Originally Posted by FPV TURBO
Depends if you want a V8 or a V6/Straight Six.
Personally id get the AUII, they were a bit better finished off then the VTII, had more power, better gearbox and also a better driving position. Another good thing about the AU II is that it will probarly be a bit cheaper.
If i went the AU2 it'd be the striaght 6 and if I went VT2 it would be a V6. How much more power did the AU2 forte have over the VT2 Executive? Forgot to mention it will be an auto transmission.
The VT's/VX's have kept a better resale value havent they? over the AU's. How much of a difference is there because I don't have a great knowledge of the VT's resale since i've always been looking at just Falcons.
Originally Posted by dave_au
Not as bad as sometimes made out around here. You'll always find a few lemons with models - as if Fords haven't had problems with waterpumps and radiator systems before.
That'd be true, no car is perfect.
Originally Posted by loxxr6
VT definately has the advantage over looks. The AU2 definately gained some ground but for most ppl is still lagging. Style and fuel economy prob were the biggest drawbacks with the AU. Probs with brakes not being decent enough a size were fixed by the AU2.
VT autos weren't the smoothest of transmissions.... Insurance generally speaking is higher on a commodore.
I'd prefer the Ford. I can honestly say that working part time with a road service providing company that there are definately more commies breaking down than falcons on a day to day basis.
I guess we really need some more info on what model in particular you're looking at buying and what use it is for an accurate and fair comparison.
I agree, the VT with a body kit does still look nice, but so does an AU, just the VT a bit better, to my eyes, than the AU, especially the front end.
I thought that I had read more than once that the AU fuel economy was pretty good? Anyone what what it's like in the VT?
Originally Posted by Dark_Horse
I'll try and keep this objective in general terms across the range:
*VT is easier to step into and out of compared to the AU's, but once you've gotten used to getting into an AU that's fine;
*VT front passenger legroom and front seat travel is greater than that in the AU;
*VT fuel tank is larger at 75 litres compared to 68 in the AU;
*VT had fully electrically adjustable front seats across the range;
*Split folding 60-40 rear seats in AU;
*Wheel mounted cruise & stereo controls on AU, Commodore didn't see this until VX model;
*Superior IRS setup in the AU;
*AUII interior in warm charcoal guise is a great improvement over the cheap plasticky interior of the VTII;
*VT had more of a wrap around cocoon like feeling about the interior as opposed to a more spacious homely interior in AUII warm charcoal guise;
*VTII with a GenIII LS1, yes some had oil issues, but honestly, ones that didn't were a gem;
*AUII - Late Edition 220 Kw Windsor combined with the IRS in XR8 form was also a gem;
*I6 in the AUII is well balanced and comes up with the kW and the torque figures as opposed to the carried over Ecotec V6 in the VT;
Driveability: - extract from trueblueford website
In comparison to what they had driven, many who were used to front wheel drive levels of steering or that of early Holden's / current Commodores mistook the VT's dulled steering response in combination with it's defective IRS as added stability. This was in stark contrast to most media drivers who having sampled the best the world had to offer, found the AU's steering rewardingly responsive with just the required amount of feedback built in. Those in the know used comments like 'wooden' and 'un-communicative' about the VT's steering - in comparison they spoke highly of that included in the AU often speaking of it's 'liveliness' and accuracy.
No need to ask which I would pick - mine's essentially an AUII with a few Ford/Tickford excuses thrown in to make it AUIII.
Yes, I have gotten into an AU at work and I did hit my head on it, thought that was pretty crap, its too low at the front, but as you said, it shouldn't be too bad after getting used to it. The front seat travel being better sounds good to me, as i'll barely ever be sittin in the rear passenger seats and the electricaly adjustable seats sounds good to me.
Doesn't the VT have a split rear seat? Does the AU2 have an electric aerial like the VT does? Also the Cruise and Stereo buttons on the streering wheel, they would only be there if you had bought a futura or something higher than a forte since the forte didnt have cruise?
So the AU2 will have a much nicer ride, less bumby than the VT?