Holden Commadore LPG review...with stats

1TUFFUTE · 23-02-2012, 05:05 PM

http://www.caradvice.com.au/159889/h...modore-review/

im sure this is new so sorry if repost but i noticed there are some VERY INTERESTING numbers and quotes fro holden in this article. Not to mention comparing range(not economy) to the like of hondas

Buntz · 23-02-2012, 06:07 PM

A Honda SUV? Why not an Accord?

What about the range of the EcoLPi? They've had plenty of time to add that to their graph!

Check out what I nabbed from CarAdvice's review of the EcoLPi:

Quote:

"Aussie engineers were made to work for their money with a new pre-priming system required to stop the traditional extended cranking times associated with LPG vehicles. The system works by priming the LPG fuel line when the driver hits the unlock button, with the final stage of priming activated when the driver opens the driver’s door.

The priming mode ensures that the car is able to immediately start regardless of the system or ambient temperature, a problem that often plagued LPG vehicles of the past. Another system employed to automate the process is single touch start. Instead of needing to hold the key in the start position, the driver can simply click once and the vehicle will automatically crank for the required length of time."

SO where is the advantage for the Holden?

PoweredByCNG · 23-02-2012, 06:14 PM

Answer is = NONE.

The media reps who have already driven the new LPG Commodore all say that they can't get within an inch of the claimed fuel economy figures, citing that in real-life driving, 13L/100km should be expected, which is actually identical to what the EcoLPi (prior to the MY12 re-calibration) returns under the same conditions.

Auslandau · 23-02-2012, 06:25 PM

Oh they say some funny things ......

Quote:

It’s also more fuel efficient than the Falcon EcoLPI. Better still, based on the average 20,000km a year cycle, the LPG Commodore costs around $1227 in fuel per year,

..... and the very next line?????????????

Quote:

very similar to the more powerful Falcon EcoLPi ($1279)

Per year you have a savings of $52.00 ........
Least they do mention quite a few times about the better power figures compared to the Falcon and it is one of the main negatives of the Holden.

PoweredByCNG · 23-02-2012, 06:40 PM

http://www.themotorreport.com.au/536...t-drive-review

falconnut · 23-02-2012, 07:16 PM

No option for a Space Saver or Full size Spare that doesnt intrude into the boot is strange.

Also why no runflats?

Are you just meant to get a tow to the nearest tyre place? Good luck if your in the middle of nowhere.

jpd80 · 23-02-2012, 07:21 PM

Edit, I'll rephrase that:

Wooing the hearts of fleet managers is very different to retail buyers...
Fleet managers don't really care as much about max power and torque,
what they really care about is purchase price and cost of ownership......

1TUFFUTE · 23-02-2012, 07:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jpd80

Edit, I'll rephrase that:

Wooing the hearts of fleet managers is very different to retail buyers...
Fleet managers don't really care as much about max power and torque,
what they really care about is purchase price and cost of ownership......

yeah but what about economy. In the real world it looks like noone has even come close to their claimed figures...that still only just beat the eclpi ford....so fail. I LOVE how you can option a full spare with no air in it so it fits in the wagon

thats the funniest stupid thing ive evvvvver seen in a new car....and that includes the whole ssangong range

falconnut · 23-02-2012, 07:42 PM

Even in the wagon??? Wow

Lukeyson · 23-02-2012, 07:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Buntz93ED

What about the range of the EcoLPi? They've had plenty of time to add that to their graph!

Very true.

So according to Ford, the ecoLPI has 88 litre tank, and in XT trim combined consumption is 12.3l/100km.

Doesn't that mean 715km approx range? *granted tank is nearly 4 litres bigger*
Or has it been a long day, and my math's is wrong.

falconnut · 23-02-2012, 07:46 PM

I find it silly that they are boasting 710km~ when i can get that on Regular/Premium petrol easily.

jpd80 · 23-02-2012, 07:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1TUFFUTE

yeah but what about economy.l

I said, cost of ownership, fleet managers go on leasing cost for fully maintained vehicle including fuel,
if the Ford comes back cheaper then that's the one they choose, if it's the Holden then they go that way.

All the talk about power torque spare tyre or not is all secondary when numbers are being crunched.

Mind you, if having a spare is important and the vehicle will eb run in the country, maybe Ecoboost
is a better choice, it still gives better fuel economy than I-6 petrol and is there abouts with savings..

I think Ford still has a very smart edge over Holden and EB may be the perfect foil needed to press
home the advantage and perception of better technology and more tangible economy figures.
Perception is very important here......

1TUFFUTE · 23-02-2012, 08:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jpd80

I said, cost of ownership, fleet managers go on leasing cost for fully maintained vehicle including fuel,
if the Ford comes back cheaper then that's the one they choose, if it's the Holden then they go that way.

All the talk about power torque spare tyre or not is all secondary when numbers are being crunched.

Mind you, if having a spare is important and the vehicle will eb run in the country, maybe Ecoboost
is a better choice, it still gives better fuel economy than I-6 petrol and is there abouts with savings..

I think Ford still has a very smart edge over Holden and EB may be the perfect foil needed to press
home the advantage and perception of better technology and more tangible economy figures.
Perception is very important here......

espescially when im sure the $2000 rebate on the ecolpi cars is only for private buyers..right? thats makes a big dint in running costs and will reallt make the ecoboost look appealing...letshope they all take 1oo of each

jpd80 · 23-02-2012, 08:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1TUFFUTE

espescially when im sure the $2000 rebate on the ecolpi cars is only for private buyers..right? l

It's not uncommon for really large fleet purchases to attract 20 to 25% fleet discount
and let's not forget GST Credit on top of that too..

There was an increase in FG II's Recommended Retail Price which in turn affects the discounted price to fleets.
Not sure of the exact wash up but I suspect Ford was trying to make EcoLPI as attractive as possible to fleets..
So unless we're talking small fleet purchases, those retail prices have little bearing on what fleets will be paying...

Am I wrong to think about a taxi pack Falcon?
Maybe it's tilting at windmills but if you have a great product, then why not....

Nikked · 23-02-2012, 08:51 PM

These new LPG commodores can predict the lotto numbers.

jpd80 · 23-02-2012, 08:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nikked

These new LPG commodores can predict the lotto numbers.

But sadly, can't get there in time to lodge the entry form...Boom Boom.

I'm here all weekend....

My poor XF · 23-02-2012, 09:10 PM

My BA goes further on a tank than the CRV. Soooooo...........

prydey · 23-02-2012, 09:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lukeyson

Very true.

image

So according to Ford, the ecoLPI has 88 litre tank, and in XT trim combined consumption is 12.3l/100km.

Doesn't that mean 715km approx range? *granted tank is nearly 4 litres bigger*
Or has it been a long day, and my math's is wrong.

haha, after reading that article i did the exact same thing

came to the same conclusioin as well. not sure what figures they used for xt range.

edit - also how much research did they do to come up with these gems

Quote:

In a nutshell, LPi has a power advantage, the simpler vapour injection has a mechanical advantage (in terms of 'work') and marginally better fuel consumption and emissions figures.

did they just absorb the dribble the holden pr man told them, or did they ring various lpg experts and installers and ask them whiich system would be the most economical. sure, the falcon may have a slightly higher consumption figure, but that doesn't mean it is the system that is thirstier. the falcon also has a larger capacity motor and makes more power and torque. to make power, you need fuel.

its one of the things that really annoys me about the media. there seems to be a real lack of research and no accountability.

naddis01 · 23-02-2012, 09:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by prydey

haha, after reading that article i did the exact same thing

came to the same conclusioin as well. not sure what figures they used for xt range.

Petrol XT figures?

**Mechan1k** · 23-02-2012, 09:48 PM

Awaiting the "real-world" tests.
Including towing ... and a fully loaded vehicle as well.

4.0i OHC · 23-02-2012, 09:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by naddis01

Petrol XT figures?

Yup. A nasty Holden PR trick. It's not the first time that they've compared irrelevant models; Holden once aired an ad stating that the diesel Captiva was more fuel efficient than the petrol Territory. Compare the Captiva V6 to the Territory I6, and things are not looking so great (even when ignoring the traditional Holden underestimation of fuel consumption figures).

4.0i OHC · 23-02-2012, 09:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mechan1k

Awaiting the "real-world" tests.
Including towing ... and a fully loaded vehicle as well.

We'll see how the 'Torqueless Wonder' will cope then.

prydey · 23-02-2012, 09:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by naddis01

Petrol XT figures?

ahh of course. holden doing what they do best!

**Polyal** · 23-02-2012, 11:30 PM

I dont know how the gm pr guys and gals sleep at night sometimes.

G6E Turbo 2 · 23-02-2012, 11:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Polyal

I dont know how the gm pr guys and gals sleep at night sometimes.

I Do, with each other obviously !!!!!!

Brazen · 24-02-2012, 12:38 AM

The commodore uses less fuel and you don't have to sit there in the drivers seat waiting for the gas to pump like the Ford. I would choose the commodore over the falcon as a fleet buyer. Falcon is better for private buyers if they want a sedan.

Brazen · 24-02-2012, 12:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 4.0i OHC

Yup. A nasty Holden PR trick. It's not the first time that they've compared irrelevant models; Holden once aired an ad stating that the diesel Captiva was more fuel efficient than the petrol Territory. Compare the Captiva V6 to the Territory I6, and things are not looking so great (even when ignoring the traditional Holden underestimation of fuel consumption figures).

Ford did it with ads comparing fuel range of diesel focus to petrol corolla

PoweredByCNG · 24-02-2012, 01:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brazen

The commodore uses less fuel and you don't have to sit there in the drivers seat waiting for the gas to pump like the Ford. I would choose the commodore over the falcon as a fleet buyer. Falcon is better for private buyers if they want a sedan.

Wost-case scenario is a six second wait for the fuel system to purge. That's *WORST CASE*. By the time you get into the car, make yourself comfortable, get your seatbelt on, fumble with the keys and turn the ignition on, the system would almost always be ready to go anyway. What's the big problem there?

BHDOGS · 24-02-2012, 01:58 AM

they always read like adverts instead of reviews i just choose not to listen anymore i drive an au v8 on gas and petrol and ill just have to go kill myself becoz of all the waiting for gas and lack of power maybe a chevy badge will fix it.

TMC · 24-02-2012, 03:04 AM

They are saying that vapour injection is a simpler system than LPi. In reality it's the opposite. They didn't put LPi on it because it was likely more expensive, not less efficient, or more polluting. LPi would win on both counts over vapour injection any day.

Real world economy would be interesting, especially under a bit of load. But Commodores were never ever good towing cars in any form they've been made in.