Another Ford vs Holden Comparison!

[SVTVNM]

http://ninemsn.carpoint.com.au/revie...alcon-g6-18105

Holden Commodore Berlina v Ford Falcon G6

Comparison Test

Carsales Network verdict
Performance: Ford Falcon G6
Handling: Ford Falcon G6
Comfort: Ford Falcon G6
Value: Ford Falcon G6
Overall: Ford Falcon G6


The Contenders
There's no substitute for cubic inches... or so the old saying goes.

In the long-fought battle between the Holden Commodore and Ford Falcon the fight has taken a twist in recent times. The launch of the latest generation Commodore with direct-injection technology (dubbed SIDI) has allowed the company to shrink its V6 engine to 3.0-litres in the Omega and Berlina models in search of greater fuel efficiency. The same fuel saving technology is also applied to the 3.6-litre V6 found in the SV6 and Calais models.

Meanwhile, cross-town rival Ford perseveres with an updated but aging 4.0-litre inline six-cylinder unit that doesn't have direct-injection to fall back on either. In theory the Holden holds all the aces and the Ford should struggle to stay close on economy. But that's just the theory...

Real world driving conditions are the only way to test these arch enemies to determine if size matters after all. In order to do that the Carsales Network has recently tested both Commodore engines against their Falcon counterparts in a two-part, two-state test. But the test is more than just a fuel economy comparison, because we know people don't buy cars purely based on fuel efficiency (no-one except Prius drivers that is!).

Add to that the fact sales of both cars are in decline, this comparison is also a test of the merits of Commodore and Falcon in the current automotive landscape of smaller, efficiency focussed vehicles.

To cut to the chase, we've already listed our 'winner' across a range of categories and overall. The time-poor among you may choose to move on now -- or hit the keyboard in adulation/disgust (delete whichever is inapplicable). But to get the full story of the battle between Australia's two favourite homegrown large cars read on...

More details on Holden Berlina here.

More details on Ford Falcon G6 here.


The Test
Given that so much has been made by Holden of the new 3.0 SIDI Commodore's ability to make it Sydney to Melbourne on a single tank, we decided that would be the ideal challenge for the Berlina and its counterpart.

Officially Holden claims an engineer got the Commodore as low as 7.5L/100km on a Sydney to Melbourne trip and although we'll be travelling a different route it will still be the benchmark.

That GM sanctioned trip was via the most direct route, down the Hume Highway, but we've decided to get off the Hume at Canberra and take the Monaro, Cann River and Princes Highway the rest of the way. That means a longer journey, but one that encompasses a wider variety of roads and conditions.

To keep the fight fair the Berlina will go up against its most direct rival, the Falcon G6. Both cars are the entry-level luxury models, both similarly equipped and priced, and both are fitted with a six-speed automatic transmission.

The G6 does grab an early advantage on comfort and equipment, even if it misses out on leather upholstery. Advantages over the Berlina include a reversing camera, fully integrated iPod connectivity and a high-resolution, full-colour screen.

In comfort terms the two cars are on par, but the Holden has an edge on ergonomics with its more adjustable seats and steering. But the Berlina looks much plainer inside with harsher plastics and switchgear, a mono-colour low-resolution screen and the leather seats don't have a premium feel.

Our test officially began when we topped the tanks of both cars up in the Sydney suburb of Arncliffe (only minutes from the airport) and reset the trip computers. I take the first leg in the Berlina, with fellow Carsales Network staffer Feann Torr in the G6.

Heading down the M5 Motorway during the afternoon peak meant a slow crawl through the King George's Tunnel but before long the traffic cleared and the two cars could be set to a steady 110km/h on the Hume. Initially, the cruise control system in the Berlina impresses with its ability to maintain a steady speed, unlike other systems in more expensive vehicles that are both more complicated to set and have a habit of gaining speed down hills.

A weakness is detected with the Commodore during up-hill travel and overtaking, though. The smaller engine labours more than the Falcon on slopes. Indeed, whenever torque is called for at short notice.

That's not to suggest the 3.0-litre V6 isn't powerful enough, because it can pull the Commodore competently enough but it requires more revs, which largely defeats the purpose of cutting the capacity.

By the time we get to Canberra in the early evening the Falcon has taken first blood with the G6 sipping 7.3L/100km compared to the Berlina's 7.8L/100km. It's an ominous sign for the Holden because the rest of the trip is going to take us across more undulating territory.

Day two begins early in the nation's capital and with the new day comes a new car because for the next stage of the journey I'm in the G6 and Feann's taking the reins of the Berlina.

By the time we reach Cooma just after 9am the Falcon has continued to impress with more than just fuel economy. It's a more comfortable car and has a greater feeling of luxury to the Berlina.

Although the FG Falcon styling is more conservative than the VE Commodore we think it is already ageing better. Holden's decision to leave the MY10 Commodore aesthetically unchanged and let the SIDI engines carry the show has, in the opinion of this writer at least, backfired. The fact that Holden has decided to keep the 'Pontiac Commodore' in the line-up suggests customers want a makeover to the VE.

By 10:30am we've reached Bombala and it's time for another car swap, meaning I return to the Berlina. Before the hour is out we've crossed the border into Victoria and are greeted by a testing stretch of downhill, sweeping roads. Even though neither car has any serious sporty aspirations, the 20km leg is a good chance to test out both cars dynamically.

The Berlina feels soft, with a noticeable amount of body roll in the bends, which doesn't inspire confidence. And once again the engine labours when the time comes to overtake, lacking the midrange punch of the Ford.

Comparing the experience with Feann over lunch in Orbost, he confirms that the G6 was much flatter and stiffer in the turns. Interestingly though, despite this firmer suspension set up we both agree that the Falcon also has a more comfortable and compliant ride.

The final leg of our test takes us west across Victoria from Orbost and into Melbourne via Sale.

As we close in on Melbourne, and after almost 1000km of driving, the Holden takes its first major victory of the test. At Sale the Falcon was displaying a range of only another 160km while the Berlina was claiming it could go for at least 300km.

By the time we have reached Berwick on the edge of greater Melbourne the G6 already had its fuel light on for 30 minutes and was warning it would be out of petrol in 20km. So, not wishing to push the car the final few kays to home, it's time to refuel both cars and compare economy figures.

The Berlina takes the moral victory because its fuel light hadn't yet gone on and claimed it could still travel another 100km, but it's the G6 that takes the actual win. Based on the readings from each car's trip computer the Berlina used 8.1L/100km while the G6 used only 7.8L/100km.

Calculating the economy based on the fuel we actually poured into the car against distance travelled the result only changed slightly: Berlina 8.0L/100km versus G6 7.9L/100km. However, and this is where the battle gets a little confusing, there was a discrepancy of roughly 30km between the two cars' trip readings; the Commodore saying it had travelled further.

Ultimately though, the fuel economy debate is overshadowed by the inescapable fact that the Falcon is the better car; more comfortable, better equipped, better ride and a fresher look.

And proof that perhaps there really is no substitute for cubic inches. The larger engine gave the Falcon the advantage on the hills of the Monaro Highway. Perhaps taking the Hume would have closed the gap, but our test proves that smaller engines aren't always better in real world conditions.

What impresses about both cars is their comfort and ability to tackle such large distances with relative ease. Despite driving the whole distance without assistance both Feann and I felt fresh throughout the journey. It's a great testament to the design and engineering work by the local teams at Port Melbourne and Broadmeadows.

In the face of declining sales and perhaps even the slow death of the great Australian road trip, the Commodore and Falcon remain ideally suited to our wide brown land.

Look our for the second instalment in our Commodore v Falcon update -- the sports alternatives

[block58]

Carsales Network verdict
Performance: Ford Falcon G6
Handling: Ford Falcon G6
Comfort: Ford Falcon G6
Value: Ford Falcon G6
Overall: Ford Falcon G6

Hehehehe

The only real positive they said about the Commodore was the larger fuel tank... good stuff!

[chrisfpv]

Carsales Network verdict
Performance: Ford Falcon G6
Handling: Ford Falcon G6
Comfort: Ford Falcon G6
Value: Ford Falcon G6
Overall: Ford Falcon G6

Just about to read the article but can't complain with the above.

[Falcon_Crazy]

Nice review....now for them totest with the bigger holden V6..be interesting.

[kezzer]

Awesome stuff, not surprised really at all, if the berlina had the option of the 3.6l with no extra cost it would have been abit better on the juice.

[block58]

Originally Posted by kezzer

Awesome stuff, not surprised really at all, if the berlina had the option of the 3.6l with no extra cost it would have been abit better on the juice.

Of course that would pretty much defeat the purpose of having the 3L in the first place.

[Brazen]

Is that G6 without the 6 speed auto? Just great economy, from both actually. I wonder if the Australian public realise how good on fuel these big cars are nowadays.

[cosmo20btt]

It seems one article after another keeps confirming what every one on AFF is saying that the Falcon is the better car for the moment.

[Falcon_Crazy]

Originally Posted by Brazen

Is that G6 without the 6 speed auto? Just great economy, from both actually. I wonder if the Australian public realise how good on fuel these big cars are nowadays.

No they dont...i make a point when some have a go at my Ute - they can't believe the economy i get out of it despite my love of the loud pedal...

Will do about 3,000km next week - up to Brisvegas, over to Toowoomba, up to Rocky and back...will see what i pull on that trip.

[kezzer]

Originally Posted by block58

Of course that would pretty much defeat the purpose of having the 3L in the first place.

3.0l was really to keep fleet sales going, 3.6l is definetly more suited to hilly terrain, whilst the 3.0l is better suited to the suburbia in my opinion.

Good to see the ford ontop where it belongs though, imagine the 4.0l with DI! :

[pauljh74]

Originally Posted by SVTVNM

The Berlina takes the moral victory because its fuel light hadn't yet gone on and claimed it could still travel another 100km, but it's the G6 that takes the actual win. Based on the readings from each car's trip computer the Berlina used 8.1L/100km while the G6 used only 7.8L/100km.

Moral victory? It has a bigger tank! Lighter car, smaller engine, less power - but still uses more fuel than the Ford! Also, the Commodore overstating the distance travelled? Holden wouldn't exaggerate something to make themselves look better now would they?

[Road_Warrior]

68 litre tank in the Falcon
73 litre tank in the Commodore.

Hmmm. Commodore trip computer not speak with straight tongue.

[Paull]

Originally Posted by SVTVNM

However, and this is where the battle gets a little confusing, there was a discrepancy of roughly 30km between the two cars' trip readings; the Commodore saying it had travelled further.

A master stroke by Holden, employing an inbuilt spin doctor in every car they make

[Falc'man]

Go the mighty Falcon!

Originally Posted by Road_Warrior

68 litre tank in the Falcon
73 litre tank in the Commodore.

Hmmm. Commodore trip computer not speak with straight tongue.

Both good points.

[uranium_death]

How is having a bigger petrol tank a moral victory?

Falcon beats the Commode in handling, performance, comfort and value.

What more must it have to actually win, with the Commodore to be called 'truly inferior to the Falcon'?

[block58]

I wonder if they discuss reviews and news topics on JustCommodores... :evil3:

[Swordsman88]

Hard to imagine anyone (ford fan or not) who is into cars and the local market esp to be surprised by this result. Is there anyone left that thinks the 3.0 SIDI is anytyhing other than a complete failure (hey where are you prydey? LOL) Based on the quoted fuel burn i'd say the G6 with 5sp auto will have gone pretty close on fuel burn to the berlina anyway (if not a fraction more). When Ford puts in the 6sp auto on base cars standard (and other tweaks e.g. epas stearing sytem) it will just improve further.

Looking forward to the review with the sports models. Assuming that is the 3.6 SIDI which is a far better drivetrain package, should be a close contest in performance/fuel burn. I expect the rest of the review to faviour the Falcon.....

EDIT: Just noticed this. Apologies if this is something people have already worked out in which case i'm about to look like a real idiot he he....

Originally Posted by Road_Warrior

68 litre tank in the Falcon
73 litre tank in the Commodore.

Hmmm. Commodore trip computer not speak with straight tongue.

The bit i like about this is that while the larger tank in the commodore will deliver a longer theoretical range (obviously) you have to be very skeptical of the predictions.

The review says that at Sale the Falcon predicted 160km till it was out of gas, the VE some 300+. So effectively a 140km greater 'range' for the commodore. If you use a rough average of 8L/100km (for the berlina overall as measured) you work out (using 5 L more tankage) a greater range of 62km. WTF. Yeah, 140km more my bum!!!

Of course i'd like to know which of the two odometers is really accurate.....given the holden keeps saying it travelled further in all the tests i've seen i know which one i am suspect of....

EDIT mk II: here is a quote from caradvice XR8 versus AFM SS review...

Originally Posted by Caradvice

It’s also worth noting the SS Commodore’s inaccurate speedometer. It ended up being out by some 7km over the trip back. In addition, the analogue speedometer was out by some ~7km/h at 110km/h, while the digital speedometer was out by around 4km/h. The XR8 on the other hand had its digital and analogue speedometer accurate to 1.5km/h at 110km/h.

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by uranium_death

What more must it have to actually win, with the Commodore to be called 'truly inferior to the Falcon'?

A Holden badge.

[Chilliman]

Originally Posted by XCPWSF

A Holden badge.

Sadly, given that the Aussie motoring media is plagued with journalists of the calibre of Jizz Spanks, that is probably true :

[prydey]

Originally Posted by Swordsman88

(hey where are you prydey? LOL)

: :

for the record, not once have i stated that the commodore is a better car than the falcon. clearly it isn't. i just stopped short of calling it a 'failure'. i guess the fact that holden big mouth about 'out engineering' the opposition didn't help their cause any, but the 3.0L still hasn't performed worse than holden claim. it gets within half a litre of its ADR 'extra urban' figure.

my point is, and has been all along, when compared to the outgoing model/motor, it makes more power and returns better economy. sure, against the opposition it hasn't made any inroads but it is an improvement on the 3.6L alloytec

there - that should get mr swordsman fired up

[jpd80]

Without knocking Holden, I think the 3.0 strategy has the capacity to do just as much harm as good.
While you may attract new buyers, traditional buyers will be disappointed by the lack of bottom end torque
and that's why I think the Ecoboost I-4 Falcon will do better, it has more bottom end and better differentiation.

I think Ford will be able to pass off the EB I-4 Falcon as a mid sized alternative, opening up a new sales,
I sense that Holden may be struggling with their existing market, especially with Camry Hybrid upon us soon...

[Watto_Cobra]

Originally Posted by Swordsman88

..............Of course i'd like to know which of the two odometers is really accurate.....given the holden keeps saying it travelled further in all the tests i've seen i know which one i am suspect of.......

My analogue/digital speedo has always matched the speed check on the freeway south out of Wodonga.

I was in Canberra recently, and heading north out of the city is an odo check. There's 5 signs exactly a kilometre apart each so you can check your odo over 5 kms. My FG was spot on.

I'd like to see a 100km odo check because 5km seems too small to measure appreciable variance.

[4Vman]

Originally Posted by jpd80

Without knocking Holden, I think the 3.0 strategy has the capacity to do just as much harm as good.
While you may attract new buyers, traditional buyers will be disappointed by the lack of bottom end torque
and that's why I think the Ecoboost I-4 Falcon will do better, it has more bottom end and better differentiation.

I think Ford will be able to pass off the EB I-4 Falcon as a mid sized alternative, opening up a new sales,
I sense that Holden may be struggling with their existing market, especially with Camry Hybrid upon us soon...

Holden have a history of selling well of the back of marketing spin and fancy technical acronyms that in reality amount to little....

Their target consumers seem to believe what they read and hear..

[cosmo20btt]

Originally Posted by Watto_Cobra

My analogue/digital speedo has always matched the speed check on the freeway south out of Wodonga.

I was in Canberra recently, and heading north out of the city is an odo check. There's 5 signs exactly a kilometre apart each so you can check your odo over 5 kms. My FG was spot on.

I'd like to see a 100km odo check because 5km seems too small to measure appreciable variance.

Not so sure, even if your speedo trip is out by 20metres by the time you have 5ks you will find that it will accumulate up to 100metres thats a fair distance overall.

[pauljh74]

Originally Posted by uranium_death

How is having a bigger petrol tank a moral victory?

Falcon beats the Commode in handling, performance, comfort and value.

What more must it have to actually win, with the Commodore to be called 'truly inferior to the Falcon'?

Yes, it is as stupid a claim as saying the Commodore costs more at the bowser because it has a bigger tank.

[Brazen]

Reading the review, something just struck me. Do you think the FG engine is one of the most underated engines in the world being produced today?

It has fantastic power and torque, reliability, economy, smoothness, and even sounds good when revved. The I6 is just one of those engines which will be talked about with fondness for decades.

I mean a little engineering team from Australia has finnessed an engine which betters the might and money of a a new direct injection global V6 from General Motors.

The I6 in the Falcon just makes it so hard to consider any other car, even before you start considering the Falcons great handling, steering, interior, styling etc...

[1TUFFUTE]

all they do is strap a small turbo to that engine and you have the BEST SPORTS SEDAN IN THE WORLD under 100 000 man those holden gurus are ************** sometimes i say .....ha

[Paxton]

And the Bathurst test was a one off?

SIDI is just looking SILLY.

[ltd]

Good win for Ford.
Still, why on earth does the commodore sell so well?

[Swordsman88]

Originally Posted by prydey

: :

for the record, not once have i stated that the commodore is a better car than the falcon. clearly it isn't. i just stopped short of calling it a 'failure'. i guess the fact that holden big mouth about 'out engineering' the opposition didn't help their cause any, but the 3.0L still hasn't performed worse than holden claim. it gets within half a litre of its ADR 'extra urban' figure.

my point is, and has been all along, when compared to the outgoing model/motor, it makes more power and returns better economy. sure, against the opposition it hasn't made any inroads but it is an improvement on the 3.6L alloytec

there - that should get mr swordsman fired up

Hey, you aren't backtracking now are you prydey?!!! Just kidding, you are right, you never said it was better than the falcon (surely no one is that stupid). I agree on the 'out engineering' thing though...that was yet another bunch of baloney that just keeps on making GMH look so stupid, as if bankruptcy wasn't already....

As for ADR figures i'm not sure we can do much comparison there because they are well known to be inaccurate, all i know is that a car rated at 9.9-10.1 (with ZF) is consistently burning approx the same, if not less than one rated at 9.3, so i don't think holden should be haning their hat on fuel burn (which they are trying to do...).

As for grunt i don't doubt the 3.0 SIDI and 6sp are better to drive than the older drivetrain (although i keep hearing from fleet guys that the old car was more punchy to drive...) but i stand by my earleir points. Beating yourself is a moot point since once a new model comes out by definition the preceding one ceases production. The only true measure it your competition (and/or your own claims) and the 3.0 fails versus both.

I'm sure the 3.6SIDI will be much more competitive so am looking forward to that comparison.....

Till we debate again prydey