Anyone care to notice that the official fuel figures were obtained running on 95RON PULP? Also, the official power figures are obtained on 98RON fuel. In the real world the majority of people just don't run on premium all the time. I wonder what the economy is like on Regular unleaded? Worse, no doubt. It would seem if you want fuel economy you're going to have to fork out extra for it. In the end, these new big cars (not just commodores but falcons, Toyota’s and so on) are really not getting figures any better than cars from 15-20 years ago - yet they have supposedly made huge leaps in engine technology. Sure power, smoothness and safety has improved but that's it. My old VN with over 250,000 still returns fuel economy of 11-12l per 100km and that's with an old pushrod cast iron engine! The worst I have recorded in the last 2 years is 13.4l/100k. I'm the sort of driver that likes to put my foot down as well so they are not bad figures at all. Driven carefully I can actually get under 11l/100 around town. Me personally, safety features set aside, I'll stick with my old bomb in the knowledge that it is more economical to run. i.e. I'd hate to be paying off any of the new thirsty large cars if petrol prices increase much further. Think about it - at $1.50 a litre it could cost you $105 to travel 500km at realistic 14l/100k. Pretty expensive. If fuel goes up to $1.80 then your looking at $125. An older or smaller car running at say 11l (a real figure) is costing you nearly $20 less to travel 500km at $1.50 per litre. I know I travel a good 300-400km per week. And, just that small couple of litres less per 100km makes a significant saving. Not only is this new commodore the most expensive to make - It will be the most expensive to own. Not a good result in today's climate. I would not be surprised to see Holden install the smaller versions of the Alloytech in the future if sales are not good.