VZ vs BA1 - Ford Forums - Mustang Forum, Ford Trucks, Ford Focus and Ford Cars
Australian Falcons Discuss the australian born and bred models here. Includes the 80's 90's and present day Falcons offered by Ford Oz.

LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #1 of 2 (permalink) Old 08-11-04, 06:26 PM Thread Starter
Registered User
Aussie Falcon's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Sydney Australia
Posts: 2,153
VZ vs BA1

It's not on DRIVE.com.au yet so I didn't want to post it in the public sections.

Traditional rivals shape up

Author: David Morley

Publication: The Age (6,Thu 12 Aug 2004)

Keywords: Ford;Holden;Toyota


While the two automotive giants continue to trade blows, the public is the real winner, says David Morley.

It's a stoush that's been going on for the past 45 years but it shows no signs of slowing down, nor of the fight fans losing interest. And now, with the launch of the VZ Holden Commodore, the bell has just rung for the latest round. It might seem a predictable pairing, but the Holden and Ford big-cars punch-up has always provided plenty of scoring blows as the pair have swapped market positions over the years.

But if revisiting the same battle with every new model seems like a yawn, think again, because the car-buying public has been the real winner over the years. It's fair to say that without such good sparring partners, neither the Ford Falcon nor Holden Commodore would be the world-class cars they are today.

In any case, the new VZ Commodore marks the final facelift of the current-generation Commodore bodyshell, which will be replaced by the all-new VE model in 2006. So, although the car is nearing the end of the road, the big news is that the VZ ushers in Holden's first new six-cylinder engine in 16 years.

Along with the new V6 comes a pair of new transmissions and some styling and specification changes to give the VZ its own personality.

Stepping through the ropes to shape up to the VZ is the BA Falcon, although details of the Mark II were cheekily announced by Ford in the same week as the VZ went public. The handful of slight changes for the October launch are vastly more restrained, with the only meaningful alterations being a shift to a six-speed manual gearbox in the XR8 and XR6 Turbo models and cruise control on the entry-level XT.

With such little changes not arriving for another two months, Drive grabbed a base-model Falcon (XT) and its Holden opposite number (Executive), threw them in the ring and stood back to watch.


Both cars offer plenty of performance, space and ability for the money. There is still, however, some evidence of a tight price-target and inclusions such as manually wound rear windows, a single-disc CD player and plastic wheel covers stamp them as base models.

On the upside, you do get nice touches such as remote-central locking and power mirrors, although you'll pay extra for air-conditioning in the Holden (it's standard in the Ford).

The scales balance a little with cruise control a $660 option in the Falcon and standard in the Commodore (as it should be in 2004).

A Commodore Executive (there's no manual option) with air-conditioning tips the scales at $35,410, while the Falcon XT sells for $34,660. But add cruise control to the Ford and it carries a near-identical sticker of $35,440.

Ford Falcon XT ****

Holden Commodore Executive ****


With an all-new V6 engine one of the VZ's main selling points, we are somewhat disappointed in the powerplant. High-tech though it is on paper, in actual use it's not the great leap forward many have been hoping for.

At 3.6 litres, it's nearly half a litre shy of the Ford's 4.0-litre engine, but, like the Ford, it uses a twin-overhead-camshaft design for better breathing ability. It also has variable valve timing, even in the base model's 175 kW format (there's a 190 kW variant in the more expensive Commodores) and all-alloy construction.

Yet for all that, it doesn't feel like a dramatic improvement over the old Buick-derived pushrod V6 that was fitted to Commodores from 1988.

There's good mid-range flexibility from the new V6, but if you were expecting the smoothness and sophisticated feel of, say, a Toyota Camry V6, you'll be disappointed.

At lower engine speeds, the Holden is fine (although it still sounds disturbingly similar to the old engine) but rev it hard and it loses some of its composure. It revs freely enough but with a fair degree of unpleasant noise and vibration.

The Falcon's inline six-cylinder has zinginess to it that the Commodore's V6 simply can't match, and there's real refinement across the Ford's operating range.

The bald numbers - 175 kW of power and 320 Nm of torque for the Holden and 182 kW and 380 Nm for the Ford - suggest an edge for the Falcon, and that's how it pans out. Even though the Ford is 126 kg heavier, it uses its torque advantage nicely from a standing start and produces more urge on the run.

The Falcon's cause is helped further by its four-speed transmission, which seems well able to second-guess the driver's intentions and deliver the right ratio (and hold it) pretty much all of the time. In contrast, the Holden's transmission is still a let-down, despite plenty of work being put into the carryover four-speed. But it can still be caught hunting for a gear and the quality of the downshifts is poor. It also lacks the Ford's manual-shift plane and is best left out of "Power" mode, where it's even less likely to pick an appropriate ratio or hold it when it does.

Holden does have an excellent, smooth-shifting five-speed automatic on the high-level variants, but unless you're spending a lot more money, the old four-speeder is your lot.

The counterpunch comes in the form of fuel economy: we recorded a reasonable (considering the driving style on the day) 11.5 litres per 100 km in the Falcon, but the Commodore used just 10.2 litres per 100 km over the same course at the same velocities.

Ford Falcon XT ****

Holden Commodore Executive ***

On the road

For those who value more sporty handling, the Commodore will be a natural choice.

The Ford has plenty of grip but it is more softly suspended and requires a little more effort to keep it on line through faster, sweeping corners. The Falcon's steering is accurate enough but it's not as talkative as it might be and falls behind the Commodore's. Particularly pleasing is the way the Commodore can be tipped into a corner with plenty of confidence and will hold that line with minimal correction needed.

The trade-off for the Holden's poise is a reduced ride quality, with some impact harshness (particularly from the front end) that gets into the cabin and through the seats.

Like the Ford, the Commodore's suspension works very quietly, but the former has a more soothing ride quality.

Both cars exhibit excellent stability through the bumpiest of bends and refuse to be thrown off line.

Ford Falcon XT ****

Holden Commodore Executive ****


Both cars get off to a good start safety-wise, with dual front airbags as standard and anti-lock brakes (ABS). They also get seatbelt pretensioners and lap-sash belts all round.

Side airbags are optional on both cars, Ford charging $550 for them and Holden offering them for $520.

Holden's overall braking package is more comprehensive than Ford's, with Brake Assist and Electronic Brake-force Distribution, which ensures the wheels with the best grip get more braking power in extreme stops.

Traction control is offered by both manufacturers, but not at this level, although at least it's optional in the Falcon at $470.

Like traction control, Holden's new Electronic Stability Program - which brakes individual wheels to regain control when the car is skidding - is not available on the Executive.

For Holden buyers, the Acclaim, which still comes in under $40,000, gets all those features plus side airbags. A similar stability control program is available on all-wheel-drive versions of the new Ford Territory, but it has not yet been adapted to the Falcon platform.

Ford Falcon XT ***

Holden Commodore Executive ****


The Commodore is well-built, but in Executive trim the interior feels slightly spartan and plasticky. The door trims don't feel right and the dashboard instruments look fairly nasty.

The Falcon is no pinnacle of virtue in this regard, either, although its instruments are more stylish and its switchgear seems generally to work more intuitively.

The Commodore's big failings in that regard include the cruise control switches on a stalk (the Ford has them on the steering wheel), centre-console-mounted power window switches and the separate on-off switch for the stereo.

In accommodation terms, the Holden picks up plenty of points with better front seats and a lower seating position that makes the Ford's higher riding position feel outdated.

In the rear seat, it's no contest, the Commodore winning easily with doors that open wider, a more comfortable rear seat, more leg room and better headroom. It's also quieter at speed than the Ford and passengers have more glass area for a better view.

But the Ford's boot doesn't have the Commodore's swing arms to foul luggage.

Ford Falcon XT ****

Holden Commodore Executive ****


Holden-Ford grudge matches have often been close contests, but rarely have they been this close. With that in mind, any decision must be a qualified one, and it would have been easy to sit on the fence and feel justified.

In the end, we've gone for the Falcon by the tiniest margin, mainly because of its better ride quality and the soothing but powerful driveline, even if it does use noticeably more fuel in the process.

If you put a high priority on driving a favourite piece of winding road, the Holden will probably be your first choice. But that must be tempered with the knowledge that the Ford is not a world away in its cornering abilities.

The other set of circumstances in which the Commodore would win involves a family with bigger kids. The Holden's rear-seat accommodation is simply better in every regard and is a more pleasant place to spend time.

But long after the slightly better finish has worn off, the Falcon's superior ergonomics and more cohesive driveline will still be impressing and, for that reason, we've given it the nod. A points decision, but by no means a knockout.

Having said that, if we had compared the slightly more expensive Commodore Acclaim and Falcon Futura, the decision may well have swung the other way, considering the Commodore's potentially life-saving ESP system.

Ford Falcon XT ****

Holden Commodore Executive ****

For details on the updated VZ Commodore range see page 8.


For a country that has such a rich tradition of performance-based six-cylinder cars, it's reassuring to note that both Holden and Ford still place plenty of importance on offering a six with true performance capabilities.

In Ford's case, the pinnacle of six-cylinder performance is the XR6 Turbo, a car that has "future classic" stamped all over it.

More than lip service has also been paid to the quick-six notion over at Holden, but the death of the old V6 engine also meant the last of the supercharged engines that gave Commodore sixes their edge.

Enter the up-spec version of the all-new Alloytech V6, which, in its hottest form, features variable valve timing on both inlet and exhaust camshafts and sports 190 kW of power at 6500 rpm and 340 Nm of torque.

Holden's sportiest platform for the engine is a new-for-VZ model called the SV6 - which amounts to a mild bodykit, fog lamps and 17-inch alloy wheels, plus some sportier trim materials and instrument panel. The SV6 package doesn't include the stability control program, but you do get traction control, and side airbags are optional.

Gearbox choices amount to an excellent five-speed automatic or an all-new six-speed manual.

The highlight of the SV6's dynamic package is its flat cornering, good steering feedback and accurate handling, which makes for assured progress and also flatters the driver.

Less impressive, however, is the driveline, which, like the 175 kW version of the same engine in the Executive, lacks finesse and refinement. Rev it hard and it gets very vocal and more than a little coarse. The gearshift is relatively accurate but has a notchy, stiff feel.

The SV6 with its 190 kW simply cannot live in a straight line with the turbocharged Ford. The Falcon's 240 kW and 450 Nm of torque simply crush the Commodore.

The Ford's four-speed automatic (as tested) is also very well matched to the way the engine develops its power, although we're yet to drive the car in Mark II form with its new six-speed manual.

The Commodore handles with more inherent balance, and feels more taut and responsive too, with the lower seating position one of its biggest advantages.

There will always be an argument about whether we should have compared the non-turbo Falcon XR6 with the SV6, and that's a valid point. For a start, the two are lineball on price and their relative abilities are much more closely matched.

You can buy a turbocharged XR6, but you can't buy a forced-induction SV6 at any price. And as the relative zeniths of six-cylinder performance motoring from each maker, they will surely be directly compared by paying customers out there in the real world.

That said, the SV6 is a keenly priced $38,990 (the non-turbo XR6 manual is $38,665) in either manual or automatic form, while the turbo Ford automatic as tested is a more hefty $46,125 proposition.

The SV6 is a handy performance car in a six-cylinder world - and, arguably, a better thing than the basic XR6 - but the XR6 Turbo gives even the local V8s a hammering at their own game and stands as one of the best factory performance cars ever produced in this country.

-- David Morley

Table :preTale of the tape Holden Commodore Executive Ford Falcon XT Price (with A/C): $35,410 $34,660 Engine: 3.6 litre V6 4.0 litre in-line six-cylinder Power/torque 175 kW at 6000 rpm/ 182 kW at 5000 rpm/ 320 Nm at 2800 rpm 380 Nm at 3250 rpm Transmission: Four-speed automatic Four-speed automatic Wheels/tyres: 15 x 6.0-inch steel wheels, 205/65 16 x 6.5-inch steel wheels, 215/60 Length/width/height/ wheelbase (mm): 4876/1842/1440/2789 4916/1864/1444/2829 Turning circle: 11.0 m 11.0 m Kerb weight: 1568 kg 1694 kg Fuel consumption (govt. test) 11.1 L/100km 11.5 L/100km Equipment Airbags (twin front/ side/curtain): yes/opt/no yes/opt/no Traction control no opt Cruise control: yes opt Power windows: front only front only/pre/p

Caption :FIVE PHOTOS: Ringside: the Falcon XT and new VZ Commodore Executive all set for their head-to-head bout; Holden's mildly revised rear end, far left; and a look from inside, far right, which shows subtle changes. Pictures by Neil Newitt./p
Section: Drive

Aussie Falcon is offline  
Sponsored Links
post #2 of 2 (permalink) Old 08-12-04, 10:59 PM
Mr. Embargo
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Embargoland
Posts: 3,745
Re: VZ vs BA1

Heard that Ross McKenzie is calling on all publications to compare the SV6 to the XR6, its about time Holden had to grovel to the journos.

RPO83 is offline  
Sponsored Links

  Ford Forums - Mustang Forum, Ford Trucks, Ford Focus and Ford Cars > Ford Cars and PAG Vehicles > Australian Ford's Discussion > Australian Falcons

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Linear Mode

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome