VE Commodore 0 - Territory 5

fordOwner · 04-12-2007, 08:43 PM

Just saw on TV that the Holden Commodore rated zero stars and was the worst for reversing vision in regards to child pedestrian safety by the NRMA. They said the distance from the rear of the vehicle to the position of an object such as a child can be seen is 15 METERS!

Territory was at the top with 5 stars as it is fitted with a rear camera and objects can be seen immediatly.

Pfft Ha!

mik · 04-12-2007, 08:52 PM

yeah i heard that on the radio , its pretty obviouse that the commy with the high back would be a pig to see behind, do they have the reversing cam as option?

Fev · 04-12-2007, 08:59 PM

probably not.. maybe on the calais and up

XR Martin · 04-12-2007, 09:49 PM

380 and Aurion wouldnt fair much better

Deadman · 04-12-2007, 10:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by XR6 Martin

380 and Aurion wouldnt fair much better

http://www.nrma.com.au/pub/nrma/moto...ty/large.shtml

AuFairlaneV8 · 05-12-2007, 03:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deadman

http://www.nrma.com.au/pub/nrma/moto...ty/large.shtml

they should have also included one the biggest sellers with private owners the xr6, the wing hurts rear visability I would say it would be a 1 and 1/2 star or less...would shudder to think what a VT would have got minus star rating?

XR6 Hulk · 20-12-2007, 05:11 PM

Dont park near a commy, they will reverse into you..

theunfairadvant · 20-12-2007, 06:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by XR6 Hulk

Dont park near a commy, they will reverse into you..

Lucky...I'm with AAMI

Lukeyson · 04-12-2007, 10:06 PM

first thing i noticed when i drove my inlaws VE SS-V, was the rear vision was even worse than their 2002 Monaro, and it was shocking !!!!

XCSEDAN · 04-12-2007, 10:11 PM

VY/Z/E have all bad vision out the backend from memory haven't they?

kocho · 18-12-2007, 10:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by XCSEDAN

VY/Z/E have all bad vision out the backend from memory haven't they?

Yeah, sure do.

Reverse parking the VY is horrible.

Angeldust · 04-12-2007, 10:47 PM

oh noes.. its the end of the world..

XR6_190 · 04-12-2007, 10:48 PM

Doesn't surprise me that the Terri won in that department, Any car that has a reversing camera, does do pretty well. That said from memory Territory doesn't have Reversing camera as standard equipment, but the Commodore/ Calais doesn't have one available at all.

All this taken into consideration, a sedan/ saloon will always have much better rear visibility than a SUV/ 4WD (without cameras or sensors of course).

Stoney! · 16-12-2007, 10:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by XR6_190

All this taken into consideration, a sedan/ saloon will always have much better rear visibility than a SUV/ 4WD (without cameras or sensors of course).

Exactly, we are talking about two totally different segments here!

Stoney!

new2ford · 04-12-2007, 11:26 PM

A fairer comparison would be with the Territory without sensors or camera - 1.5 stars. Still beats the Commodore even though its an SUV! As a Territory owner though I'd have to say the rear view is pretty poor but not as bad as some of the Jap trucks. Basically you reverse until you hear the thump. If that's a kid that's a pretty poor show. Ford should not scrimp on safety. Cameras should be on across the range. Shame Ford!

05MkIIFutura · 05-12-2007, 09:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by new2ford

A fairer comparison would be with the Territory without sensors or camera - 1.5 stars. Still beats the Commodore even though its an SUV! As a Territory owner though I'd have to say the rear view is pretty poor but not as bad as some of the Jap trucks. Basically you reverse until you hear the thump. If that's a kid that's a pretty poor show. Ford should not scrimp on safety. Cameras should be on across the range. Shame Ford!

What about airbags, arent they more important. I ahve often wondered why Ford can justify giving people with more money more airbags. There should be the 6 bags atandard across the range.

I dont see the the big need for camera's,

**Polyal** · 05-12-2007, 12:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 05MkIIFutura

I dont see the the big need for camera's,

I dont know what the numbers are, but atleast once a month you see some poor kid being run over by thier own parent (usually) in the driveway, its tragic.

IMO cars a safe, very safe; it the idiots behind them that seem to be getting worse.

ef_classic · 05-12-2007, 10:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Polyal

I dont know what the numbers are, but atleast once a month you see some poor kid being run over by thier own parent (usually) in the driveway, its tragic.

Its actually one a week :(

IVI194 · 05-12-2007, 10:51 PM

Being lucky enough to drive a Territory, BA XR6 and a VE i agree that the VE has absolutely poor vision all round. You can't see behind in the mirror if the stupid thing has a spoiler, can't see out the sides behind when you want to change lanes and the A pillar can block a Ford econovan at a roundabout.

The XR6 has the better vision than the territory.

Holden should be ashamed at spending that much money and getting the whole car wrong.

MNM96 · 05-12-2007, 10:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by new2ford

A fairer comparison would be with the Territory without sensors or camera - 1.5 stars. Still beats the Commodore even though its an SUV! As a Territory owner though I'd have to say the rear view is pretty poor but not as bad as some of the Jap trucks. Basically you reverse until you hear the thump. If that's a kid that's a pretty poor show. Ford should not scrimp on safety. Cameras should be on across the range. Shame Ford!

Ford didn't scrimp on safety, you did. They offered it to you, you chose to save some money, rather than put safety before money. If you could save $40 dollars by using drum brakes, you prolly would!

:

mcnews · 05-12-2007, 10:33 AM

I know the head check vision is terrible in the Falcon utes, ****es me off no end.

Dezza · 05-12-2007, 04:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mcnews

I know the head check vision is terrible in the Falcon utes, ****es me off no end.

Yep. I've driven one of those too. For work, I drove a BA one tonner with aluminium tray and canopy. It had the biggest blind spot down the right hand side, and the quarter window was useless for head checks. Every time I merged right, I had to put the indicator on well in advance, start moving across slowly, and listen out for the toots from any car I was cutting off.

new2ford · 05-12-2007, 08:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MNM96

Ford didn't scrimp on safety, you did. They offered it to you, you chose to save some money, rather than put safety before money. If you could save $40 dollars by using drum brakes, you prolly would!

:

Er, no actually. Safety (primary and secondary) rates at the top of my car-buying criteria. But before this first Ford I owned European cars where these safety features were standard across the range - not optioned to save the manufacturer money.

I bought one of the first Territorys 3 1/2 years ago (that's it in the avatar, still running brilliantly). At that time reversing camera was not even on the specs list for any model. The side airbags on our model was an option that we paid some $800 for - there was no question about getting them, but there was about paying extra for them. ...so that's my "$40 worth".

SUV owners are known to back over children regardless of how much money they have. The camera should be standard across the range.

You're looking at the subject from the wrong end of the tube MNM96. Still shame Ford.

Oh and also brakes .. the Australian made European designed cars I was driving in the 1960s and 1970s had power assisted disk brakes when your Falcons and Holdens were still using drum brakes - later with disks an option that you paid extra for. There's a long history to this with Ford and Holden.

DDXR6T · 04-12-2007, 11:56 PM

A sales rep who deals with my old man's work reckons it is the worst car he has ever driven in regards to general vision and along with a leaking valve cover in the first 2000km's and a car that is constantly having electrical faults (3 times RAA called in 6000km's) - I think holden didn't spend a cent of their billion dollars on quality control.

Falcon Freak · 05-12-2007, 12:16 AM

The VE has visibility problems both front and rear.

FF

Dezza · 05-12-2007, 12:22 AM

I really noticed this. I drove a VE SV6 about a week and a half ago, and when I went to reverse, I could hardly see out the back. The combination of a high beltline, thick c-pillars, and rear spoiler were not the ideal situation.

While the car did feel a lot nicer to drive than my EA (18 years of progress does that), I still love driving the EA with it's awesome visibility out the back.

MRJUCY · 05-12-2007, 09:04 AM

It's not just reversing; the VE has the blind spots of a tank all around it.

My XD was the best car for visibility I've ever driven, all cars have been gradually getting worse since then but the VE is particularly bad.

Powdered Toast Man · 05-12-2007, 09:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MRJUCY

It's not just reversing; the VE has the blind spots of a tank all around it.

My XD was the best car for visibility I've ever driven, all cars have been gradually getting worse since then but the VE is particularly bad.

Gotta agree here, the square XD/XE/XF had the best visability of any Falcon.

Even the BA has poor visability. I hate the huge B pillars and the boot line is almost as high as the Commy. But looking at the VE I can imagine it would be much worse.

I guess fat A, B and C pillars and high waist lines are the price we pay for safer cars.

Tles · 05-12-2007, 10:00 AM

Not really surprised when our Territory was backed into by a Commodore Monday, just didn't see the side of a big red SUV behind him.

JBomb3000 · 05-12-2007, 10:10 PM

I went from a BA to a territory and i found the BA better as far as forward vision. I seem to find myself having to lean forward on right hand corners in the terri where i didn't have to with the BA. Even without the camera the other advantage the terri has going backwards over the BA is much bigger mirrors.