HOLDEN HAS TODAY REVEALED its first major mechanical update for the VE Commodore and WM Statesman range at a press conference this morning at its Port Melbourne engine assembly plant.
The current 3.6 litre V6 engine has been succeeded by two new engines: one a 3.0 litre direct-injected V6 and the other a 3.6 litre V6, also with direct injection.
A new six-speed automatic transmission is now standard across the Commodore, Statesman and Caprice range, replacing the current four and five-speed auto gearboxes.
The new engines will be phased in from September, and production of the updated Commodore is already underway at Holden’s Elizabeth assembly line in South Australia.
The 3.0 litre V6 will be the standard engine in the Commodore Omega and Berlina, with the Calais, Statesman, Caprice and SV6 (below) receiving the new direct-injected 3.6 litre engine.
Although Holden has given its base-model engine a significant drop in displacement, power output has not suffered greatly. The 3.0 litre V6 develops 190kW thanks to the more efficient direct-injection technology (SIDI in Holden parlance), just 5kW shy of the outgoing port-injected 3.6 litre.
Fuel economy has also improved markedly. The 3.0 litre powerplant uses 12 percent less fuel than the current 3.6 litre, consuming just 9.3 litres per 100km.
The 3.0l V6 brings with it a slight weight saving as well, weighing around 10kg less than the 3.6 litre engine it replaces.
The new 3.6 litre SIDI V6 is also notable for being the most powerful Australian designed and built naturally-aspirated six-cylinder engine, its 210kW power output placing it 15kW higher than the current 3.6 litre V6.
Fuel economy, like the 3.0 litre unit, is also impressive. The upcoming 3.6 litre SIDI Calais consumes 9.9 l/100km compared to the 11.2 l/100km rating of the current model.
Holden claims the new fuel efficiency improvements unlocked by the adoption of direct injection allows the base model Commodore Omega to be driven from Melbourne to Sydney on one tank of regular unleaded petrol. Carbon dioxide emissions are also reduced by 600kg per year thanks to the SIDI system.
Holden also estimates that the new powerplant can return a $325 saving in yearly fuel costs compared to the current 3.6l-equipped Commodore, given an annual travel distance of 20,000km and a petrol price of $1.25 a litre.
LPG Commodore variants also benefit from Holden’s mechanical overhaul of the model range, gaining 6 percent greater fuel efficiency.
Significantly, most models in the Commodore/Statesman range will not change in price, despite the newer, more efficient engine technology that’s soon to be on offer.
When probed about the prospect of developing a four-cylinder Commodore to rival Ford’s recently-announced four-cylinder Falcon, Holden’s outgoing managing director and chairman Mark Reuss said that “dropping cylinders would be the last resort” in the company’s search for greater fuel economy.
Mr Reuss also confirmed that the 2.8 litre V6 currently built at the Port Melbourne facility was not considered for the Commodore due to the 3.0 litre’s better power characteristics.
Besides the addition of new SIDI and Ecoline badging, the VE range remains cosmetically unchanged. A styling update is in the works, but Mr Reuss refused to divulge exactly when the facelifted model will be rolled out.
Reuss also confirmed that the locally-built Delta-platformed Holden is still on track for production, despite Ford recently abandoning its own plans for a locally-produced four-cylinder Focus.
Loading ...
Comments
Click here to jump to Add Comment box
How do you get a picture next to your name?
Get a Gravatar. Click here to find out more.
About time the Commodore made it into the 21st Century with a 6 speed auto
WOW all this news about more power BUT look at the weedy torque figures….
Power aint evrything, torque is what gets a lardy car like the commodore off the mark. I still reckon fords “old” 4L is the go, ya just cant go past 391nm of torque and still get 9.9L/100kms (6speed auto models), the ford even puts out over 420nm and 205kw’s when run on the more expensive 98 octane fuel.
Sorry holden but ya need to address the torque hole that the “new” V6 (especially the 3.0L with only 290nm of torque) has always had BUT at least it seems like its going to rev out nicely.
Will hold full judgement until i get a drive of them in the next few weeks.
3.0L V6 doing 290nm is old stuff… Holden should replace V8s with blown V6s and V6s with overblown L4 or blown L5s
Then make V8 the big luxury thing… or the audiophile’s car
A//
This engine is heaps large enough, the VL had a 3L/6 and it went very well and was frugal [remember him?:-)] on fuel if you did/nt hammer it.
No mention on the turbo 6, leave that for the future [shhhhh, mums the word!]
LPG looks the business, Ford want to get a hurry on with its LPi.
What about a test on Falcon LPG v Commodore LPG?
B//
Do i smell a rat, NO informations on the baseline Ute in the above graphs?
Once again [not just lack of safety kit] us commercial vehicle owners get screwed…..
Just think, another 10% reduction in fuel use, 15% less emissions if they fitted MultiAir……
C//
Before you go all gaagaa here is what outgoing CEO M/R of Holden mentioned on the new 3L/6:
“Annual fuel savings of $325″…….BIG DEAL!
All this hoopala to save just $325 dollars p/a.
Just get LPG fitted and you can save THOUSANDS per year…
Get back to us Holden when your @ UNDER 7L/100km
0 0
Yeah but the VL weighed about 300+ kgs lighter than the VE. Weight has a BIG outcome on fuel economy and performance.
Peter that is why Ford will fail at using a 4 cylinder unless they are reducing the size of their cars.
At least Holden is still using a 6 Cylinder with reseasonable power.
Will, the reported torque figures for the ecoboost engine is higher than any of the engines announced today. Still, the announcements today are good, good to see 6 speed transmissions standard, however I think a lot of Holden fans were expecting more. Shame to see the 225kW 3.6L DI engine Cadillac have never made it over.
Are holden/australians scared of turbo’s?
Compare the “awesome” new V6 with Mazdas 2.3 Turbo
Holden - 190kw, 290Nm
Mazda - 190kw, 380Nm
Fair enough the mazda uses slightly more fuel - 10.5l/100km vs 9.9l/100km, however the mazda engine pushes even the 6 mps to 100 in 6.6 seconds. Cant imagine the holden will be anywhere near this.
Understand weight is a consideration (6 MPS = 1660 VE Omega = 1690) however I would have thought a turbo would be better - greater low down torque to get your fat ass off the line.
Maybe holden have got it right, but judging on past efforts it seems they are still 10 years behind.
The Mazda 2.3 is a 4cyl engine my friend. And yes, it would wipe the floor with the Holden offering performance wise. Turbo & SuperCharging is the way of the future. Many of the euro brands are going smaller capacity/w turbo, its really a no brainer. Turbo provides more power(and torque more importantly), with the benefit of greater economy as the turbo isn’t essential to the engine all the time. Turbo lag is a thing of the past.
Ford have gone the right way here, they have shown how they can create a great turbo engine with the i6 turbo. Fords 4cyl turbo is said to use 8lt per 100klm I believe, while producing far more torque that Holdens 3.0 V6… Win, win. Holden are behind, only offering 14l-15l/100klm+ V8 performance cars??? The XR6T uses just over 11l/100klm and is as quick as an R8 HSV. Holden have marketing down to a fine art though.
True, marketing is the only area where Holden lead the way. Its a shame, if vehicles were selling just on their merit Ford would be wiping the floor with Holden.
The current 3.6L has no torque, let alone 3.0L 290Nm! and i bet that’ll peak at like 5-6000rpm; and it’s gonna pull a 1.8 tonne commo?? Better off with Ford Falcon In-Line 6 for sure but at least they went with 6spd trannies and got rid of that horrible 4spd box.
Shame there’s no turbo option still…
Not good enough Holden. Why do the yanks get 226KW in the 3.6 and we only get 210? What happened to the 200KW 300NM 3.0 and why do Holden ship 2.8 turbo V6’s with more power and torque from Melbourne to SAAB? Where is this engine? The current design V6 is rough, noisy and lacks torque. Where are the weight reductions that were rumored?
News flash. More torque (and power) equals less throttle opening to achieve the same acceleration at lower revs which means better economy. Less weight means the same outcome.
I was eagerly awaiting the lease expiry on my VZ wagon so I could upgrade. I am very disappointed and I am a Commodore man.
Doesn’t the powerful and torque laden Ford 4.0l I6 use 9.9l/100km’s? I’m confused. How do you make a smaller engine, with less torque, and still arrive at 9.9l/100km’s? I must be missing somthing. Surely you would look at one V6 petrol engine, the 3.6l, and one V6 diesel engine. Not two V6 petrols? Time will tell if this works for the general.
My frustration with the GMH V6 engine, has always been it’s lack of torque. You don’t even need to be towing, just cruising on the highway, it’s constantly lurching in and out of top gear, trying to find torque which is not at 1900rpm, but 3500rpm and above.
I think that It’s good that Ford Australia and GMH are continuing with the large Aussie sedans. They are both trying to give us options that entice us to buy again. This should be applauded, and we should all get out there and drive these cars before deciding on an inferior imported car!
From a design point of view, Holden’s got it dead right. They set out to make the Commodore more powerful and more fuel efficient and they achieved it. All without needing to lop off two cylinders, switching fuel sources or forced induction.
Perhaps a turboed four-cylinder or diesel Commodore is the way to go but I don’t think the target market is ready for this change just yet.
@Frogger
They’ll change their mind when they see more power and more torque giving better performance - AND lower fuel consumption. The same as everyone knows the XR6T performs better than the V8s, this will be the turbo 4 performing better than the 6 cylinders.