I will never buy a new Holden again "ever"

[Tezza's ZB]

I drove both the 4 cylinder and V6 before my purchase . The 4 cylinder was very zippy and slipped through the gears with ease. The V6 was just as zippy but had stacks in reserve . If I am overtaking at 110km/H on a single lane country road I want to be sure u can change down fast and have plenty in reserve to pass a b double or 4 cars at once. The V6 delivers here. For city driving the 4 cylinder is great but for high speed country you notice the V6 benefits .

Sounds very concocted from a non owner and feel the vibe you’d never believe the truth about the brilliance of the four cyl petrol turbo

 

[StrayKiwi]

Tezza: I know you love your car. Thats great. But just as I have little chance convincing you that the V6 is actually quite a good drive, you won't convince me to go back to a turbo (of which I have 13 years of prior ownership).

As for the VXR reviews, I read and watched as many as I could (and there aren't many) to get a general sense of what the journalists thought. My impression of their reviews were they were stuck in the past comparing the VXR with either the SS Commodore or trying to compare it with the Stinger GT. But when they evaluated the VXR by itself just as a car, they tend to be more favourable in their views. I won't go so far as to categorically say they were raving about it because not all of them did, but I can say for the most part they were impressed with the overall package even if the performance isn't what Holden have offered in the past.

As I've said before, this car has been a slow burn for me and the wife, the more we drive it the more we realize we made the correct purchase. We couldn't be happier, as I am sure you are with your LT.

 

[Tezza's ZB]

Tezza: I know you love your car. Thats great. But just as I have little chance convincing you that the V6 is actually quite a good drive, you won't convince me to go back to a turbo (of which I have 13 years of prior ownership).

As for the VXR reviews, I read and watched as many as I could (and there aren't many) to get a general sense of what the journalists thought. My impression of their reviews were they were stuck in the past comparing the VXR with either the SS Commodore or trying to compare it with the Stinger GT. But when they evaluated the VXR by itself just as a car, they tend to be more favourable in their views. I won't go so far as to categorically say they were raving about it because not all of them did, but I can say for the most part they were impressed with the overall package even if the performance isn't what Holden have offered in the past.

As I've said before, this car has been a slow burn for me and the wife, the more we drive it the more we realize we made the correct purchase. We couldn't be happier, as I am sure you are with your LT.

Thanks for your comments.. I’ll admit to going over the top, often motivated by people who say things

Tezza: I know you love your car. Thats great. But just as I have little chance convincing you that the V6 is actually quite a good drive, you won't convince me to go back to a turbo (of which I have 13 years of prior ownership).

As for the VXR reviews, I read and watched as many as I could (and there aren't many) to get a general sense of what the journalists thought. My impression of their reviews were they were stuck in the past comparing the VXR with either the SS Commodore or trying to compare it with the Stinger GT. But when they evaluated the VXR by itself just as a car, they tend to be more favourable in their views. I won't go so far as to categorically say they were raving about it because not all of them did, but I can say for the most part they were impressed with the overall package even if the performance isn't what Holden have offered in the past.

As I've said before, this car has been a slow burn for me and the wife, the more we drive it the more we realize we made the correct purchase. We couldn't be happier, as I am sure you are with your LT.

I get over the top at times. The VXR though is poor value for what you get. I honestly believe some people purchase a car and have the money to do so, without really considering what they need or want. I could afford the VXR too but it is patently very very poor value for money and the performance is questioned as has been serious tyre wear. My car cost $27880, the VXR might have cost $48000 give or take. My goldilocks 4 cyl petrol Commodore is tremendous. It’s full of goodies. I actually want a Lotus Exige 430 hp Cup, a perfect car for stunning road and track performance but it would cost me 105 thousand British Pound. I actually can’t afford that though could I guess if I took a very big hit. It’s a preferred choice, rather than a Lamborghini Aventador many times the price of the Lotus or a very highly powered and highly priced Porsche. I of course won’t buy either. The RS V 6 ZB has proven to be a poor choice, vehemently denied, but true. AWD lovers have made a poor decision with the VXR and the RS V, but they will never admit to it to the grave. Silly isn’t it not to say, I got it wrong, you aren’t a lesser person to admit it. One fellow on this thread was rightly outraged about the tyre wear on his VXR, at least he admitted it. I bought a Mazda 3 18 months ago.. i made a mistake.. just noisy on the road, and the 2.5 litre 4 underwhelmed, aside from other things. The LT was not much more expensive when I purchased it in April 2019. Threads here are stacked with people who never admit to their mistakes. Why? The few people I know who have an LT or RS 4 cyl , said the LT or RS 4 cylinder amazed them with its fabulous balance, eagerness and pace and especially its lithe handling compared to the 6. With the LT, you get a great priced sports car and saloon comfort without the badges and the hype. When you look at the rear, all you see is the word “commodore”, a lower case word, no mention of Turbo, I like that. You get some idea it might have a fair bit of ‘pop’ by seeing the modest dual exhaust.

 

[Mayuri Krab]

Currently visting my grandmother at the land of the communist (China) and ZB commodores (badged differently obviously) were quite common here...

 

[arsevee]

The argument is not fallacious at all; you drive a 6, I drive a 4. I stuck to what the pro reviewers said. They said the 4 cyl was a better car to drive, and the 157 extra fat kg is there with the six. It’s the sweet combination of power, torque, drive ability and, in particular the litheness that is there in the slimmer 4. You never agree to that no matter the commentary. Indeed if the reviewers came down ‘ on my side’, which they do, you’d counter that too because perhaps you’d say they don’t know. I must revisit what the pros said.
Unfortunately too, old school Commodore drivers hang on like grim death psychologically to the wonder of their 6 cyl or v8. You can forget comments made by people with VE or VF cars with six cylinders in particular; they are just not anywhere near the ZB, and broadly this applies to most cars on the road. That’s the reality, and that reality is unquestionably shared by the pro reviewers. The reality covers handling, braking, power to weight and so on. Most, not all the bloggers here promoting the RS V are 6 cyl owners. I’ll drag up some pro reviewers re the ZB. I absolutely agree with the potential buyer here, stick with the plain beauty you get with the modesty and simplicity but great drive
ability of the 4 cylinder. It’s loaded with the niceties too, and not just the essentials.

Oh, my - what a strange world you inhabit.

You keep referring to 'poor reviews' yet provide no citations.

"The reality covers handling, braking, power to weight and so on" - exactly, and in all those metrics, the V6 AWD with the bigger wheels and lower-profile tyres exceeds the LT. Whether you like or agree with that, it's independently demonstrable.

You keep referring to the 'extra fat', but ignore the 23% gain in power over the 10% gain in weight. You can't ignore it. It's called 'power-to-weight ratio' and negates your arguments to the contrary.

I've owned several Commodores in the past:

VX sedan
VXII sedan
VZ sedan
VU Storm ute as well as a series 3 Monaro (even a Camira way back)

I haven't bought a Commodore since the Monaro as none of them appealed to me, so you can't accuse me of 'hanging on to the past'. The ZB is the best of the Commodores yet (although I would have the Monaro back), and I think I can speak from first-hand experience of the car I currently own.

I've also had a few 'modern' high-output' turbo fours, so can all speak from experience and give an informed critique of both.

I'm fully aware of the programmed flat torque curve of many turbo fours, but unless you have a dual-stage or twin-scroll turbocharger, you get lag. You don't get lag in a normally-aspirated engine - again, that's just a fact.

You're also ignoring the torque-steer of a front-wheel-drive car - GM has done a superb job of reducing torque-steer, almost eliminated it in fact and it's recognised as class-leading, but it's still there and is noticeable.

Moving up to the RS-V you not only get the V6 and AWD (which you seem to discount), but the suspension is better; up front the RS-V gets HiPer strut front suspension that keeps the steering geometry consistent regardless of suspension travel and a five-link rear suspension, rather than the four-link on the base model.

All this adds up to improved handling. Again, it's a fact whether you believe it or not.
.

Look, the bottom line here is that no-one's knocking your car - it's a fine beast - but to run-down higher-spec models with spurious, counter-intuitive and unverifiable statements is doing yourself no favours...

 

[arsevee]

You don’t seem to own one, so doubt the veracity here!

Sounds very concocted from a non owner and feel the vibe you’d never believe the truth about the brilliance of the four cyl petrol turbo

I think the clue was in Benny66's words "I drove both the 4 cylinder and V6 before my purchase"

 

[arsevee]

Here’s one blog I found, and there are many others. All I’ll say is people want their AWD, and this and that, and very soon their tail is between their legs. RS 6 buyers then tenaciously defend a car that consumers don’t like, but they won’t admit their mistakes
“The 2.0l turbo is the sweet spot, because it has tuning potential unlike the NA V6 and is lighter over the front wheels and steers better. Even a moderate tune would do nicely say 250kW/450+Nm.”

Ok, citations needed...

1/ Point me to the V6 owners who have 'their tail between their legs'.
2/ Point me to the legion of unhappy owners. Actual owners, not some unsubstantiated third-party commentary.
3/ You can 'tune' a V6 too, it's not just the domain of turbos... Mercedes only just get 250KW in a twin dual-scroll turbocharged engine specifically designed for the job - you will never get that out of the GM four... And a quick look at Google hasn't revealed anyone doing it here in Oz.
4/ Like-for-like an AWD will out-corner a FWD in any on-road situation. Initial front-end turn-in will be better with less weight over the front (within limits) as a simple by-product of the inertial mass in a FWD, but the AWD also steers the back end around the corner due to increased torque to the outside rear wheel (both rear wheels receive motive power) and will ultimately corner better.

 

[arsevee]

The VXR tries to look fast, it’s message or appeal when you look at it, is that it exudes being a fast car, but it ain’t:

“The VXR’s lack of grunt isn’t ideal, especially considering Australians are already having to contend with a Commodore that is no longer locally built or rear-driven.”

At $55000, or whatever, what a poor choice, so enjoy the 8 inch screen (; big deal), heated leather seats ( omg a joke. Oh dear, even if you paid 45 to 48 g, you won’t admit the truth, and it seems that the awd is disaster too

More power than the four. Also more power than the V6 that was in the VF, so there's that... I remember the article - it was comparing it with an SS - you know the V8 - so, in comparison, yes, the VXR has a 'lack of grunt', but more than the VF it replaced.

Again, your next comment makes erroneous assumptions - I didn't pay $45-48k, nowhere near. That is the truth.

Please detail where you can demonstrate empirical evidence that the 'AWD is a disaster"

Like many of your comments thus far, I suspect you can't.
.

Seriously, no-one here's knocking your four-pot, but you seem to be on a quixotic campaign to denigrate higher models...

 

[arsevee]

As others have said, each to there own, I first drove a RS 4 cyl over 12 months ago and decided it wasn't for me and looked at other vehicles, by chance I saw a RSV demo at a good price and decided to at least try it, I was impressed and decided to buy as it has 5 years warranty and 3 years free servicing. I am still a bit wary if it will be as reliable as my past commodores, but time will tell.
As for tyre wear I do hear the continential tyres do not last long, I have currently done nearly 16,000 km and they still look good. I find they are a bit noisy on some surfaces. The rear view camera at night is almost useless, good resolution in the day.
The awd system seems to work well, especially when roads are wet it just grips and goes without any slip.
On four long trips it has always averaged around the 7 but has been as high as 7.4, on short trips of a few km at a time it gets up to 13-14 L/km
I will try and post a photo of fuel usage on a nearly 400km trip.

After a week of 'normal driving I'm averaging 8.5l/100Km - but it's too early to tell - I'll track it for three months & report back...

 

[arsevee]

Bui

Currently visting my grandmother at the land of the communist (China) and ZB commodores (badged differently obviously) were quite common here...

Buicks there's talk of them shifting the manufacturer over to China...