VE - Big Whoopy Do Da

[1991_Vn2nV]

How is it cheaper to repair than a VZ?? Major service for the Alloytec is gonna be a bitch, requires more expensive oil than the ecotec (i know it was in the VY). Transmission will be more expensive to service if you have the 5speed. Panel repair are gonna be greater as the back panels cannot just be taken off. A better suspension system means it'll cost more to fix. The tyres are outrageously expensive for the base model (big no no if your buying for fleets). Not gonna talk about the 8's as normally the family car is a 6.

1, servicing is not a repair. Service intervals are now longer than wat was in the VY, so even if it is a tad more expensive it works out cheaper in the long run because there are LESS services doesnt it? Same goes for transmission I believe.

The tyres on the VE are expensive, but only if you buy what they come with stock. They're 16 inch, my 225/50 R16's cost me $112 a tyre. Outrageously expensive? I dont think so.

Better suspension system = Less cost. Its a better quality product that should be more reliable which means less repairs. Why be so pessimistic?

And back to the main point about it being cheaper to repair in minor accidents:

New front-end design a key to cutting Holden Commodore repair expenses after shopping centre bingles.

“Repairs will be more rapid because the front section is easily unbolted and replaced – as opposed to the traditional ‘weld on’ front-end design.

Holden is the first GM division globally to use this advanced, all-in-one unit and the VE Commodore is the first Australian-built vehicle to take advantage of this technology, which until now has been mainly the domain of high-end imported vehicles.

It resolves something like 30 little issues with the old design as well.

 

[vztrt]

1, servicing is not a repair. Service intervals are now longer than wat was in the VY, so even if it is a tad more expensive it works out cheaper in the long run because there are LESS services doesnt it? Same goes for transmission I believe.

Trust me just because it's less service intervals doesnt mean it'll be cheaper in the long run. It'll normally be the same or more. Like I said previously the major service in an Alloytec is expensive (like on the Mitsabishi). Also the regular service is more and the service be priced at 1.5 more than a 10,000k service would, a dealer wont be losing out. It's still the same 4sp auto so that should stay the same, but the 5sp and 6 sp transmissions will cost more but that will be more especially with the sport shift.

Also you service a car to identify things that have gone or can go wrong soon on a car so you reduce the damage on other components. Changing the oil and servicing are normally two different things.

 

[Scotty_Doesn't_Know]

Yup! I totally agree with vztrt...

And personally, oil and oil filter change for me every 5000km on my new VE. WELL worth it.

 

[monaroCountry]

The magna for one, maxima, accord...and yes you'll mentione they are in the another league but you did mention leave power out of it.

Besides, Holden and Ford dont have the best repuation when it comes to Fuel Economy... what they say dont mean it will be in the Real World..

Holden VE uses 10.9L/100km
Mitsubishi 380 uses 10.8L/100km
Nissan Maxima uses 10.8L/100km
Ford Falcon XT uses 10.9L/100km
and the 4cyl Camry (117kw) uses 9.9L/100

Holden claims their car uses less fuel on real world situations. Initial test drives from www.drive.com.au have backed this claim up.

F you really want to be the tight-ass record holder then forget about owning the Toyota, Maxima or your claustrophobic enhancing Honda. The cheapest to run (fuel wise) would be in the order of Ford Falcon LPG, Holden dual fuel LPG and then the Mitsubishi dual fuel LPG.

 

[mongoose3800]

Well, as the person that started this thread it's about time I added some more. All I have to say is that my predictions are starting to come true! In fact, having driven a VE and read many reviews I think the points I have made are even more valid than ever before. I'll definitely stick with my old bomb. Want proof - well here we go straight from http://drive.com.au/Editorial/ArticleDetail.aspx?ArticleID=19584&vf=3

"The biggest surprise of this test, however, was fuel consumption. After all the Holden hype we expected the Commodore to be super-frugal. But after 3000km of driving, the Falcon was more economical - despite having an identical fuel-rating label. It is the first time in a long time that the Falcon has been more efficient than the Commodore. That Ford has done so with a bigger engine is quite a feat. And Ford still has a few tricks up its sleeve with next month's new model (it claims to have trimmed another 0.2 litres/100km from the official average consumption figures). "

I also find the following a little concerning:

"Not that our car was the best example; a vibration from the rear at freeway speeds made the Omega the car testers wanted to avoid on our giant comparison" and "One dashboard panel was poorly aligned and an awful rattle emanated from the base of the driver's side windscreen pillar where the side mirror is mounted."

Oh, and then there's that huge blind spot I have mentioned in a different post. So, even more than ever I say: VE - Big Whoopy do da!!! A thirsty and over weight car that doesn't meet the needs of today! And, sadly, I say this as a Holden supporter. You won't find me buying a VE. A typical S1 car. Bring on S2!!!

 

[1991_Vn2nV]

Well, as the person that started this thread it's about time I added some more. All I have to say is that my predictions are starting to come true! In fact, having driven a VE and read many reviews I think the points I have made are even more valid than ever before.

bla bla bla. They make 2 bad paragraphs in a massive story and thats all you can see. And dont take **** out of context man. The full quote was: "The driving experience of the Omega is a huge step up from the tired old Executive it replaces. Not that our car was the best example; a vibration from the rear at freeway speeds made the Omega the car testers wanted to avoid on our giant comparison."

Read Wheels reviews and a few others. The VE's are getting better fuel consumption that the figures given by Holden in ALL of their V6 models. Even at the stated 10.9L per 100km how can you call it thirsty? And you call it overweight when comparing Holden and Ford? The VE is simply the same weight as the Falcon now.

Ok so your points are more valid than ever?

I am trying to be as objective as I can but really, after all the hype leading to the official release of the VE I feel rather let down. All I see is a car with all the "mod cons" but, one that is most likely heavier, thirstier and slower than it's previous models. Lets face it, there's some doubt (certainly in the press) as to whether the VZ is any better than the Vy - mechanically. This is particularly the case if you compare the cars as "drivers cars". Now, I drive an old noisy and unrefined VN S1 yet I see nothing that would make me fork out a huge amount of money to buy the new model when an old 2nd hand model will fare very well comparability.

The VE looks likely to cost it's owners a fortune - i.e. increased fuel costs and a huge increase in the cost to replace the rubber. So where's the real improvement when it comes to ownership?

1. Its the most fuel efficient commodore yet. It is NOT thirstier.

2. It is the FASTEST Commodore range EVER. It is NOT slower. The Omega is only slower than 2 other commodore models, the VN and VP when they were new. The high output models however, the Calais and SV6, are massively quick. They are in the 7's for 0-100 times.

3.) Increased fuel costs... NO. As said it is more fuel efficient. Increased Rubber Costs? Not necessarily. Sure rubber might be more expensive if you use the same tyres that they come with stock, but 16" tyres are not expensive, I pay $112 for 225/50/R16's.

4.) Your comment about drivers cars is simply ridiculous. You cannot compare a boat of a car like a VN to the state of the art setup found in the VE. ESP, braking systems and ABS, GOOD IRS for once in a Commodore, all new suspension setups, 50/50 weight distribution, increased track etc. None of which your VN has.

 

[mongoose3800]

Ist things 1st. I know the VN handles like a boat, is unrefined etc, etc, etc. If you rule all the VN comparisons out I'm still not impressed. I'm just commenting on reports I have read and my experience from driving the car. In response to your points:

1) how can this be so when Falcon (known for is thirst) does better in real life testing.
2) For the performance versions this may be true. But for base models - not so. Reporters already comment on the extra work required to take an omega up a hill.
3)see point 1.
4) Having driven a VE - yes the handling is a noticable improvement and I was impressed how the ESP kicks in. I conceed here. But, some people like their cars to be harsh - i.e. hear the engine, feel all the rough bits an so on. That's what I was referring to.

Remember, the vast majority of VE's sold will be the Omega.

Oh, don't always believe what you read in wheels either. After all these idiots gave the Camira a wheels car of the year award, and at one stage tried to claim the VB commodore was the best car in the world.

 

[1991_Vn2nV]

Ist things 1st. I know the VN handles like a boat, is unrefined etc, etc, etc. If you rule all the VN comparisons out I'm still not impressed. I'm just commenting on reports I have read and my experience from driving the car. In response to your points:

1) how can this be so when Falcon (known for is thirst) does better in real life testing.
2) For the performance versions this may be true. But for base models - not so. Reporters already comment on the extra work required to take an omega up a hill.
3)see point 1.
4) Having driven a VE - yes the handling is a noticable improvement and I was impressed how the ESP kicks in. I conceed here. But, some people like their cars to be harsh - i.e. hear the engine, feel all the rough bits an so on. That's what I was referring to.

Remember, the vast majority of VE's sold will be the Omega.

Oh, don't always believe what you read in wheels either. After all these idiots gave the Camira a wheels car of the year award, and at one stage tried to claim the VB commodore was the best car in the world.

In reply to number 1, the Falcon no longer is known for its 'thirst' due to the 6 speed auto available in some models and many refinements made by Ford Australia. It is a very efficient 4.0L engine now and left the Ecotec behind.

2.) The OMEGA does 0-100 in 8.1 seconds. The VE OMEGA is faster than the VZ SV6 and as I stated the OMEGA is the fastet base commodore since the VP.

Heres the performance information for you:
Official Stats from Wheels for the VE V6 Range:

0-100:

Omega - 8.1 Seconds
Berlina - 8.2 Seconds
SV6 - 7.4 Seconds
Calais V6 - 7.4 Seconds

1/4 Mile:

Omega - 15.8 Seconds
Berlina - 15.8 Seconds
SV6 - 15.5 Seconds
Calais V6 - 15.3 Seconds


3.) Answered in point 1...

4.) I agree. Some people prefer the car to be 'harsh' etc. Its part of why I love my VN over the families VS and VT (that and the VS has too much bodyroll and play in the steering wheel). But my old VL was great, you could really feel where the car was and how it was performing and you knew exactly when it would let go... Going to the VN I lost some of that feeling, and the newer the car the more of that feeling you lose I guess.

 

[mongoose3800]

Good to see someone who can discuss this and back things up with facts and not emotion. My next lot of responses:

1) It was the 4speed XT falcon that got better fuel economy than the omega. Nothing to do with 6 speed unit. Isn't the Omega supposed to be the most fuel efficient?

2) I'll concede the figures prove me wrong. Although, I still note reporters comments on how the car handles hills. Hence, the car has suffered a little for having extra weight. But, the difference is probably so small it's not concerning.

3) See point 1. I'm waiting to see more real life tests - not track tests.

4) It's all personal preference - I'm glad you see where I'm coming from.

 

[Scotty_Doesn't_Know]

Still, to prefer a VN over a VE is just plain incomprehensable... Sorry, I just don't understand.