Welcome to Just Commodores, a site specifically designed for all people who share the same passion as yourself.

New Posts Contact us

Just Commodores Forum Community

It takes just a moment to join our fantastic community

Register

VE - Big Whoopy Do Da

BadMac

New Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2005
Messages
75
Reaction score
1
Points
0
Age
56
Members Ride
VX SS.
kill -9 said:
So in realist terms about 14.0/100. I don't think car manuafactuers should be allowed to give fuel figures based on non real world environments.

Doesn't really matter, the old Berlina was 11.1/100k's so the new one given Holdens testing method is very slightly better, in spite of any other changes (ie more weight, etc).
 

drewins

swear word
Joined
Dec 27, 2005
Messages
411
Reaction score
9
Points
0
Age
35
Location
Gawler S.A.
Members Ride
VS Commodore wagon
BadMac said:
From Fnomna on LS1.

Official sticker number for fuel consumption on the V6 Omega is 11.0L/100km
Same on Berlina V6. He has posted photos of these taken from the windows of cars now building up outside the Holden plant.

Correct. Exactly the same as the old model so everyone should stop assuming it is heavier and thirstier.
 

Reaper

Tells it like it is.
Joined
Aug 15, 2004
Messages
6,493
Reaction score
11,463
Points
113
Location
SE Suburbs, Melbourne
Members Ride
RG Z71 Colorado, 120 Prado , VDJ200, Vantage
SlickHolden said:
This has got to be legit if it's on a ford forum. they have said that holden has found after handing over there first economy ratings that when they did them again recently it was better with some models, To the point where it was on par with VZ or better.
That was on a ford forum so you know they wouldn't give out info like that if it wasn't true. I'm amazed it came up:D
It's maybe because they have done some internal work on the engines fixing some errors maybe. Might be a Buick V6 to a Ecotec job?

Haha, sorry - not doubting any of the figures quoted. Just having a bit of a rant about peoples (lack of) decision making skills overall.

Look at it - the average car does roughly 20,000km a year and at 13l/100 (rough estimate for real world economy figure) would cost around $3,400 per year in fuel ($65 per week). If the car does 10% better fuel economy you save a huge $6.50 per week. Compare that to the average $35,000 car that will cost around $9,000 each year for the first few years in depreciation alone! If we all are buying a car for purely financial reasons, it would be hard to go past the Holden Barina, Hyundai Getz or similar. To move from a large sedan to a mid size that quite often costs more and has similar (or worse) depreciation is mad!

(end of rant!) :yeah:

Reaper
 

Full Spectrum

Bro it's a VW your Audi!
Joined
Dec 6, 2003
Messages
2,411
Reaction score
16
Points
0
Location
Melbourne
Website
www.news.com.au
Members Ride
Berlina V6
BadMac said:
From Fnomna on LS1.

Official sticker number for fuel consumption on the V6 Omega is 11.0L/100km
Same on Berlina V6. He has posted photos of these taken from the windows of cars now building up outside the Holden plant.
This was the first test done, They Holden want there new figures to be used now. Which is more favourable.
minux said:
So in realist terms about 14.0/100. I don't think car manuafactuers should be allowed to give fuel figures based on non real world environments.
My sisters Proton has a figure on the window of 7.7/100. When in-fact we my brother and i have been able to get it under 7/100.
Reaper said:
Haha, sorry - not doubting any of the figures quoted. Just having a bit of a rant about peoples (lack of) decision making skills overall.

Look at it - the average car does roughly 20,000km a year and at 13l/100 (rough estimate for real world economy figure) would cost around $3,400 per year in fuel ($65 per week). If the car does 10% better fuel economy you save a huge $6.50 per week. Compare that to the average $35,000 car that will cost around $9,000 each year for the first few years in depreciation alone! If we all are buying a car for purely financial reasons, it would be hard to go past the Holden Barina, Hyundai Getz or similar. To move from a large sedan to a mid size that quite often costs more and has similar (or worse) depreciation is mad!

(end of rant!) :yeah:

Reaper
Well for the first 12 months i have had my VP Commodore it ran 26l/100km. I drove it over 9000km. Last month i finally fixed my fuel issues and now return 14.5l/100km. Fuel really doesn't bother me when it's now the best economy i have had in a car. To top it off it does as good as a BA Falcon which I'm pretty happy about.
4 things stop me from buying a smaller better fuel economy car.
1: To small
2: Ugly
3: No balls
4: I'll blow the engine in 12 months. Or my mum will:D

Saving money on fuel is great but there are other ways to try and save some back in our everyday lives.
I'm just not a fan of smaller cars smaller engines etc. But i understand what your saying. I just think smaller can limit what you do. Such as when i go to the footy i carry 5 people and there crap they take. Weight of all 5 of us ruffley...427kg. Ad that weight to my car and it's amazing i can still burn rubber i wouldn't fit these people in a smaller car.
But someone on there own it might be the best thing?.
 

drewins

swear word
Joined
Dec 27, 2005
Messages
411
Reaction score
9
Points
0
Age
35
Location
Gawler S.A.
Members Ride
VS Commodore wagon
Isnt it 11? I saw that written on the window of one.
 

vztrt

New Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2006
Messages
393
Reaction score
6
Points
0
Age
40
Location
NTH Suburbs Melbourne
Members Ride
VXII Exec
SlickHolden said:
Well for the first 12 months i have had my VP Commodore it ran 26l/100km. I drove it over 9000km. Last month i finally fixed my fuel issues and now return 14.5l/100km. Fuel really doesn't bother me when it's now the best economy i have had in a car. To top it off it does as good as a BA Falcon which I'm pretty happy about.

Falcons run at 10.9 for the 4sp Auto, at least the sticker says it.
 
Last edited:

Dave398

New Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2005
Messages
123
Reaction score
3
Points
0
Age
38
Location
Perth
Members Ride
VE SSV Ute Nickel Silver
vztrt said:
Falcons run at 11.4 for the 4sp Auto, at least the sticker says it.

Yeah but in the real world its worse than that. I know a few people with BA's any their jealous of the economy I get in my ecotec (even though I drive her like shes a V8). :whistling
 

vztrt

New Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2006
Messages
393
Reaction score
6
Points
0
Age
40
Location
NTH Suburbs Melbourne
Members Ride
VXII Exec
Dave398 said:
Yeah but in the real world its worse than that. I know a few people with BA's any their jealous of the economy I get in my ecotec (even though I drive her like shes a V8). :whistling


I edit, it's actually 10.9 4sp and 10.2 for the 6sp.
Well just like mentioned above thats what the sticker says. You cant claim sticker fuel figures for one car and real world figures for another. Also fuel economy depends on how you drive the car.

The BA was 300kg heavier than the AU which would be the ecotec competitor. Also the BA I6 shits on the ecotec for power and torque.
 
Top