To the comment above, are you the writer of the other review? Well, at least two of you like the Epica. BTW Holden are talking about replacing it with a Chevy Malibu. That won't help resales of Daewoo Epica's one bit I'm afraid. As for the Porsche designed engine, which is quite underpowered for a 6, Mercedes designed the engines of most SSangyongs, but you don't hear of them getting rave reviews... still I think the diesel would be a better drive for the Epica than the petrol 6.
The the comment above, yes I am the other reviewer.
Yes, I am aware of the stunning GM Malibu, which will be arriving from 2012 as the Holden Malibu, which will be produced by GM Korea (No longer named GMDAT).
The Malibu will be an excellent replacement for the Epica, and will continue with setting the standard, which is ironic because in Korea the Epica was sold as the Tosca, which in Korean means "tommorrow's standard"!!!
The Epica really really is an ultra refined car in terms of vibration reduction and noise reduction. It's actually amazing, especially given the price, the Toyotas are like snotboxes in comparison.
As for your statement on engines, well yes they could have gotten a little more power from them, but that simply wasn't the point, and nor was it to steal Commodore buyers. Epica is all about refined and understated luxury at a competitive price, which they have well and truly achieved.
Epica was very poorly received by the public for mainly three reasons, very poor marketing, very poor series I with the 2.0 petrol, and the public perception of crappy Daewoo.
I actually have the official internal Holden Epica development statistics and development information, which I acquired through a colleague who couldn't believe how interested I was in this car.
The documentation states that, the 2.0 inline 6 is designed by Porsche and is the product of a 5 year US$200 million development programme! It's simply 642mm long and is thus shorter than many 4 cylinder units, meaning it's got excellent weight distribution, despite it being an inline 6 and not nose heavy.
I can confirm that Holden contributed the following:
- Engine calibration verification
- Automatic transmission calibration
- 40,000km of Diesel powertrain evaluation testing
- 64,000km+ of chassis tuning
- General driveability.
The GM Epica programme took 27 months months to complete.
3 million kms were clocked in vehicle development and 6 million in engine durability.
261 prototype cars were produced.
These cars are an understated machine. Go and test drive one. Go in as a skeptic, and at the very least you will say it was acceptable. It's your average midsizer that does everything just right.
As good as the car might be, it has a Holden badge on it. The Holden badge has a reputation in Australia as the car of choice for public housing tenants, low socio economic and bogan people. Holden make some good cars, but I and many other respectable people could never put our money down for one of their cars.
Plus, although the Epica might be an exception, most of their range are poorly built and ancient technology wise, introducing technology after it has been round for years. It's just not a very good brand any more.
Hi there, I'd like to point out just because Holden, GM or Daewoo wasted money on 9 million kms worth of testing, doesn't make it a good car. Did they mention how many broke down out of the 261 cars? Did they mention how many bits fell off?
Quite frankly I don't think they did that much at all. I rented one of these a while back, and was simply appalled by its performance from the 2.5, so called 6 cylinder. It's clear to me they didn't do much testing, and obviously didn't go near the testing ground with the 2.0.
My wife test drove a 2007 Holden Epica Auto 2.5L petrol in 2011 when shopping for a newer car, and said it was what she wanted. It was 2nd hand with 40k on it from a Holden dealership.
To be honest, I had never even heard of the car, and had not even considered it as a possibility for our household, but I also test drove it, and it was very comfortable and shifted well through the gears etc., and it was a good price, so we bought it.
Although some basic research before buying showed some negative reviews, I had a colleague who had tested the Epicas at RACV for the various evaluations, and he mentioned it was gutsy, roomy and all round good car, which agreed with my first impressions. It also had an alright ANCAP rating.
I currently drive a 1997 Toyota Chaser JZX100 2.5L straight six petrol turbo RWD manual, previously owned a Nissan Silvia 1.8L 4 cylinder petrol turbo RWD manual, and for a mid sized sedan I did not feel any shortfall of power in the Epica Auto, even coming from these Japanese RWD sports cars. It is no V8, but I think it is more than acceptable in grunt.
Anyway, the car's just ticked over 57k and a service is due; no issues whatsoever thus far.
List of other similar sized cars owned/frequently driven for comparison etc.
2001 Toyota Camry CS Auto 4 cylinder 2.2L.
2007 Honda Civic VTI-L Auto 4 cylinder 1.8L (very quick car with VTEC).
I'm a sales rep in Perth, Australia, and drive a 2010 Holden Epica 2.5L 6 cylinder. I've covered 35,000km in the last 6 months, and the car has now travelled 167,000km. I have driven A LOT of cars in my time, and I can say that Holden has amazed me with this car. I am amazed at how their sales reps managed to sell them! I hope they all got hefty bonuses, because it must have been bloody hard to get customers to hand over the cash!
Overall reliability has been OK, touch wood. Comfort is OK. A/C is excellent.
Performance, from a 2.5L 6 cylinder, rubbish! Very little torque, from a decent size engine. You have to rev it hard to get any performance from it.
6 speed auto transmission, laggy and dangerous! After coasting, and then applying the accelerator, there is a fairly hefty gap before the transmission engages; this can raise a few neck hairs at roundabouts, intersections etc. Holden have confirmed this is normal.
Fuel economy, a joke! The thirst of this car is ridiculous! If it provided performance, then its alcoholic consumption could be excused. I'm lucky to get 450km from a 65L tank in urban driving. Longer trips to Kalgoorlie etc will return around 550km.
You realise it has a Tiptronic transmission that you could change down manually if you wanted to before the roundabouts? I just got a manual 2 litre, and yeah it's a bit gutless, but considering how few Aurions are around, maybe people are more worried about other stuff than acceleration and smoothness.
I own an Epica, which most people that have commented so far don't. I own a petrol 2.5 CDX, and a mate of mine owns one as well. It is a very good car for the price you pay on the second hand market. A good car all around.
Commodore owners love to trash this car; 90% have never even driven one.
I owned an Ford FG XR6 Falcon previously, and drove the family VE SIDI Omega; both good cars. Other than the power difference, I don't see how they are that much better. Harder to park, less practical, much heavier on fuel. The overall quality is better, but then they were a lot more expensive to buy.
As the commenter who is the rep, what exactly are these other cars? What price tags do they have? If normally you drive a car that is $20-$30 grand more, well of course the Epica is not going to be good; that is simple logic.
This car has a lot decent equipment, a great price, is easy to park, is good on fuel, and is very comfortable and practical. Its only real weakness is when it comes to overtaking.
Comment dated 25 March 2012.
I will move from the review of the actual vehicle and address your views on the socio-economic categorisation you have made based on the type of vehicle one chooses. Your comments are downright insulting and have no place in a car survey forum. It would seem that you place yourself above the ordinary Australian in our so called "classless" society. Driving a vehicle with any other name or badge does not make you a better person. Think on that point and be ashamed of yourself.