Not made here...

[SlickHolden]

Well Id consider myself quite stupid if I wanted a fast car and both had identical engines except one was lighter

What id be more upset about is if I had a commodore belina (up from omega) and the falcon XT (optioned up with a 6 speeder auto and euro sports package) and the falcon was a bit faster a cheaper on juice (wheels test this month funny thing is it had the biggest engine the most torque and the 2nd most powerful next to aurion and was the most economical wonder how that works?)

And in a pure stroke of genius on wheels part they made the Belina winner of the comparison (380,aurion,falcon all the trim up from base excluding falcon) despite the fact it had weaknesses all the other cars didn't have

But anyways base model cars are lighter it makes more sense to use them as a base for something that goes fast its the origonal concept of a muscle car! this is something that seems to be lost on people today.

Option up?? Different brands it's really not the same.
I'll tell you how it works.. Options options options and a base engine across the range.. Tell me would you be more upset if you bought a BF Fairmont Ghia and a XT BFII pulls up next to you with 6 speed and sports suspension and a bucket of money waving at you that it saved ??

The berlina was maybe the better drivers car nothing wrong with the aurion or BA-BF ride it's just they don't sit as well as the VE's do they are great on the road ni all conditions. And it's only weakness is not being able to option up a better engine and transmission. Unless you ad the 6lt and 6 speed.

My VP is still faster then the VE Base.

[Falcon500]

Yeah but still the theroetical worse car is performaning better in alot of areas :P
Wheels true to their usual form said apprently the ba has a cramped rear seat.....now come on a screwman has a cramped rear seat a celica has a cramped rear seat but a falcon?

that would hurt too i wouldent enjoy them rubbing the savings in my face but i still think itll hurt more getting beaten by a oppositions lesser car :P

And on that note the 380 never won a damn thing in that comparison but then again it didnt loose a damn thing either it should fo come 2nd possibly even won it. I be;leive it was the cheapest and it was always in the middle for everything they tested.

Lol all the technology in the world and they still cant outrun a mild 92 version they made

[SlickHolden]

After MSN done the test with the Omega and i herd one after driving a Calais i had to agree the engine was mush, They sound pretty shit loud and harsh they do need to replace that and the 4 speed, But they believe it's to expensive to make the 195 5 speed across the range.. Or they just don't want base model kicking the SV6's arse more like it.
When i took the Calais back i spoke to the lady at the returns she ask me did i like the car i said yes very much but I'm glad i had the calais and not the omega, She said 90% of the people that bring the omega back complain about the engine being loud and harsh sounding, I said i agree the one next to me was terrible sounding. It really is the biggest flaw in the in the VE range the base engine and 4 speed.

The 380 has been a top car for mitsub and it's been overlooked pretty much all the time. I haven't herd anyone moan about it that has driven one.

The old boy even with me in it a not so factory kerb weight of 1420kg before i get in and some not very factory standard tyres 225's the old boy still punches under 9 seconds to 100km/h.. And i know it's slightly out of tune also it takes off more like a VS delayed

[Falcon500]

Well typically i like noise but the winded flat note of an omega gets old really quick. (hell the whole car gets old really quick its a slow late model vz with flash suspension)

Yeah 380 isnt so bad but there really isnt much of intrestin their lineup either


See low weight for you I keep saying think how fast theyd be and fuel ecconmy etc etc but does anyone listen noooooo :P

[SlickHolden]

there's no low weight in me..

If i did more highway driving the economy would be great but i really would be lucky to do 5% over a tank, So not being a sissy and liking to hit the speed limit with some throttle but not being a speeder i'm pretty accepting of my fuel economy of about 14-15.5L/100.. I warm the car up before i go anywhere so i can spent up to 5min warming it first thing in the morning and up to 30 seconds when out..
The omega wouldn't be for me i like some sound rather then shitty sound.. The Calais sounds nice i'd love a sports system on that it's rather quite compared to the omega.

[Falcon500]

Yeah thats too much beer and pies for ya

that ecconmy aint so bad the current gen IV gets around that (16 ish i beleive) and its 15 years newer.

IMO i in general dont like the sounds our 6s make (with the exception of a stroked ecotech and the BA motor with a decent exhaust) but nothing beats a good 8 sound and a set od duals on holdens v6s can almost work if done just right

[motorsportnerd]

And in a pure stroke of genius on wheels part they made the Belina winner of the comparison (380,aurion,falcon all the trim up from base excluding falcon) despite the fact it had weaknesses all the other cars didn't have
.

Simple - the Berlina had the best dynamics and of course we all know how important a car's dynamic capabilities are on our commute to work.

Also, that article made the Aurion out to be a heap of crap when its comes to cornering - but then again, we all go tearing around a racetrack every weekend don't we?

Having driven both - I'd agree that the Commodore is better dynamically, but at the sort of speeds that 99% of us would drive at on public roads that gap isn't that great. After all, neither are meant to be sports cars and both can comfortably do double the recommended speed on most tighter corners.

The ageing Falcon - when fitted with the six-speed gearbox - still makes a convincing argument against the Commodore in they dynamics department and in the performance/economy department against the Aurion.

However - the Falcon isn't quite as smooth/refined as the Aurion, doesn't have the safety features of Aurion or the body strength of the Commodore and is the worst put together of the three.

If I was in the market for a low-mid $30K four door car - I'd still take the Aurion. Yep I'd join the moronic masses as you guys put it. I'd enjoy the Aurion's engine - easily the best of the local sixes; its refinement, its quality, its safety; its comfort; its transmission. And dynamically, its fine up to very, very high speeds (any car that can capably go around a 45km/h recommended corner at 80km/h plus is no dud in the cornering department), which would be adequate enough for me. And I'd win out when I came to selling it down the line.
The deals that are being done on Falcons atm would make it a very tempting option though.

[motorsportnerd]

probably because the moronic, mindless drones that make up the general population are quite happy driving big marshmallows.

Hey - I drive a big marshmallow. Or at least my Falcon does a very good impression of a marshmallow at times. It isn't the most rigid chassis on the block.

[bypopulardemand]

ive read the review in question and i thing i have to wonder is why they didnt make an effort to get 4 cars from the respective models that had a price within a 1 or 2 thousand of eachother? Im sure it wouldve had an effect on the review.

[motorsportnerd]

Well typically i like noise but the winded flat note of an omega gets old really quick. (hell the whole car gets old really quick its a slow late model vz with flash suspension)

Well, yep - there's noise and then there's noise. Of the three Aussie sixes, only the Commodore just sounds noisy. The other three all sound much better under acceleration (the two Japanese sourced V6s have that nice howl that good V6s can generate and the Falcon has a purposeful straight six sound) and are nicely subdued when you're just cruising. The base six in the Commodore always seems to be droning - and its not a particularly inspiring sound.

[clutch-monkey]

Hey - I drive a big marshmallow. Or at least my Falcon does a very good impression of a marshmallow at times. It isn't the most rigid chassis on the block.

i suspect your car was turned into a marshmallow after having 5 less than lightwieght guys placed within it the chassis never recovered!

[adrenaline]

If I was in the market for a low-mid $30K four door car - I'd still take the Aurion. Yep I'd join the moronic masses as you guys put it.

I don't like the Aurion, but if I did have low-mid 30k to spend, it would top my list for sure. It's better value than the others, and it has the best base engine/ transmission. I saw a black AT-X the other day and it looked quite good.

[Falcon500]

Ive drivan a VE SS but not a Berlina I was pretty liked the ss alot it was a great peice of equipment. But if the Berlinas anything like an omega (unless it was a true bargin) id give it a miss.

BA theortically is the worst put together but my parts experiance with the holdens makes me doubt it could be that bad :P all jokes aside the ve has its flaws (like all new cars) the BA is a good car and has a great rep in general and from its parts guys at other dealerships havent said there was many problems (excluding niggling ones and territory is a bitch to put a towbar in throw away the instructions....) about it.

Aurion im sure is a fine car and I would try one but im not keen on fwd vehicles I currantly drive one of the finest fwd setups ever devised (beleive it or not my subaru is fwd and ill easily rate it with alot of hondas ive driven) and its still just not right although i do like the cornering speeds...I just dont like front wheelers

[motorsportnerd]

ive read the review in question and i thing i have to wonder is why they didnt make an effort to get 4 cars from the respective models that had a price within a 1 or 2 thousand of eachother? Im sure it wouldve had an effect on the review.

The writer of the article claimed that Ford couldn't provide a Futura (which would've matched the Toyota and Holden most closely on price) for the test. Since the Futura only has a four-speed auto as standard, the Falcon's performance in the comparison was flattered a little by the optioned up base model with the six-speed auto. As for the Mitsubishi - there is no direct competitor in the 380 range for the mid-spec Berlina/Futura/Prodigy. The closest 380 to these three in price is the VRX - but that's a more sporty oriented, rather than comfort oriented model. The SX they chose was the best option - much cheaper than the others and still fitted with a sports-tuned suspension, but not quite base level either.
In fact when you think about just how cheap the 380 is (the SX that was tested in Wheels is just $34,990), and how well it does in direct comparison to the other Aussie cars, I'm surprised that it doesn't sell much, much better.
Don't point out its FWD chassis - that isn't holding the Aurion back from selling. The only things I can think of are doubts about Mitsubishi's long term future and the poor resale of the 380 (you can already find very mileage eighteen month old 380 VRXs in the mid 20K range, compared with the high $30K new price).

[motorsportnerd]

i suspect your car was turned into a marshmallow after having 5 less than lightwieght guys placed within it the chassis never recovered!

Yep - that'd be the reason.
No, Falcons have always displayed lots of body roll. Even the latest Falcons - at least in base trim - are still a more comfort orientated and therefore a little soft in the suspension department.