Those figures for the power output are the figures for a new Commodore/Falcon. The problem is that the Holden engine, being an engine developed by GM for Buick in ancient Egyptian times, gets tired very early. (obviously an exaggeration) 1967 I believe was the first time it was used. (some Holden\GM boffin may correct me on that, I don't care enough to remember exactly when, but I do know it was the 60's)
I was a mechanic for Holden from 1996 until 2002, and noticed a strange phenomenon. They hit 150 thou kms, and like clockwork get tired, then the power output drops dramatically. I dynoed a VT at 190 thou kms, and it had 98 kw and 285 torque.
This Commodore also used very close to 20 litres per hundred compared to the Ford, which used 12 (even in my 450 thou km Falcon is still 12), so the Ford's Achilles heel is only that when you first buy the car, then it becomes the better option economy wise.
This happens with the Falcon engine too, but not to the same extent. I drive an EL Falcon, which has 450 thou kms, and when I had it on the dyno 3 months ago, it's still got 140kw. My dad's EL has only 120 thou kms, and its got 156 kw.
The Falcons are better as used cars, and have far better power to weight as a used car just new.
To add to that, the Holden 3.8 was only 147 in the VS/VT with 304 torque, and didn't get to 153 until the VX/VY. 10 kw still isn't much, but with all that extra torque in all round driving, the Falcon is more responsive and feels far better. In the Holden, if you're cruising at say 90 and want to get up to 110, you have to wring the neck of the Commodore, but in the Ford, all you have to do is feather the accelerator and you're there.
Yes, I've had do the the head gasket twice in those 450 tho kms, but all in all, I can live with this, as the straight 6 makes the job easy. Not so if you have to do a head gasket on a Commodore.
The major down side with the Falcon is the cornering is far worse than the Commodore, but then vs Commodore ABS against EL Falcon ABS, the EL's ABS is great, works well, whereas the Holden ABS gets stumped by bumps in the road and pot holes, and going down hill can be an issue in them, as it views these things as wheel locks, and simply won't stop the car as a result.
The weight difference is due to reinforcements in the doors, largely as Ford cares about their customers, where as Holden cares about selling cars and making as much money off its customers as it can. Shut a Commodore door and you get a tinny rattle. Not so in a Falcon.
Just to say I'm not a Holden or a Ford fan. I just like nice cars, and will buy whichever is the better car at the time.
All the evidence I need as the the longevity of both cars is just look at the taxi ranks; 95% Falcons, and of that 5% that drive Commodores, all of them regret it in the long run.
What I always tell people when they ask my advice on cars, is if you want to get a new car, keep it 2-4 years and get rid of it, or you're getting given a company car, get a Commodore, you will be better off as they are great cars new, and resale value is better than the Falcons. If you want a used car to keep for 10 years or so, get a Falcon; you will be better off, parts are cheaper, and they are more reliable.
I cant speak for the new Falcons/Commodores, as I haven't worked as a mechanic since 2004, but that was the case back then.
7th Apr 2011, 01:29
Those figures for the power output are the figures for a new Commodore/Falcon. The problem is that the Holden engine, being an engine developed by GM for Buick in ancient Egyptian times, gets tired very early. (obviously an exaggeration) 1967 I believe was the first time it was used. (some Holden\GM boffin may correct me on that, I don't care enough to remember exactly when, but I do know it was the 60's)
I was a mechanic for Holden from 1996 until 2002, and noticed a strange phenomenon. They hit 150 thou kms, and like clockwork get tired, then the power output drops dramatically. I dynoed a VT at 190 thou kms, and it had 98 kw and 285 torque.
This Commodore also used very close to 20 litres per hundred compared to the Ford, which used 12 (even in my 450 thou km Falcon is still 12), so the Ford's Achilles heel is only that when you first buy the car, then it becomes the better option economy wise.
This happens with the Falcon engine too, but not to the same extent. I drive an EL Falcon, which has 450 thou kms, and when I had it on the dyno 3 months ago, it's still got 140kw. My dad's EL has only 120 thou kms, and its got 156 kw.
The Falcons are better as used cars, and have far better power to weight as a used car just new.
To add to that, the Holden 3.8 was only 147 in the VS/VT with 304 torque, and didn't get to 153 until the VX/VY. 10 kw still isn't much, but with all that extra torque in all round driving, the Falcon is more responsive and feels far better. In the Holden, if you're cruising at say 90 and want to get up to 110, you have to wring the neck of the Commodore, but in the Ford, all you have to do is feather the accelerator and you're there.
Yes, I've had do the the head gasket twice in those 450 tho kms, but all in all, I can live with this, as the straight 6 makes the job easy. Not so if you have to do a head gasket on a Commodore.
The major down side with the Falcon is the cornering is far worse than the Commodore, but then vs Commodore ABS against EL Falcon ABS, the EL's ABS is great, works well, whereas the Holden ABS gets stumped by bumps in the road and pot holes, and going down hill can be an issue in them, as it views these things as wheel locks, and simply won't stop the car as a result.
The weight difference is due to reinforcements in the doors, largely as Ford cares about their customers, where as Holden cares about selling cars and making as much money off its customers as it can. Shut a Commodore door and you get a tinny rattle. Not so in a Falcon.
Just to say I'm not a Holden or a Ford fan. I just like nice cars, and will buy whichever is the better car at the time.
All the evidence I need as the the longevity of both cars is just look at the taxi ranks; 95% Falcons, and of that 5% that drive Commodores, all of them regret it in the long run.
What I always tell people when they ask my advice on cars, is if you want to get a new car, keep it 2-4 years and get rid of it, or you're getting given a company car, get a Commodore, you will be better off as they are great cars new, and resale value is better than the Falcons. If you want a used car to keep for 10 years or so, get a Falcon; you will be better off, parts are cheaper, and they are more reliable.
I cant speak for the new Falcons/Commodores, as I haven't worked as a mechanic since 2004, but that was the case back then.