High-tech All-new Commodore Ready To Take Australia By Storm

[Bossxr8]

Originally Posted by Maka

So can it be said then if theoretically Holden had a v8 etc rwd performance /sports car (Camaro) priced to match the Mustang, would it help things along sales wise or is it too late to arrest the sales dive?

cheers, Maka

They are chev’s not holdens, and projected to sell less than 200 a month. Can’t see how that will help. Not when they are 20k more expensive than an equivalent mustang. They will be rarer than the zb.

[solarite_guy]

Are the Equinox and Colorado's recognized as chevs?

[Fordman1]

Originally Posted by solarite_guy

Are the Equinox and Colorado's recognized as chevs?

They are badged as Holden’s - the Camaro won’t be.

[Nikked]

Where it gets scary for Holden is, Mustang sales.

ZB has every chance of being out-sold by a sports car...a niche car.

What happens if HSV sell more Camaro's than the Commodore?

[Maka]

Originally Posted by Maka

So can it be said then if theoretically Holden had a v8 etc rwd performance /sports car (Camaro) priced to match the Mustang, would it help things along sales wise or is it too late to arrest the sales dive?

cheers, Maka

[QUOTE=Bossxr8]"They are chev’s not holdens, and projected to sell less than 200 a month. Can’t see how that will help. Not when they are 20k more expensive than an equivalent mustang. They will be rarer than the zb."[QUOTE]

There you go Bossxr8, you missed that part lol!

There was talk earlier in the thread that the hero
car Mustang brings in potential customers into the Ford showrooms to look at it & maybe walk out buying another Ford product if not the 'Stang, can a Camaro have the same effect in the Holden showrooms?

Thats what i was getting at, what's good for the goose can work for the gander (excuse the lousy cliche' lol)?

cheers, Maka

[Fordman1]

Originally Posted by Nikked

Where it gets scary for Holden is, Mustang sales.

ZB has every chance of being out-sold by a sports car...a niche car.

What happens if HSV sell more Camaro's than the Commodore?

Tell that smart bloke “Hackney”, he doesn’t get it

[hackney]

Originally Posted by Nikked

Where it gets scary for Holden is, Mustang sales.

ZB has every chance of being out-sold by a sports car...a niche car.

What happens if HSV sell more Camaro's than the Commodore?

Again it doesn’t matter,after all isn’t it a “sports car”?Should imagine they would be delighted to match Mustang sales.Could very well happen.A lot of fans out there of the thing.

[hackney]

Originally Posted by Fordman1

Tell that smart bloke “Hackney”, he doesn’t get it

Oh,don’t you worry,I get it all right..All the “lights” are definitely on.

[JIm260]

Originally Posted by hackney

Oh,don’t you worry,I get it all right..All the “lights” are definitely on.

But apparently nobody's home....

[Bossxr8]

[QUOTE=Maka;6129363][QUOTE=Bossxr8]"They are chev’s not holdens, and projected to sell less than 200 a month. Can’t see how that will help. Not when they are 20k more expensive than an equivalent mustang. They will be rarer than the zb."

There you go Bossxr8, you missed that part lol!

There was talk earlier in the thread that the hero
car Mustang brings in potential customers into the Ford showrooms to look at it & maybe walk out buying another Ford product if not the 'Stang, can a Camaro have the same effect in the Holden showrooms?

Thats what i was getting at, what's good for the goose can work for the gander (excuse the lousy cliche' lol)?

cheers, Maka

Must have missed that bit. The fact remains that there is no rhd factory camaro and probably never will be. And the camaro will never have the same widespread appeal as the mustang anyway. Most people know what a mustang is. Camaro less so. Nor will its looks have such a wide appeal.

Based on GM pulling out of europe and abandoning chevrolet a few years ago there, there’s no way they will get the numbers to make the camaro in factory rhd. Australia, nz and south africa would be the only markets and without uk sales there is not enough to justify the many millions it would cost to put a rhd version into production at the factory. They rejected it in the last version and that included uk and europe numbers.

[Nikked]

Originally Posted by JIm260

But apparently nobody's home....

...bit like a Holden showroom.

[jpd80]

That's gold but colder than the taxman's smile....

[Crazy Dazz]

Originally Posted by commodorenutt

Turbos change the game dramatically by increasing the engine's efficiency.

No, no they don't.

You will generally find that a turbo makes the engine less efficient.

Also, the claims about the EB having better power and economy are misleading at best.

Sure, a 2.0l 4 will generally be more economical than a 4.0l 6, if driven miserly. And if you drive an EB to the standard, that's what you get, as you're so far off boost that the turbo is practically irrelevant.

Then of course you can plant your foot, spool up the ole turbo, and pretty much dial in whatever power you want. But don't expect decent fuel economy.

[Crazy Dazz]

It's interesting to think of that path not taken...

Holden sold so many appalling pieces of junk as their imported mid-large FWD option, that I lost track.
But that's basically what we have here.

ie, its equivalent to Ford selling the Mondeo as a Falcon.

I would have given my left nut to see the Falcon live on.
But I am so thankful to Ford that they didn't do this.

I have never liked Commodes, but if I were a fan, I would be appalled by this.
Is this the car than won Bathurst so many times?

And how can they claim all this horse**** about Australian DNA?

And lets not forget, that in a country where even the Taxis are Mercs, Opels are what poor people drive. Basically the German equivalent of Daewoo.
And they're not even GM any more...

[data_mine]

Originally Posted by Crazy Dazz

No, no they don't.

You will generally find that a turbo makes the engine less efficient.

So all the worlds auto manufacturers are wrong in moving to turbo charged engines (away from n/a) to meet stricter emissions and economy targets. you'd better go an tell them all.

oh will their faces be red.


Mazda seems to be the only one still researching n/a motors, but the result is very complex designs (e.g. their HCCI) approximating the diesel cycle with petrol.

[Maka]

The smaller capacity turbo fours are the one's that are argubly less reliable if flogged & not serviced on time with quality parts, oils & fueled with premium fuel etc.

Disposable small (whitegoods) turbo cars that last around 240,000 km is good for the environment & business (jobs & growth?) apparently hey lol.

A couple of my sometimes mandatory interesting links -

https://www.designnews.com/electroni...10258542158513

And from that sometimes funny & mostly controversial bearded leprechaun (well to me he looks like one ha ha) -

https://autoexpert.com.au/posts/the-...-turbo-engines

cheers, Maka

[mike_nofx]

Originally Posted by data_mine

So all the worlds auto manufacturers are wrong in moving to turbo charged engines (away from n/a) to meet stricter emissions and economy targets. you'd better go an tell them all.

oh will their faces be red.


Mazda seems to be the only one still researching n/a motors, but the result is very complex designs (e.g. their HCCI) approximating the diesel cycle with petrol.

What I assume he means is that the same engine would be less efficient in turbo form over na form. Like how an XR6T would use more fuel than an na XR6.

Of course a 2.0T is more efficient than a 4.0na.

What auto manufacturers are doing is decreasing engine size and adding a turbo to compensate. Not adding a turbo to an already capable engine.

[data_mine]

Originally Posted by mike_nofx

What I assume he means is that the same engine would be less efficient in turbo form over na form. Like how an XR6T would use more fuel than an na XR6.

driven in the same way they should be very close.

but sure if you're going to make use of the extra power available to you with the turbo, it'll use more fuel.

power = fuel

My BF GT-P, which I've had since new, starting life as a 5.4L 290kW (240rwkw), is now a 5.8L supercharged with 440rwkw, my daily economy has not noticeably changed over the life of the car. Sure it'll suck the tank dry in no time if I've racing it, but regular commuting/highway mileage is close enough to being the same.*

i.e. to do 110km/h down the highway takes the same amount of power - and thus fuel.


* my first 20 tanks averaged to 15.83L/100, and my most recent 20 tanks averages to 15.17L/100 (there was some highway trips in that last 20).

[Crazy Dazz]

Originally Posted by data_mine

So all the worlds auto manufacturers are wrong in moving to turbo charged engines (away from n/a) to meet stricter emissions and economy targets. you'd better go an tell them all.

Ok smart****,
Give me a single example of a turbocharged engine that is more economical than the same engine in n/a.

[Smoke Pursuit]

Originally Posted by Crazy Dazz

Ok smart****,
Give me a single example of a turbocharged engine that is more economical than the same engine in n/a.

You better call Ford and let them know their ecoboost philosophy is all wrong.

[wildpete]

Originally Posted by data_mine

driven in the same way they should be very close.

but sure if you're going to make use of the extra power available to you with the turbo, it'll use more fuel.

I can't get anywhere near the economy of the advertised n/a engine in my G6ET when driving very sedately (10.7L/100km). I assumed it due to the lowering of the compresson required for the turbo.

[data_mine]

Originally Posted by Crazy Dazz

Ok smart****,
Give me a single example of a turbocharged engine that is more economical than the same engine in n/a.

That's easy, you can't. But read on before you start name calling and false gloating again.

No factory engine turbo is going to be the same as the n/a with a turbo bolted on, there's always modifications done to them to support the boost.

from hardware changes like, lower compression pistons (with direct injection and more powerful ECU's this is becoming less required, so off boost performance isn't compromised), bulkier rods, to things like Ford have done specific to a motor design, removing the intake runner butterflies.

And of course the ECU is remapped entirely.

So there's no way to compare apples with apples, unless you DIY it.

So take a n/a motor, and bolt on a turbo. yep it'll be less efficient for sure.

Thankfully manufacturers don't just slap on bits. There's literally millions spent on the calibration and testing programs alone for a new motor.

FPV spent $40 million to take the Coyote and supercharge it. buying the superchargers didn't take up all that money.

[Nikked]

Originally Posted by Crazy Dazz

Ok smart****,
Give me a single example of a turbocharged engine that is more economical than the same engine in n/a.

That's not how it works.

A turbocharger uses the exhaust to force air into the engine, rather than it relying on the vacuum to do it. Essentially, you are using spent energy (heat) that would otherwise be wasted...thats one key point in efficiency.

Because the engine isn't relying on vacuum to turn air into energy, the size can be reduced (remember engine = air pump) where as a larger engine typically makes more power because it has bigger volume to draw air, the smaller engine makes better use of its chamber volume.

When companies can downsize their engines, make more power and torque due to a turbocharger...there must be some science working.


Oh...my EL XR6 was very good on fuel with a turbo slapped on.

[mike_nofx]

Originally Posted by Smoke Pursuit

You better call Ford and let them know their ecoboost philosophy is all wrong.

What philosophy is that?

That you could stick a 2.0 ecoboost in a Falcon and it could compete with a Barra 4.0? I think they already know they got that one wrong.

[Bossxr8]

Originally Posted by mike_nofx

What philosophy is that?

That you could stick a 2.0 ecoboost in a Falcon and it could compete with a Barra 4.0? I think they already know they got that one wrong.

The engineering side was fine. Public perception and desireability are a different kettle of fish.

[b0son]

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

The engineering side was fine. Public perception and desireability are a different kettle of fish.

Before they can make up their minds, first, the public need to know it exists....

[Bossxr8]

Originally Posted by b0son

Before they can make up their minds, first, the public need to know it exists....

Well that ship has long sailed

[Nikked]

The next subject in the commodore thread:

Clothes pegs, and how to use them correctly.

[Sprintey]

If your clothes peg has a rear hinge don't replace it with a front hinge and expect the market to buy it in similar volumes.

[Fordman1]

Originally Posted by Nikked

Clothes pegs, and how to use them correctly.

I put Chev badges on mine