Toyota Aurion AT-X and Holden Commodore VE Omega Road Tested by MSN

Over the last two weekend I have had the chance to do some serious miles in base model versions of the two brand new six-cylinder Australian built cars that have been introduced in the last few months.
I don’t bother going to a dealer and driving a few kilometers with a salesman sitting beside me extolling the virtues of the car and running down the opposition. Instead, I outlay my own money and hire the car for a day or two and go drive it over a varied route.
The first weekend I hired a Toyota Aurion AT-X from Hertz for a day (had other plans for rest of weekend, but still did a reasonable distance in one day). The next weekend I hired a Holden Commodore VE Omega from Avis for the weekend – sharing the driving on this occasion with Cyco. Sauc3 was also along for the ride. So what follows are my thoughts on the two cars. I’ll review them separately, then draw some conclusions. Also, since I’ve driven both the Mitsubishi 380 and Ford Falcon BA (BF upgrades would be unlikely to change my opinion much) I’ll draw some overall conclusions on the four locally made Australian six-clyinder cars.
So, first up, in order of when I drove them, the Aurion.
And a quick warning - this is a long report, but I felt that necessary to do justice to both of these important new releases.

TOYOTA AURION AT-X 3.5 V6.

This is probably the most controversial car released in Australia in some time. An upgraded Camry fitted with a smooth 3.5 litre V6 24-valve engine from the Lexus ES series, given a few sheet metal changes over the Camry and a new name. Toyota then has the temerity to target the car directly into the Aussie heartland at the Ford Falcon and Holden Commodore. All this at a time when the large car market share is shrinking.
I’ve read and heard many things about the Aurion. It’s FWD and has 200kW, so it won’t handle apparently. The design details are poorly executed. The TV campaign is shockingly bad. Its just a Camry V6 in drag. It’ll cost Australians their jobs. This last one explained by the suggestion that if it sells well, it will inevitably take sales from the Falcon and Commodore. This in turn will lead to job losses since Ford Australia and Holden’s very survival depend more on the sales success of the Falcon and Commodore than Toyota Austalia’s success is dependent on the Aurion. The debate I’ve read on various forums about the Aurion tends to get pretty heated. On the one hand, there’s the extreme critics of the car who point to all the things they hate about it (FWD, styling, perception of Toyota as bland, etc). On the other side are the car’s defenders who go on an on about the things they love about it (refinement, quality, reliability and performance). It’s a debate with little middle ground. And critics seem to be in greater supply than the lovers/fanboys of the Aurion. I’ll admit I’ve done my fair share of defending the Aurion. But up until now I haven’t driven one to back up my opinions.
So, putting aside the controversy, just how good is the Aurion?
Put simply, very, very good. It is a car with very few weaknesses and some outstanding strengths.
The model I drove was the base model AT-X. The AT-X is priced at $34,990. For that you get a 3.5 litre DOHC V6 engine producing 200kW@6200rpm power and 336Nm@4700rpm of torque coupled to a six-speed automatic gearbox. A manual gearbox is unavailable. Standard equipment includes power steering, tilt and reach adjustable steering wheel, cruise control, remote central locking, air conditioning, power windows front and rear, power mirrors, a six-speaker stereo with single CD and audio controls on the steering wheel and a fully electric front seat. Safety is taken care of by six airbags (dual front, dual side and curtain bags), ABS with Electronic Brake Distribution and Vehicle Stability Control (or ESP as its known by other manufacturers) with traction control.
The only major omission from the equipment list is a trip computer – something I find useful and missed having.
There is no doubting the exceptional value for money that the car offers considering the extensive equipment and safety list and the advanced drivetrain.
The engine and transmission are the Aurion’s big trump card on paper. With 200kW@6200rpm the engine has the potential to be peaky. However, with peak torque produced at a lower 4700rpm, there was never any need to worry. Yes, the engine needs to be revved to produce its absolute best. But there is power on tap from very low down all the way up to the redline. Not quite the instant surge of the Falcon, but the Aurion is never caught short. There is a slight hesitation when the accelerator is pressed hard, but once on song, the Aurion is damned quick. Magazine tests (Wheels in this case) indicate a 0-100 km/h time of 7.5 seconds, a 0-400m time of 15.5 seconds and in-gear 80-120km/h time of 4.3 seconds and the car feels that quick by seat of the pants feel.
The engine delivers its performance in a super smooth and extremely flexible manner. There’s a nice sounding exhaust note under acceleration (it has dual rear exhausts), and once cruising is extremely quiet and refined. This, simply put, is a brilliant engine. The engine is very well matched to the standard six-speed auto. The gearbox slurs seamlessly between gears. Being a modern fuzzy-logic gearbox it learns from the driver. So, by the end of the drive, the gearbox was holding gears just that bit longer, the way I like in town driving and not rushing through the gears like it did when I first picked it up. Left to its own devices, the gearbox is never intrusive, seems to always be in the right gear at the right time and never hesitates before selecting gear. Accelerating hard, then backing off doesn’t catch it out. The ‘box has a tiptronic mode. From my perspective, the change for the tiptronic mode is around the wrong way – using the shift forward to change up, back to change down. This is the same setup as the Mitsubishi 380 and the opposite setup of the Falcon. In tiptronic mode, the computer will normally let the driver decide when to change up. It will hold the selected gear all the way to the red line and in terms of operation is extremely smooth, quick and light to use – the best tiptronic I’ve experienced to this stage in regard to how easy to use it is. However, the computer will occasionally over-ride the driver’s selected gear choice. At one stage while sitting in sixth in tiptronic mode I attempted to accelerate up to 110km/h to see if the car would hold sixth. It didn’t – the computer deciding to over-ride and drop down two gears for what the computer thought would be more optimal acceleration. A pity – in all other respects, this gearbox is brilliant. It is a shame that the gearbox will occasionally try to out-think the driver and hopefully Toyota will retune the electronics in future updates so that when driven in tiptronic mode, the computer will not intervene.

The Aurion’s engine/gearbox combination is by far its best feature. This is not to imply that the rest of the car is average, just to point out how great the engine/transmission combination is.
Stepping inside the Aurion, the driver is immediately able to get comfortable and find an ideal driver-focused seating position. The driving position is ideal and it will take drivers of all shapes and sizes next to no time to get comfortable. The seat has more than enough adjustment, the steering wheel is the right size and height, and the transmission lever falls close to hand. In tiptronic mode the transmission lever sits right next to the driver’s hip, nice and close to the reach, a nice touch. I have yet to drive a car in which I could get comfortable so quickly and in which everything falls to hand so easily. It is definitely set up in a very driver focused way. The driver’s seat itself is very comfortable, with plenty of side bolstering. The driver sits low and unlike some of the opposition, it feels like you sitting in the seat and not on it. The rest of the ergonomic relationship matches the seating position. All the controls fall to hand easily. There’s a quality feel to the indicator and wiper stalks. I love the way the instrument panel lights up. The Aurion uses Optitron instruments – stolen from Lexus – which begin blacked out on ignition and then light up once the ignition is turned on. I thought it a touch of quality and very impressive to look at. The instruments themselves are easy to read. A minor niggle is that the plastics used in the dash are fairly ordinary, but least well put together.
So, the Aurion has a fantastic engine and a very driver focused seating position. This bodes well for enthusiastic or at least enjoyable motoring. Dynamically, the Aurion earns high pass marks. Handling is generally very good. There is an impressive lack of body roll for a car this size. Body control and chassis rigidity are very good with no flex ever felt though the body even on rough roads or under braking. The car is stable up to fairly high speeds. Supposedly a FWD car with this much power shouldn’t be able to handle. At least if you believe certain critics. Well – they’re wrong. This car (the base model with a more comfort focused suspension, remember) will treat sharp 45km/h corners with disdain flying through at well over 80km/h without any effort. Understeer is well contained. Grip is very good, especially considering the car only has relatively narrow 215/60 R16 tyres, though grip would obviously be even better with wider tyres. The VSC system is rarely noticed, though it is obviously helping once speeds build up in corners. The steering is generally good – well weighted, direct and consistent. There is enough feedback to know what the front wheels are up to, but as with a lot of modern electric steering systems, it could do with even more feedback. The steering is also just a touch vague around the straight ahead position. It is nice and light for city driving, but firms up noticeably at highway speed. This is not the best FWD car I’ve driven in terms of handling – that honour still belongs to the lighter Mazda6. However, it is definitely a very enjoyable car to drive through corners, with easily accessible and controllable handling.
The only let down of the dynamics is that the ride is quite fidgety and unsettling across bumpy roads. A bit of a let down considering how comfortable the ride is around town and on smooth roads. Better damping would sort it out.
One telling thing about the dynamics is how easy the car was to steer around a potential trouble spot. A truck driver in front of me on the freeway chose the very last moment to swerve around a nose to tail crash ahead (nothing in the other lane thankfully), and since I was unsighted behind the truck I was forced to do the same. I was sitting far enough behind the truck to deal with the situation anyway, but the Aurion handled this situation with no drama whatsoever and in a manner far more unfused than any previous car I driven when confronted with similar situations. The excellent brakes and VSC systems obviously helped.
There is also some minor tyre noise on bad surfaces – not enough to upset the generally high refinement levels of the car, but still noticeable.
Torque steer, the usual criticism of a front wheel drive car is not completely eliminated. However, it is absent in corners. I only noticed it twice – the first two times I accelerated very hard from standstill. A brief tug on the steering, by no means excessive. However, it was there. Interestingly, when I tried to replicate the torque steer later in the drive under hard acceleration it had disappeared. The car I drove had just 5kms on the clock when I picked it up, so was brand spanking new – basically a virgin car that I was first to break in. I suspect that the computer was still in learning mode and once it learned from the first couple of detections of torque-steer, it calibrated the VSC/traction control system to eliminate it from happening again. Just a theory, but even under hard acceleration just before I returned the car, I just could not get it to torque steer again. I have to mention the torque steer, simply because I did experience it. It was not in any way bad and as I mentioned, I suspect it will never be experienced by most Aurion drivers once the electronics have bedded in and “learned”. If I drive an Aurion in the future with more kilometers on the clock, I’ll see can generate torque steer again.

Now to the question of economy, something that is becoming more important to buyers, even with recent reductions in petrol prices. I covered a total of 260 kilometres in a combination of city, twisty secondary roads and highway motoring. The Aurion used just 20 litres of 91 unleaded to cover the 260 kilometres. This equates to an excellent 7.7L/100km/h. Absolutely stunning for a powerful six-clyinder car and in no way was I driving gently.

In common with some other modern cars I’ve driven the Aurion has poor levels of visibility with pillars that are just too thick. In order to meet modern safety legislation, manufacturers are using thicker pillars. In order to improve occupant safety in a crash they are compromising primary safety by putting in bad blind spots that make overtaking, lane changes and negotiating intersections more dangerous than necessary. Pretty much every car I driven recently has suffered this problem. The Aurion is an offender, but not the worst offender.

I’ll touch on styling briefly. To me, it is an average looking car. I like the details like the twin exhaust at the rear which helps improve the rear end appearance. The grille is too large and it could do with alloy wheels. The Sportivo versions look better.

This car has an excellent engine/transmission combination, is very comfortable, refined and smooth. And, yes, it is actually quite enjoyable to drive with generally good overall dynamics. This is not a Toyota you buy just because its good value for money – it is a Toyota that is worth buying for other reasons. In summary, forget the criticism and controversy. Go and drive an Aurion for yourself. It really is a good car.

LIKES
Excellent engine/transmission combination, performance, smoothness, refinement, value for money, safety levels, decent dynamics and steering, excellent fuel economy.

DISLIKES
Ride on rough roads, lack of trip computer, poor visibility, unavailable with a manual transmission.

SPECS
Drivetrain

Engine: V6, DOHC, 24v.
Layout: front engine/front wheel drive.
Capacity: 3,456cc
Power: 200kW@6200rpm
Torque: 336Nm@4700rpm
Redline/Cutout: 6250/6500rpm
Transmission: Six-speed automatic with tiptronic function

Dimensions
Length: 4825mm
Width: 1820mm
Height: 1470mm
Wheelbase: 2775mm
Weight: 1620kg.

Performance (from Wheels magazine)
0-100km/h: 7.5 sec
0-400m: 15.5 sec
80-120km: 4.3 sec
Top speed: 240km/h est.

Total distance covered: 260km
Fuel used: 20litres
Fuel economy: 7.7L/100km (36.7mpg)

HOLDEN COMMODORE VE OMEGA

The Commodore VE is the latest of a long line of Commodores stretching back to the VB model introduced in late 1978. An all new Commodore is always an exciting moment for most Australian car enthusiasts, as such an event only comes along every eight years or so. The VE is a clean sheet design, supposedly costing a billion dollars to develop. Both the V6 and V8 engines are carried over from the previous VZ, but upgraded. Everything else is new.
Thank to the internet, the VE was perhaps more keenly anticipated than any other Commodore in the past. And when it was released, most of us enthusiasts weren’t disappointed. The V8 variants – in particular the Calais-V and the SS-V – were very impressive. Early drive reports matched the hype. This was the best driving Commodore ever. The SV6 was a slight disappointment according to some writers (particularly Go-Auto and Drive), but the V8s were even better than expected. What about the base model though? Virtually forgotten in the early hype, the fleet version of the Commodore is the one that is likely be the biggest seller in the VE range. Well, Wheels magazine tested it and suggested that “In the real world, Omega’s relaxed manners remind…of the way XJ Jags behaved in their prime – calm, self-confident, and graceful”. High praise indeed. But what about the old fashioned 4-speed auto, the lack of standard air conditioning and the fuel consumption? Largely brushed aside by the car’s virtues it seemed.
So I was looking forward to driving it. Four years ago when the Falcon BA was released, I thought it was an impressive leap forward for a large Aussie car once I finally got the chance to drive it. The reports suggested that the VE, even in base model Omega form, would be just as impressive. Well, was it?
I rented a VE from Avis while in Adelaide over the past weekend for the Classic Adelaide event. Since I was meeting up with Cyco and Sauc3, this time around I was going to be able to get a second or third opinion. Cyco shared the driving and I’m sure he’ll share his comments on what he thought of the Omega.
The first few miles in the Omega were disappointing, to say the least. The car uses an upgraded and more powerful version of the Alloytec 3.6 litre V6 engine that was fitted to the VZ. The engine produces 180kW@6000rpm with 330Nm@2600rpm. However, the car weighs a not inconsiderable 1690kg and uses a four-speed automatic. It was the engine that was the source of my disappointment in the early kilometers. It sounded harsh and coarse at city speeds, didn’t feel particularly torquey, and the engine note was a lacklustre droning sound. The large steering wheel and high driving position didn’t help my early impressions.
As the weekend went on, and we drove more kilometers at higher speeds, my disappointment with the engine and performance softened slightly. The engine never sounds very impressive, but at least it is smooth, quiet and refined at highway speeds. The engine feels more flexible from 80-140km/h than it does around town. The overall impression of the engine is one that it is merely adequate. The SV6 and Calais get a 190kW version of the engine, so hopefully that is somewhat better than the 180kW version.
The auto doesn’t help much. It really is disappointing that a 4-speed auto is still used in what is meant to be a modern, clean-sheet design. Yes, I understand that claims that Holden had to save money somewhere, and that they couldn’t keep the Omega’s price down to an acceptable level if they put a better transmission in it. However, all of the opposition offer more ratios in their transmissions either as standard (Aurion, 380) or as a low cost option (Falcon). At the very least the VE Omega should be able to be ordered with the 5-speed or 6-speed auto as an option. However, its stuck with the 4-speed – at least until the first update. The 4-speed is reasonable. It certainly does an adequate job, but is let down by clunking harshly into gear and it can be caught out very easily. Coming to a near complete stop to negotiate a slow turn at an intersection will leave the transmission dithering before actually changing down from fourth back into the needed first or second. And it will clunk noticeable once it does actually change down. It is also reluctant to change down under enthusiastic driving. Left to its own devices when just cruising, the transmission does an acceptable, if occasionally noisy job, but it is rather sloppy and indecisive once the driver starts to drive enthusiastically.
Performance is also in the acceptable category. Wheels magazine tests suggest that the 0-100km/h time should be about 8.6 seconds. Three up, we couldn’t beat 10 seconds. The engine refuses to rev over 2,400rpm when held against the brake, making launching the car hard very difficult. It really needs more revs up. Apparently the computer intervenes to protect the gearbox when the driver attempts such hard launches.

The VE Omega is priced at $34,490. Standard equipment includes a six speaker Blaupunkt AM/FM stereo with single disc CD player, multi-function trip computer, tilt-reach steering wheel, electric windows front and rear, remote central locking, power mirrors, cruise control, and electric tilt adjust for the drivers seat. Safety is taken care of by dual front airbags, ABS with Electronic Brake Distribution and Electronic Stability Control (ESP) with traction control.
Major omissions on the equipment front are the lack of standard air-conditioning (the car we drove had it fitted), and more vitally from a safety point of view, the lack of side and curtain airbags except as an option. Not to mention the fact that only a 4-speed auto is available. The Omega is certainly not bad value for money, but it doesn’t quite match its opposition.

Where the Omega does impress is in terms of space and comfort. This car is, simply put, huge inside with a very impressive boot. Three large men could easily fit across the rear seat, and they’d be comfortable. There was plenty of leg and head room front and rear. The rear seat was quite comfortable.
The seating postion is good, but can take time to get just right. The steering wheel is too big and initially feels uncomfortable to hold, but as you do more miles the wheel starts to feel just right. The mirrors, unfortunately, are too small. The instrumentation is clear and easy to read. I liked the easy to use trip computer display, and in particular the digital speedo readout. The digital display complements rather than replaces the analogue speedo. The centre consol is well laid out, but a bit of a stretch from the driver’s seat.
The handbrake felt a bit flimsy to me, but plastic quality overall seemed reasonable if a little low grade. It is the base model though. This car had done over 6,000kms and had probably lead a hard life as a rental, so the lack of sqeaks and rattles was praiseworthy. Holden seems to have lifted its game for interior quality – though it still falls a long way short of the best Japanese cars I’ve driven.
The cabin is impressively quiet. There is some tyre noise – noticed especially when sitting in the back seat. Wind noise is largely absent – at least up to about 140km/h.
The Omega obviously has a strong, rigid body. The doors close with an impressive sounding thunk. With so much space, the driver and passengers sit quite a distance in board from the doors, something that will help in a side collision.
However, its not all good news inside. One of the Commodore VE’s biggest faults is the huge A-pillars. They are simply unacceptably intrusive. All the reports have mentioned it, and they are right. It can make negotiating intersections or changing lanes a more dangerous task than it needs to be.

Dynamically the Omega is very good. The ride in particular is very impressive, ironing out bumps and never getting unsettled or fidgety. A high speeds, the Omega will rebound and bottom out over dips, but generally body control and ride comfort is excellent.
The handling is also very good. The car is easy to place in corners, and turns in precisely and quickly. There setup is pretty neutral. Pushing hard, the Omega will start to oversteer, but the ESP system will intervene before it actually steps out. In fact, I’d say the ESP system intervenes too early. The first time it happened to me it caught my by surprise. The back had started to drift slight while negotiating a 45km/h corner at some 80km/h. No drama, but the ESP cut just as I got started to compensate for the rear drifting. Such are the high levels of grip and stability of the chassis that the ESP could probably be safely turned off in dry conditions by most drivers.
We were hustling the Omega quite hard through some of the corners. At one stage, Cyco took a corner with a recommended 85km/h sign at indicated 150km/h. The Omega handled the corner without drama. Later in the drive I took an 85km/h corner at an indicated 140km/h, with no drama. At higher speeds, the car is a little underdamped and will bottom out at times. While the Omega obviously has very high cornering limits, ultimately it is a little too isolating and uninvolving. The steering has decent weighting and is quick and consistent, but just doesn’t offer the driver much in the way of feedback. It is certainly a very easy car to drive down a twisty road. In a sense the suspension does such a good job of dealing with corners while offering an impressive ride that it actually manages to remove a large amount of driving pleasure. You feel like you’re guiding the car rather than actually driving it.

An interesting exercise that we carried out was too see how well the ESP system in the Omega handled fast takeoffs on gravel roads. Leaving the ESP system on, I attempted to generate rear wheelspin on gravel. The ESP struggled to cope and messages about the loss of traction flashed up on the computer screen. A academic exercise, but interesting none the less. The driver’s right foot is still better at controlling a RWD family car on gravel than electronic systems.

During the course of the weekend we covered a total of 460 kilometres via a combination of city driving, very brisk driving on country roads, some freeway motoring and an attempt to drive economically for the last 80 kilometres to bring down the overall economy figures. The Omega used 49.83 litres of 91 unleaded to cover the 460 kilometres. This equates to a 10.86L/100km, which matches almost exactly the official ADR figures of 10.9L/100km. I suspect that figures around 9.5L/100km would be achievable providing the car is driven economically. Its worth noting the the trip computer gave a rather inaccurate figure of 11.9L/100km at the end of the weekend, which was wildly pessimistic.

In terms of styling, I find the Omega to be pleasing to the eye. The short front overhang and tight lines around the front fenders and grille are its best feature. It looks a little bland from the rear and looks a little too tall. But overall, the styling is pleasant.

There is no doubt the Omega is a good car. However, it falls way short of being a great car. It doesn’t offer the great leap forward in any area that the Falcon BA did when first released. Where the Omega impresses most is with its huge interior space and very comfortable ride. The chassis is commendably good, if ultimately a little too isolating for the keen driver. There’s also no doubt that the car is very good value for money. Drivers of the previous model Commodore Executive will certainly be impressed by this car when they upgrade. However, no matter how competent the Omega is overall there’s nothing here that advances the class in any way and it is not the great leap forward that I hoped for.

LIKES
Spaciousness, comfort, ride comfort, smoothness and refinement at highway speeds, body strength and rigidity, high cornering limits and generally secure handling.

DISLIKES
Visibility through the pillars is appalling, engine is coarse and unrefined at low speeds, inconsistent and old-fashioned auto, steering could do with more feedback.

SPECS (courtesy Wheels magazine)
Drivetrain

Engine: V6, DOHC, 24v.
Layout: front engine/rear wheel drive.
Capacity: 3,564 cc
Power: 180kW@6000rpm
Torque: 330Nm@2600rpm
Redline/Cutout: - /6200rpm
Transmission: Four-speed automatic with sports & economy mode.

Dimensions
Length: 4894mm
Width: 1899mm
Height: 1476mm
Wheelbase: 2915mm
Weight: 1690kg.

Performance (from Wheels magazine)
0-100km/h: 8.6 sec (our best was 10 sec)
0-400m: 16.0 sec
80-120km: 5.4 sec
Top speed: 215km/h est.

Total distance covered: 460km
Fuel used: 49.83 litres
Fuel economy: 10.86L/100km (26mpg). Note: trip computer told lies and said 11.9L/100km.

*The last photo in the sequence is courtesy of Sauc3.

A COMPARISON BETWEEN THE AURION AT-X, COMMODORE OMEGA, MITSUBISHI 380ES AND FORD FALCON XT.

Now that I have driven the Aurion AT-X and the Commodore VE Omega, I have driven each of the four Australian built six-clyinder cars. While I haven’t driven a Falcon BF, the upgrades to that car would be unlikely to be sufficient enough to change my opinion of it.
So, which is the best? Without any preamble, I’ll state that the Aurion AT-X is easily the best of the four cars. Some of you won’t want to hear that, or will not believe it. But that is my experience.

Some people will suggest that the two cars should not be compared. The Aurion is front wheel drive. The Commodore is rear wheel drive. The Aurion is a narrower, shorter car than the Commodore and is therefore not truly a “large” family car. However, there are similarities. Both have six cylinder engines. Both have similar power and torque outputs. The two cars are priced within $1000 of each other. And even if the Aurion is smaller than the Commodore, it is still a large family car. So, I’m going to compare to the two.

The Aurion is superior to the Commodore Omega in four key areas – performance, engine/transmission, value for money and fuel economy. It is marginally better than the Omega in refinement, smoothness, build quality and seating position/ergonomics.
The Commodore Omega is superior to the Aurion in two key areas – spaciousness and ride comfort. It is marginally ahead of the Aurion for body strength.
That leaves dynamics. I’m not going to call a clear cut win for either car. Both cars have very high limits. Few drivers would get anyway near the limits of either car on public roads. Both cars offer impressive body control. The Aurion has marginally more feedback through the steering in the corners, but is slightly more vague around the straight ahead position than the Omega. I actually enjoyed driving the Aurion through corners more than the Commodore – primarily because of the Aurion’s more driver focused seating position and because it’s a narrower and therefore easier to place the car in the corners. Also, since I’ve driven far more kilometers in FWD cars than I have in RWD cars, I find it easier to exploit and explore the limits of a FWD car than I do a RWD car. The Commodore would probably have ultimately higher cornering limits in the hands of expert drivers and on a racetrack. The best way to decide which the best handling car is would be to drive them over exactly the same roads. I suspect my opinion wouldn’t change. The Aurion would probably remain the more enjoyable. The Commodore would probably have the higher cornering limits but would feel more isolating to drive. I’m going to call it a draw between the two cars for dynamics.
So, the Aurion beats the Commodore. What about the 380 and Falcon? Where do they fit?
Well, the 380 ES is easily the best value for money of the four cars. The 380 is priced at $29,990 when equipped with a five-speed auto (the five-speed manual is $27,990 and even more of a bargain). It doesn’t suffer in any way on equipment. Missing from the equipment list in comparison the Aurion and Commodore is ESP and traction control systems. However, it has all the other goodies you’d expect (remote locking, six-speaker stereo, power steering, air-conditioning, electric windows and mirrors and a trip computer). The 380 trumps the Commodore by having a 5-speed auto and by having side-airbags as standard equipment. Notably, the 380 also has a full five year/130,000km warranty.
As for the driving experience, the 380 is not quite as refined as the Aurion or Commodore, but it offers similar levels of dynamic ability, a better ride than the Aurion and better performance and engine/transmission combination than the Commdore. The 380 is actually the quickest of the four cars with 0-100km times of about 7.3 seconds. I found the 380 to be an enjoyable car to drive and it is at least a match for the Falcon, if a little behind the Aurion and Commodore.
That leaves the Falcon. Nominally the most expensive of the four cars at $35,990 for the four-speed auto variant, I doubt that anyone ever pays anything like that for a Falcon, so it still offers pretty good value for money.
The Falcon still has an excellent, torquey, and refined engine that sounds good. Acceleration times are equal with the Aurion with 0-100km/h coming up in 7.5 seconds. The Falcon’s four-speed auto is better than the Commodore’s, with smoother changes and offering a tiptronic mode that works well or a “Performance” mode that works better than the Commodore auto’s “sport” mode. Even when fitted with a four-speed auto, the Falcon gets very, very close to the Aurion in terms of how good its engine/transmission combination is. With the optional six-speed auto, it is likely to be as good or better than the Aurion. Dynamically, the Falcon is still very good and has more steering feedback than the Commodore along with generally very good handling. However, in terms of refinement, quality, body rigidity, comfort, ergonomics, the Falcon is now off the pace.
So, overall then, the Aurion is the pick of the Australian six-cylinder cars. It is the easily the best all-rounder of the four. Commodore is next, but not as far ahead of the level pegging 380 and Falcon as one might expect.
Buyers of these cars would be happy with any of the four. Those that hate FWD would avoid the 380 and Aurion – even though the four cars are actually very close dynamically regardless of drivetrain layout. Those that hate Ford and Holden products or prefer the supposedly better quality of the products with Japanese parentage will buy either the 380 or the Aurion. The Aurion is the best overall, but the other three cars are still good cars.

*For my previous write up on the 380 go to [URL="http://www.ultimatecarpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=22189&highlight=Mitsubishi+380"]http://www.ultimatecarpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=22189&highlight=Mitsubishi+380[/URL]
*For my previous write on the the Falcon go to [URL="http://www.ultimatecarpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=24584&highlight=Falcon+XR6"]http://www.ultimatecarpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=24584&highlight=Falcon+XR6[/URL]
Just keep in mind that both of these previous reviews were of the sporty versions. The base versions don't handle quite as well.

Fantastic write up MSN, certainly covered all areas of the vehichle dynamics, saftey, build quality, NVH, etc. The fuel economy on the Aurion is very impressive especially for an engine that has yet to run in, ecomomy will definetley get better with 5000km under its belt.

I have breifly driven a SS-V and VRX 380 and they were certainly nice, but a quick lap round the block isnt like living with a car for a few days to find out the positives and negitives.

[QUOTE][B]MSN originally posted[/B]
. Grip is very good, especially considering the car only has relatively narrow 215/60 R16 tyres,[/QUOTE]

I actually saw a gold zr6 Aurion today in traffic and thought it looked way undertyred, definetley needs 235/45/17's or 18's(if there is an option) to give them a more purposeful stance and certainly wouldnt hurt the handling. Thought the [I][B]sporty[/B][/I] model looked quite good.

[B]Ding, Ding, Ding let the fun begin[/B]:D :D

[QUOTE=motorsportnerd]. At one stage, Cyco took a corner with a recommended 85km/h sign at indicated 150km/h. The Omega handled the corner without drama. Later in the drive I took an 85km/h corner at an indicated 140km/h, with no drama. [/QUOTE]

Jesus Christ was kind of roads where you testing on:eek: , thats insanity.

btw you say there isn't a difference between ba and bf but there is. The 6 speed makes more of a difference than you think.
Nice right up.

I'm sure the six-speed makes a big difference to the BF - at least that's what all the reports tell me. But the BF XT still has the four-speed auto as standard, and that's the one I'm talking about.

[QUOTE=syko]Jesus Christ was kind of roads where you testing on:eek: , thats insanity.
[/QUOTE]

You're right - we were driving a bit hard. However, it was relatively safe - the roads were deserted. I generally prefer to experiment with handling on corners that are posted in the 45-65km/h range. That way I stay within speed limits. After all 80km/h through a 45km/h posted corner in the Aurion was probably also a little excessive.
But shows how good the cars are anyway.

A few more photos showing just how well the Commodore VE Omega handles hard acceleration on gravel, with the ESP system [B]switched on[/B].

First two photos are courtesy of Sauc3. Last photo showing the dashboard display getting excited is from Cyco.

theres a corner on the way down to canberra sign posted @ 90kph, and in all fairness, its the most exciting part of the drive..
its quite easy to drive that well over the speed limit, as the quality of the corners and surrounding roads are excelent.. anyways, f*cking long review, well bloody done :) i enjoied reading that.

now these are all unknown quantities to me, so I have a lot of reading to do, and I am sure it will be worth it.

Just comparing the Toyota V6 and the Commodore, or Omega (?) V6 engines, I noted that the toyota has max torque at 4700 and max bhp at 6000, or at the red line, the Omega had max power at 6000 as well, but max torque at 2600 only. I think that would make the Toyota less pleasant/easy to drive. The fuel consumption difference is also significant...