holden or ford

[ben315vz]

Fords complex to work on???

Do not ever open the bonnet of a mercedes or anything Euro.

I mean't more complex then a Commodore. This thread is about comparing Fords and Holdens.

 

[Darren_L]

in my experience Commodores and Falcons are comparable in regards to ease of repairs.

 

[AlexVSII]

For example. VT's are clear winners of AU's...

You can't be serious. I know this is a Holden forum and that the AU is widely reviled as the most butt ugly car ever produced this side of the the Iron Curtain [although don't mind the look of the AU Fairmont Ghia truth be told] but you can not honestly think the VT is a "clear winner" over the Ford with all the problems they had. Other than looks, and the VT doesn't set the bar that high either, there is no comparison between the AU and VT Commodores.

In general, I prefer the Falcon to the Commodore. It's generally accepted that the FG Falcon is better than the VE Commodore. Ford kept working on their I6 engine, going from 148kw in the 1992 EBII Falcon through to 157 in the EF series and up to 172 in some variants of the AU, and then 182 in the 2002 BA. The FG Falcon, develops 195 kw and apparently they could easily tune it for over 200 kw but choose not to, so as not to fall afoul of various insurance regulations and other laws.

Holden on the other hand stood still. Going from 130 kw with the VP/VR series Commodore, through to the 147 from the VS/VT and 152 from the VX onwards. It was only by supercharging the V6 that they had even a snowflakes chance in hell of competing with Ford, and one got the message they all but gave up. It's only with the VZ onwards that Holden has started to compete with Ford in terms of power again, and even then they compete in terms of kW only and not the equally important to me, at least torque figures.

 

[Jesterarts]

The AU was a lemon. Exterior was ghastly, interior was cheap and nasty, steering was vague, braking was inconsistent and there were reliability issues. I know because we owned one, brand new.

The VT had suspension geometry issues, few other mechanical quirks but the rest was an alright package. That and I see more VT's still on the road compared to AU's. Though i live in cranbourne so there may me a holden over representation.

 

[Jesterarts]

The AU was a lemon. Exterior was ghastly, interior was cheap and nasty, steering was vague, braking was inconsistent and there were reliability issues. I know because we owned one, brand new.

The VT had suspension geometry issues, few other mechanical quirks but the rest was an alright package. That and I see more VT's still on the road compared to AU's. Though i live in cranbourne so there may me a holden over representation.

 

[Killr6]

I mean't more complex then a Commodore. This thread is about comparing Fords and Holdens.

ive owned holdens and fords and never found anything "complex" about the running gear, although i always have the right tools for the job needed

 

[Brenno]

My two bob.. I've always owned fords and subarus.. Owned '94 Wrx, '05 WRX, 04 BA XT, 05 BA XR6T, 08 FG XR6T..
You can't beat the ford turbos in terms of Cost vs. performance and ease of modifying.
I read here consistently about build issues with the VE's.. And I'm grateful that mine has none of those problems. But you'll read the exact same about the fords on the ford forums (Hence why I sold my FG). Thing was a bloody lemon.. But I know not all of em are..
Ford's I6T has holden smashed for straight line speed.. But i think holden has a much better handling and exterior look..
So really 6 of one half a dozen of the other in my books.. Both lineups are offering awesome cars..