right?

Yes Morton...you are correct on both points there!

[88GreenVN]

My dad has a AU and wished he didnt. But when cheep is good the AU is the standout winner. Cheep Cheep Cheep. The only AU highlight.

[Emackulation]

Oh my lord, how ugly is the AU falcon, I mean look at that abomination! Ugliest Falcon in the past 15 yrs.

[Stupa]

the overall shape is also simmilar to the taurus. another success

[Morton]

the overall shape is also simmilar to the taurus. another success

And if you thought the Taurus was bad...




... really, Australia got lucky.

[adam69]

I have an AU ute and i have no probs with it.Does the job.

[VLDavo]

i dunno ive never been a fan mainly becasue of the looks.. and they go like a busted ass..