Omega & Berlina to get "premium" engine

[CSP]

The underlying problem is the 1800 kgs of lard it has to push.

Reaper

I disagree. Well perhaps it's more like not totally agreeing. Yeah, the VE isn't a light car but safety, handling, modern luxuries all add weight.

The biggest problem Holden have is they spent $1billion developing and engineering the VE but still put mediocre drivetrains in them. They needed direct injection and 6 speed autos from day one!

Yeah they're heavy, doesn't mean they can't also be efficient and powerful all at the same time. Especially for a $1billion price tag.

 

[1991_Vn2nV]

I disagree. Well perhaps it's more like not totally agreeing. Yeah, the VE isn't a light car but safety, handling, modern luxuries all add weight.

The biggest problem Holden have is they spent $1billion developing and engineering the VE but still put mediocre drivetrains in them. They needed direct injection and 6 speed autos from day one!

Yeah they're heavy, doesn't mean they can't also be efficient and powerful all at the same time. Especially for a $1billion price tag.

$1 billion aint that much these days. The FG cost $700 million and its really just an upgraded BF. Considering the VE is all new, thats much more cost effective than the BF-FG change at $700 million.

The 4 speed auto isn't being used by any other GM car except Holden. Every other GM car upgraded to the 5 speed, which is now superceded as well lol It has been superceded by a 6 speed version (different to the 6L80 currently used). So Holden are 2 transmission upgrades behind the rest of GM.

 

[Aggro_VE]

so redline is 6500 as opposed to 6000rpm, they still have the four speed? reason was 6000rpm was what the four speed could only handle, 6500rpm is the 5sp redline. Am I missing something?

 

[1991_Vn2nV]

so redline is 6500 as opposed to 6000rpm, they still have the four speed? reason was 6000rpm was what the four speed could only handle, 6500rpm is the 5sp redline. Am I missing something?

Since when could the 4 speed could only handle 6,000rpm?

 

[andyman]

vz's will rev to 6500 with a 4sp behind it, manuals will rev to the end of the tacho, im asuming the ve's are the same,

honestly i rather add .4 of litre for more torque/power, 0.4 is stuff all differeance, the same as ethanol costing 4c less as a saving, for 70 litres it what $2.30

 

[Full Spectrum]

Whilst I have no idea how Lightning_VP's post was relevant to this thread, VP's were mechanically quite reliable back in their day. Today it is perhaps a different story lol

My old one still has it's original fuel lines and seatbelts:yeah:.

Holden still has 7+ months before an update. If this is true chances are it's a short term fix it.
See i herd something different about the motors and auto's. I herd that holden was stopping the 4 speed and only sending 5 speed's overseas now. First sign of removing the old slush.
Engine was to ad the old 190 with chain driving belt.

An omega can run on fuel better then a VZ Exec. When you line the 2 of them up you can see how much work is in the VE range. Then ad the extra weight. Tomorrow if you added the omega auto/engine package to a VZ you would get 5-8% better fuel. It is like reaper said it's weight is hiding the improvements they have made.

 

[1991_Vn2nV]

Yeah but the alloytec is still pretty thirsty for this day and age.

It uses more fuel than the 4.0L straight 6 in the falcon, and makes less power and a heap less torque. Plus the FG apparently weights 30kg more than the VE (though it doesn't look it from the exterior).

For 2008, its not a good engine. Simple. How much improvement has been made since the Ecotec was introduced 13 years ago? Remove the crap ADR fuel ratings and I don't believe there is enough improvement over 13 years considering the advances in technology and the rest of the motoring world.

 

[CSP]

the alloytec and the ecotec are two very different engines.

 

[1991_Vn2nV]

the alloytec and the ecotec are two very different engines.

Thanks for that very enlightening comment

The point is CSP, the Alloytec for all its worth actually uses 0.6L per 100km MORE FUEL than the ecotec did in the VX/VY commodore. Thats manual vs. manual by the way. Auto has improved but only by 0.4L.

At the same time, torque has only gone from 305 to 325NM and power from 154kw to 175kw. But its in a less useable range than it was in the ecotec.

 

[50LTRv8]

Thanks for that very enlightening comment

The point is CSP, the Alloytec for all its worth actually uses 0.6L per 100km MORE FUEL than the ecotec did in the VX/VY commodore. Thats manual vs. manual by the way. Auto has improved but only by 0.4L.

At the same time, torque has only gone from 305 to 325NM and power from 154kw to 175kw. But its in a less useable range than it was in the ecotec.

This is why I am so dissapointed with ford for dropping the I6. It had power where you needed it most, low in the rev range. I am just about to clock 600Km from one tank of fuel in my ef and that ain't bad.

I am not sure why holden persist with making engines that have no low down torque, but a better for move for them now which would have no development costs is to dump the low spec v6 and just make the 195 standard across all models.