(first posted 5/11/2017) The last Ford Falcon rolled off the Broadmeadows production line on October 6, 2016. The last Holden Commodore will roll off the Elizabeth production line on October 20, 2017. Six decades of Australian automotive manufacturing will come to an end. It’s tragic, it’s disheartening, but maybe it was inevitable. We could talk all day about the cause of death for the Aussie car industry, but let’s instead talk about the product. I’ve had the pleasure of having extensive seat time in both a 2007 Holden VE Calais V 3.6 V6 and a 2009 Ford FG Falcon G6E 4.0 I6, two of the last of these historic lines. How do they compare?
Ford and Holden tended to do one big redesign every seven or so years, with multiple facelifts and enhancements in between. Past Commodore series had used extensively redesigned European Opel Rekord and Omega platforms but the 2006 VE Commodore was a clean-sheet redesign, using an all-new, Australian-engineered platform known as Zeta. The VE was succeeded by the VF in 2013, which featured revised front and rear sheetmetal on sedans (front-only on wagons and utes), all-new interiors, and some new features.
The Falcon series’ evolution was subtler, as each new generation of Falcon generally carried over components from its predecessor. The FG was the final major redesign of the Falcon and launched in 2008 amidst gloomy speculation of its imminent demise. Although it looked similar to the previous BA/BF Falcon, it wore new sheetmetal and rode a revised chassis with a new front suspension and revised IRS. The delightful 4.0 inline six carried over in both naturally-aspirated and turbocharged variants. Ford threatened to replace it with an American 3.5 V6 but this never eventuated. A facelifted FG X arrived in 2014, with new front and rear styling, infotainment, but a carryover interior.
By the time the VE and FG reached the market, large car sales had been dwindling after reaching historic highs in the late 1990s. The Falcon, in particular, had suffered thanks to an unloved redesign (the AU) in 1998. The 2000s saw the emergence and soaring popularity of the crossover and Ford wisely spun-off the Territory from the Falcon platform; Holden’s attempt was the half-baked Adventra, more a Subaru Outback clone than a genuine crossover.
The Calais V and G6E sat at the top of their respective ranges and were priced against entry-level German compact sport sedans. Naturally, one would expect these two to have luxuriously-appointed interiors and, for the most part, they deliver.
The Calais was available in with either an ebony interior or this attractive two-tone cream/gray. While fake wood was standard on the Berlina and long-wheelbase Statesman, the Calais V used silver metal-look trim. The door panels are padded with leather and aqua ambient lighting is employed in the footwells, dramatically elevating the interior over the Omega and Berlina. Those cars’ monochromatic green instrument displays were replaced with a color screen in the dash which displayed air-conditioning and radio details and a diagrammatical view of the car when parking sensors were activated. Power window switches are situated in the center console, a cost-saving measure to aid conversion to left-hand-drive.
The dash top isn’t quite soft-touch but uses a distinctive, almost crosshatch pattern. The metal-look trim is handsome while the headliner is nicely woven.
But the Calais V’s interior isn’t perfect: the lower half of the dash is constructed from hard, grainy plastic; the doors don’t quite close with a solid thunk; and the leather in the cabin is nothing special. The use of faux suede material on the lower parts of the door and center stack was also a puzzling choice, leading to ugly scuffs.
The G6E’s cabin immediately appears more ergonomically sound. The screen is mounted higher on the dash, in the driver’s line of sight, and features a reversing camera; navigation was optional. Deep purple ambient lighting pools in the footwells while LEDs are used for the ceiling lights. Lock and light switches are conveniently located in the center stack, while window switches are logically situated on the doors. Dash plastics are relatively soft to the touch, while the leather-wrapped door panels are a tactile delight.
Both cars are equal in terms of cabin space with plenty of room front and rear, although both have a prominent center hump that impedes middle passenger legroom.
Ford did cut some corners. The headliner is a nice, woven one like the Calais’ but the ceiling light surrounds and sunglass holder are made of rather naff plastic. The steering wheel controls have no backlighting. The passenger seat isn’t power-assisted. Only the driver’s side window has an auto function, and that’s only auto-down. The door courtesy lights look rather like cheap bicycle reflectors instead of the warm, glowing lights of the Calais. The rear seats have only “bumps” instead of three proper headrests like in the Calais. There are no rain-sensing wipers. And the “carbon fiber” on the dash is an odd choice, if relatively inoffensive.
Still, the Falcon imparts a greater feeling of solidity and quality than the Calais, right down to the plush yet supportive leather seats and the solid ‘thunk’ of the doors (which feature nice stitching).
Ford and Holden took two very different approaches to the dynamics of their top-line sedans and Ford’s was the most successful. The VE Calais, for the first couple of years of its run, used the FE2 sport suspension of sporty Commodores like the V8 SS. While this allowed for remarkably good roadholding, the trade-off was a stiff ride. It was a puzzling choice for a luxury sedan and Holden later reversed course, re-introducing a FE1.5 tune that balanced the demands of comfort and handling ability. While the early VE Calais doesn’t cosset over bumps, the solid Zeta chassis handles superbly and the car shrinks around you, making it a delight on a winding road.
The Ford, in comparison, feels less planted at high speeds and in fast corners. Handling is still more than competent, however, with little bodyroll. Where the Ford triumphs is in ride quality, with an impressive feeling of solidity as it softens out ruts and bumps. It’s not floaty but, rather, it feels well-engineered.
Steering in both cars is excellent, with good weighting and road feel, but the cars diverge again in terms of engine and transmission. The French-sourced five-speed in the Calais can be slightly dim-witted at times and the shifts are more noticeable. Fortunately, Holden replaced this with a six-speed automatic in 2010. The FG was also briefly available with a five-speed but the G6E came with a ZF six-speed. The ZF shifts as smoothly as butter and is never caught out of step. A manual shift mode is present on both cars but the G6E ups the ante with a Performance Mode that quickens shifts and makes the car feel notably more responsive.
Not that the Falcon’s six is lacking, mind you. The 4.0 mill produces 261 hp at 6000 rpm and 288 ft-lbs at 3250 rpm. it’s a distant descendant of the American Falcon’s six-cylinder but has been extensively revised and refined countless times over the decades. What’s remarkable is how much more polished it feels than the newer, US-designed 3.6 in the Calais. There’s a rather distinctive whirring engine note that can be heard softly in the cabin but there’s none of the straining sounds of the Holden. The presence of more torque is keenly felt; the Holden’s engine produces an identical 261 hp (at 6500 rpm) and but only 251 ft-lbs (at 2600 rpm).
If your daily commute is in a canyon or on a mountain-top, the Calais’ sport sedan chassis is ideal. But for most top-spec Aussie sedan buyers, the Falcon is the superior choice. While the Calais eventually received a six-speed automatic and a softer suspension, its 3.6 V6 remained. The proposed American 3.5 V6 never made it to the Falcon, leaving the impressive 4.0 I6 and, from 2012, a 2.0 turbocharged EcoBoost four-cylinder. That four-banger had more torque than the Holden’s 3.6 (260 ft-lbs), almost the same horsepower, and achieved greater fuel economy to boot. Despite its superior power figures and delivery, official combined economy figures have the Falcon 4.0 using 10.2 liters per 100 km (23mpg) while the Calais used 11.3 (21mpg). Clearly, newer isn’t always better.
The G6E, at around $AUD47,000, actually undercut the Calais V by $8k and was priced equivalently to the regular Calais. The Calais V hardly offered $8000 worth of additional features, making the G6E the better buy. In fact, for the Calais V’s $54k asking price in 2008, you could have purchased a G6E Turbo with 100 more horses under the hood.
Both the Calais and G6E depreciated heavily, as top-spec Aussie sedans are wont to do, reducing the Falcon’s price advantage. However, the Falcon remains the more sensible purchase for one reason: reliability. The early VE Commodores earned a reputation for costly timing chain repairs while the FG Falcon is regarded as being fairly bulletproof and cheap to repair.
It’s clear the Falcon wins this comparison unless winding road thrills are your chief concern. If we were comparing a 2013 Calais to a 2013 Falcon, the story might be different. The 2013 VF revision brought an improved interior, more features, and slightly more power to the Calais while the Falcon was left to stagnate.
American Curbsiders must be wondering how these two full-size Aussies compare to their counterparts in the US. The 2010 Ford Taurus offered more features and technology, such as adaptive cruise and multi-contour, massaging, ventilated front seats. It also has optional all-wheel-drive. But space efficiency in the big bull is rubbish, with an enormous center stack and console; a high beltline makes the interior feel even more claustrophobic. It also has front-wheel-drive and, in turn, less involving dynamics. The twin-turbo SHO matches the Falcon turbo’s power but falls short in torque by 43 pound-feet. In SHO guise, the Taurus weighs a portly 4368 lbs; the FG Falcon comes in a shade under 3900 lbs.
The Calais’ counterpart in the late noughties would have been GM’s W-Body sedans, against which there is absolutely no contest. Even the comfortable and stylish 2013+ Impala is inferior to the Calais dynamically, with an interior no better than the VF Calais.
GM had the good sense to utilize its Australian division, spawning the Pontiac GTO and G8 and Chevrolet SS from the Commodore. None of those models were exceptionally successful commercially but they helped add rear-wheel-drive excitement and optional V8 power to their assigned divisions. Ford, however, never took advantage of the Aussie Falcon in the same way. While it’s true there were some old components still being used, the final result was vastly superior to anything wearing the Taurus nameplate in the 2000s.
I felt it was appropriate to write this comparison test, to show you how splendid Ford and GM’s Aussie operations had made the Falcon and Commodore by the 21st century and how they could make a more engaging mid/full-size sedan than their North American counterparts. It was also timely to write as the Falcon ended production recently and the Aussie Commodore range will soon join it in the automotive graveyard.
There was another reason I wrote this comparison, too: I bought the Falcon.
Related Reading:
Automotive History: Australian Auto Family Trees – The Holden Commodore From A-Z VB-VF.
COAL Update: 2007 Holden VE Calais V – Farewell, Old Frenemy
I was travelling thru Ireland a week or so ago and the first car I saw when I came off the ferry from Wales (apart from the ferry traffic…) was an FG G6E Falcon with Irish plates on parked by the side of the road. I’ve always wanted to get one in the UK but it seems they are hardly ever imported unlike the Commodore.
That’s pretty remarkable!
My brother recently bought a used Falcon a 2010 XR8 with the FPV assembled 5.4 motor he loves it according to Ford it is one of one built to that exact spec but what they included or left out has yet to be determined, I had a 3.6 alloy tech Holden on hire for a week in Qld it was quite a disappointment in all honesty though it steered me into PSA cars so it wasnt entirely a waste the sheer lack of any decent low down torque had it shifting constantly and annoyingly in cruise on the Bruce highway every time it pointed uphill, a fairly stiff and uncomfortable ride too I expected better.
I remember the early reviews of the 3.6 Alloytec when it was introduced in the VZ, and journalists were pretty disappointed. The old Buick-derived 3800 had less power, sure, but they were expecting a big leap in power and refinement and it wasn’t much more refined and it doesn’t feel especially powerful. I’d love to try GM’s current 3.6, like the direct-injected one used in Cadillacs. I imagine it’s an improvement.
I know sales of the Ecoboost 2.0T Falcon were negligible but I think Holden might have been more successful with a 2.0T. There’s a perception that V6s guzzle more fuel and I wonder if GM’s 2.0T might have been more appealing to private buyers, particularly if it was available in an SV6-type trim. It would have been much more desirable than that 3.0 V6…
That 3.6 was better on fuel on the highway @ 119 average than my 2.0 Toyota Corona I had in NZ at the time round town not so great but I though the fuel consumption was ok better than the old 3.8 VR I had it just didnt go as well or handle particularly well mind you I was used to my Amon modified Corona so that could be subjective.
We rented a Calais V in Brisbane last year. Admittedly we only used it around town, but I was left with two impressions – the coarse lumpy ride as though the tyres were filled with cement, and the coffee-grinder impressions given off by that Alloytec V6. Smooth but noisy, and not as much torque as I expected. Very nice inside though.
Thank you for this. I lament the fact we in Europe do not, and did not, have any equivalents to these cars for quite some time, after Opel, Peugeot, Renault, Citroen, FCA and Ford gave up the fight to the Germans and lone Volvo.
I suppose one could consider the Chrysler 300C as an option but it is now a grey import so that the price advantage offered by its Lancia Thema cousin does not exist.
A very good comparison. Of the two, it’s easy to see why you went to the Falcon. The history of the Falcon in Australia is an interesting one given how it was a constant change of flux, and never really a true redesign as we are accustomed.
Halfway through the article I was already thinking “Will bought the Falcon!” as you missed the BA so much! Isn’t your family more to the Holden side? What did they say
That said, I’m sure you will get a lot of joyful miles on that Falcon. Hope it’s a keeper!
My family aren’t the enthusiasts I am, and don’t really have any brand loyalty. The long string of Holdens was really just a coincidence.
They like my new car and they now have my old car. But our family, again by sheer coincidence, now have 7 cars amongst ourselves ALL in gray or silver. Oy.
Seven shades of grey ?? ?
Really like your Falcon! The Commodore is still the biggest stunner visually, but the Falcon is much more balanced, looks nicer inside and that 4.0 is a trusted engine (and one you know well from the BA). You’ve got a winner, William!
The straight-six is my favorite engine configuration. I would’ve liked to have seen a photo of that Falcon engine.
Happy Motoring, Mark
I found it fascinating the straight six was still in use there, wasn’t aware of that. Great compo article – enjoy your new Falcon, William!
Rather incredibly, the engine is directly descended from the US 1960 Falcon 144ci engine. It still has the same bore spacings. Even in 2016, there was equipment in the factory where it was made dating back to the beginning (don’t ask me what, my cousin worked there and easily spoke beyond my understanding of such things). By about 1970, it was 250ci; in ’76, a crossflow head, a head made of alloy by ’81; it gained fuel injection in ’84; an overhead cam in ’88; variable valve timing on some by ’94; twin cams, 24 valves and variable timing on all by 2002; and on some, a massive turbo too. Always tough, if a bit gruff and then leaky in early ohc forms, by 2008 it was a refined and smooth operator, instantly responsive. It was also physically huge, and with an iron block, heavy. Great motor, and in a great car by the end, but without export, a doomed orphan.
barra 182 (approx)
From 1980 to 2011, I owned just five cars, and these were all examples of the above.
Four Falcons all with six cylinders, and a 1985 VK Commodore with a 5L V8 (ex-police car) just to mix things up a bit. Hard to believe now that these once mainstay Australian vehicles, will soon become a rarity on Australian roads.
The British magazine MODERN CLASSICS did a similar comparison test for their 4th issue, testing the performance coupes from Ford and Holden. They tested a Vauxhall Monaro VXR500 against a Falcon XR6.
Needless to say, the Holden/Vauxhall with it’s V8 did much better than the 6 cylinder powered Ford. Dynamically, the Vauxhall was the winner, too.
I don’t know much at all about these cars, but even from this article, which car would be a winner in a 2 car comparison, apparently hinges heavily on the year chosen and the models.
That said, ANY Australian-built Ford product would be my dream car. While if I wanted a Zeta-platform car I’d be more inclined to buy a new Camaro.
Interesting write-up William. I’d love to drive both of those sedans someday.
Have you driven the current generation Fusion/Mondeo? I’d be curious how its performance compares to the Falcon, since the Aussie’s dimensions place it between the Fusion and Taurus.
I’d also be interested in hearing about your experience adjusting to driving left hand drive vehicles.
Pah, no biggie. You get in the car and drive. I’ve never veered to the wrong side of the road. I know a lot of people initially struggle though.
Haven’t driven the current Fusion/Mondeo yet, but I’d like to. There’s a consistently high level of competence in that segment, for sure.
I drove an earlier Diesel Mondeo with the PSA powertrain it was really nice to drive then they ruined with the herky jerky DSG transmission what does surprise me now is both the OZ sixes have less torque than the HDI 173 engine in my newer C5 and less room insiden ride handling and toys arent quite there either but these late model Aussie cars are quite nice, a mate of mine had use of a turbo Barra recently and said it was enormous fun it sucked fuel but the performance was worth it, the lack of handling ability was scary however,
One tip I’ve learnt from my dear Australian friend: mentally chant, ‘Keep Left. Keep Left. Keep Left.’ After a day or so, it becomes a second nature.
I had to learn NOT to turn my head and move my right arm to the back as if I do in the left-hooker car. The funny bone caused by my right arm hitting the B-pillar wasn’t that funny.
I dreaded the right turn hooks in Melbourne. Look it up what it does…
Hook turns only in the inner city where the trams roam, as I found out when I got a Vic licence.
Now imagine doing your licence test if you live in inner-suburban Melbourne. One guess where they take you…..
I haven’t spent a lot of time behind the wheel of these model Falcons & Commodores although I have in a Mondeo (diesel wagon). The Falcons are much faster than most Mondeos which have 2.0L Ecoboosts with ~200hp or ~175hp diesel. The more recent upper models have 235hp which might be closer.
I can’t really comment on handling other than to say the base model Mondeo has quite soft suspension that seems to reach its bump stops easily – the Falcon is much better here; I’d expect the suspension travel is longer and it will have had more tuning for rough roads.
The VE Commodore I drove was much better than earlier models I’ve experienced, which is not a very high hurdle! I do remember the engine sounding and feeling like it was suffocating, this was a pre-direct injection one. I’ve also driven a VF HSV GTS – that was another story. Power was great but I only drove on straight roads so I can’t comment on the handling. It was easy to drive though, although the manual gearbox couldn’t be accused of being slick-shifting which is standard for a T56/T6060 and fair enough given the torque ratings.
It seems such a shame that Ford, having invested in the Falcon platform in Australia, could never find a use for it elsewhere. Like HERE, in the US.
But maybe it is just my love of RWD and inline sixes talking. At least GM made some reasonable efforts to make use of these Aussie assets.
That Falcon looks like a very nice car. Enjoy!
Ford Aus did start to develop this very model Falcon for LHD, with government assistance too, but Dearborn killed it off; not enough of a market, they said. Maybe, hard-headedly, they were right; Pontiac G6, even though a great drive, was hardly a great seller. Oh well. The Falcon drives as nicely as it looks, just to tease you..
Before Mullaly took over the reins of Ford the Falcon was supposed to be the basis for all RWD Ford cars around the world, including a new Crown Victoria and Town Car, in stretched and super stretched versions. However they weren’t that far along and with money tight they couldn’t justify completing the project and the tooling to bring it to a market that was already starting to shrink.
That could explain why the LWB Fairlane had this unfortunate roofline. It came across as looking very American alongside Holden’s much sleeker Statesman.
It should have happened rather than the D3 platform. Couldn’t possibly have had worse sales performance than the Five Hundred/Taurus.
Since its debut in 2013, GM has sold about 10,000 SS sedans. In that period Ford has sold 200,000 examples of the Taurus. That’s not even taking into account sales of the D3 Sable or the Lincoln MKS. And lets not forget about the Explorer and the D4 platform. As cool as it would have been to have a modern RWD Ford sedan, Mullaly and co. made the right decision.
Mullaly was still at Boeing when the D3 based Five Hundred debuted. That was with Bill Ford at the helm, and likely greenlighted under Jacques Nasser(Volvo was part of his PAG failure, ergo P6 platform), this was when the Falcon should have been produced for the states, not 2013. Mullaly made due with the cards he was dealt and plodding ahead with the D3 was all that could be done, and it took SIX years and dozens of failed models on it to be considered anything near successful(and even then 90s Explorer sales still dwarf it)
Well Mullaly could have certainly brought the platform over as a replacement for the Crown Vic, which was a rumor that circulated for a while, thats why I mentioned him.
There certainly weren’t “dozens” of D3 based vehicles – thats a huge exaggeration, especially since many of the models were just name changes. And other than the three row crossover segment, Ford didn’t really need the D3 to compete anywhere else, so the fact that some nameplates didn’t perform especially well wasn’t that big of a deal. And again, the success of the current Explorer proves they were right to stick with the platform. As for sales comparisons with the 90’s Explorer, what did you expect would happen? There was an explosion of new competitors in the early 2000’s. The Explorer was never going to maintain its sales figures from that era.
The Five Hundred/Taurus was in essence the replacement for the Crown Vic, there’s no sense having two completely different cars in the same languishing full size segment. That’s one problem with the Chevy SS. The Panther only stuck around after the Five Hundred debuted because departments still demanded them, civilian sales prospects were basically over by that point.
Fine, I exaggerated. But 3 flops for a 6 year period is not good business, and finally turning a profit on the back of those failures is not a success worth celebrating. By that logic the GM10 would have been a certified hit rather than a deadly sin.
The frustrating part of this is the argument keeps devolving into enthusiasts vs. businessmen. The argument isn’t the importation of a lone performance model ala GM. When Ford finally caved to the voices calling for the current gen Euro Focus to replace the US’s Gen 1 based Focus they didn’t do it by only bringing over the RS the enthusiasts wanted. No, we got a lineup of submodels. The entire Falcon range should have made it over like that, and it would have fit the “One Ford” strategy by now being a global car, Just like the Fiesta, Fusion, Focus, Transit and now Mustang are.
Not bringing the Falcon platform to the US at the right time is to me on par with GM stubbornly wasting millions on the Vega when an Americanized Opel Ascona would have done the same job (well, a better job) at a fraction of the cost.
“Since its debut in 2013, GM has sold about 10,000 SS sedans.”
What do you expect when you pretty much try NOT to sell them? Very few people know they even exist. But I can throw a rock at any non gearhead and they know about the Charger…if that rock bounces and hits another, they’ll know it too. Difference is, that car was actually MARKETED. If GM could move that bloated whale of a Caprice (and Impala SS) then the SS/G8 has literally no excuse not to sell. Not. One. Excuse.
Edward, I agree with Matt and Mopar.
It’s not fair to compare SS sales to Taurus sales considering one is a $40k, V8 and RWD-only niche performance sedan, while the Taurus starts much lower, offers a range of engines, and has heavy fleet sales.
Had Chevy released the SS as a V6 and V8 sedan, in lieu of the ’13 Impala, sales would have been much higher than they have been with the SS. All the Taurus would have had over the Zeta would have been the option of AWD and some nice optional features. Ford engineered the Falcon platform with AWD as the Territory was a spin-off from the platform and widely regarded as one of the best-handling crossovers on the market.
Nasser clearly was trying to amortize the Volvo-derived platform and it took until the 2010s for it to have a product that actually met sales expectations. The Freestyle, Taurus X, Five Hundred/Taurus and Montego/Sable all sold in disappointing numbers. Consider the fact the G8 ran for a short, ’08-09 stint and sold in almost exactly the same numbers as the Sable. And the G8 was a new nameplate, marketed as a performance sedan, sold alongside the same-size Grand Prix, and sold by a division that was on the chopping block by a company going through bankruptcy. It should have shifted right to Chevrolet for 2010, but that’s another story.
How funny too that the ’10 Taurus and the current Explorer are the least space-efficient of any of the cars on their platform, which was always host to impressively roomy cars. And there is no reason whatsoever to buy a Taurus now over a Fusion, as the smaller car is more space-efficient. There are no plans to bring the new Chinese-market, Fusion-derived Taurus here, while FCA is committing to a new generation of RWD Charger. That should give you an idea what still sells in the full-size segment.
Ford NA should have adapted the Falcon for LHD in the early 2000s. It could have replaced the Crown Victoria in LWB Fairlane/LTD guise, it could have replaced the Crown Victoria for police and taxi fleets – which the Falcon has long been respected and popular with here in Aus – and it could have served as a flagship RWD sedan, sold alongside a LHD Territory, perhaps even negating the introduction of the D3 Fords. But no, Ford wouldn’t support an export program for the Falcon/Territory because they allegedly wanted to protect the Crown Vic in the Middle East – allegedly – and there weren’t any other markets where a car of its size would have sold convincingly. Other than the US, where they instead fielded a bland, underpowered Five Hundred and an aged, unpopular-with-private-buyers Crown Victoria.
William:
Indeed. GM’s and Ford’s stupidity is what helped Chrysler to own that niche. It seems the “not invented here” syndrome was still alive and kicking in the 90s and 00s. As noted above, this was a repeat of the Vega fiasco (in that a perfectly viable, easily Americanized platform to do the job existed overseas (Opel Ascona) but not given even a casual glance). It is also worth noting that Chrysler’s big RWD cars were in many ways derivatives of the existing MB W211 platform…
fascinating article. thanks william. you guys built the best american cars. it’s sad we never got the ford variants in the states. i really wish i could justify buying a chevy ss….
These have always fascinated me, if for no other reason than the ol’ “Forbidden Fruit” syndrome. I remember a lot of commentators suggesting Ford would have done better to bring the Falcon to the U.S.. From what I read here and elsewhere, it certainly seems like the platform is pretty competent. What I’ve never managed to put a good bead on is how these compare size-wise to an American car. I mean, even when I was at Ford I never saw one of these in the metal-I did a materials clinic with the then-current Mondeo. I sat in a first-gen EcoSport. I saw the earlier Kuga, Ka, Euro-Focus, and on and on, but never the Falcon.
Shame. Seems like Ford had something there, but who knows…? I suspect they succumbed to the sunk-cost fallacy with the D3 Taurus-they dumped so much money into it they couldn’t just let it go.
Would you drive a 1st gen Ka as a DD? Here in Portugal it’s derided for being ugly, but I just find it different.
The 1st gen EcoSport had an equivalent called the Fusion (!) here, with a Fiesta-esque rear. At this moment, Ford is my favourite American manufacturer. They seem to have the most balanced lineup and at least in Europe they haven’t put a bad car on the road for a long, long time.
I had a play in a TDI Kuga and was impressed it went and handled well, though out of my price range, the people who had it on demonstrator loan turned it down and bought a Holden Craptiva since sold on.
Very nice comparison. Really puts these in context. So what year is your Falcon? Is it the 2009 in the comparison? You didn’t say.
I’m guessing it is, as the plates match with the last picture (his)
Yup Paul, the one in the article is mine. And I love it!
I wonder if a stretched Falcon would’ve found a niche here in the US. It certainly would’ve been a good candidate to replace police departments’ Crown Vics.
On a somewhat related topic… Does anyone else think that the Chrysler 300 would’ve made more sense as a police car than the Dodge Charger? The Charger’s roof line seems like it would be troublesome when trying to wrangle arrestees into the back seat.
Great car, the last Falcon. My wheel time was with an identical-looking 2009 G6E turbo. With 4 in-line litres of long-stroke, variable twin-cam, 24 valve, 6 cylinder intercooled power and 6 speed ZF auto, it was absurdly fast. A bit more than was good for it, in truth. Speed being so easily available, the fast arrival of bends made the front end feel a tad unrefined, as one became VERY aware of a long, tall and heavy six poking out past the front tyre centre, with the steering assisted so as to defy any finesse. Hardly unsafe, but not settling or great fun. I think the non-turbo choice you’ve made is actually the better one, still a rapid car in the real world.
Ford NZ removed the base Falcon from the rental fleets replacing it with the XR6, even the base six goes well enough to frighten some renters but the XR6 with the same engine has wider tyres and better suspension and will turn better, and it mostly what is seen here, kinda bearing out Ford strategy.
That’s interesting. I seem to recall seeing a few Commodore SV6s in rental fleets here, mirroring the situation in NZ.
The XT is a big step down in interior ambience but I feel the FG XR6 wasn’t as nice inside as the BA/BF. That weird cloth upholstery felt like the inside of board shorts.
Then there was the regular G6 with the bizarre mouse fur/velour seats. And the trim was on the doors too but the adhesive would wear, leaving weird saggy curtains on the doors.
I think the main reason rental companies changed to the XR6 is because it had better resale value, so cost them less.
The base model scared a lot of renters they do like to understeer and the unwary didnt like them a XR6 at the time retailed for 48K dealers cost was 21K so yes lots of profit I asked my BIL if he would get me one, my sister turned one down and I was out of the loop as he knew I’d sell it and John Andrew Ford/Mazda like to have the profits for themselves being the largest car dealership in this hemisphere they can dictate.
It always made me very envious as a Ford guy that only GM would bring Holden to the states. The Falcon was what I pined for, I like everything about it better, especially that straight 6.
Sucks I have to wait until 2045 to bring one of those Falcons here to the States. Sucks even more that I’ll be 82…
as someone already posted the other day, there is a falcon here…
http://lefthandutes.com/
Good and thorough write-up on these cars. Sad that these are gone, and even MORE sad that these weren’t brought over to the States. Its completely stupefying to me, how these cars which are the old school style broad shouldered rwd cars with something under the hood that define what an ‘American car’ is all about seem to be the bread and butter Down Under, yet here we are in America trying to make knockoffs of the Camry and wondering why they don’t really make any lasting impact. FWD V6 appliance cars definitely have their place…and its at Toyota, Honda, Nissan, Hyundai, etc dealerships. That’s what Asian car companies do best, is make efficient dependable transportation for mostly non car people. The Mopar LX platform is still a strong seller here, even though it was introduced in 2004. Where GM went wrong was only offering a couple of top tier versions of the Holdens here, rather than a full lineup from entry level sedans and stylish coupes and wagons on up to full tilt ball breakers. Arguably, the Holdens offered a more comprehensive lineup and if the tooling were replicated here, they could have been a massive success. At least you guys get to enjoy them!
X2. See my posts above.
The sales of the GTO/G8/SS proves what would have happened to any US spec Falcon. With SUV’s and CUV’s selling, and “car guys” waiting 10-25 years to get their favorite ‘niche’ cars used, they had little chance.
Oh, Ford is making $$ with D3, on something called the Explorer.
Can argue all day, but it’s “Dreams” vs. reality.
Of course, because if GM can’t sell a car, no one can….
Really, the Explorer? How about the Five Hundred, Taurus, Montego, Sable, Freestyle, Taurus X and Flex based on it the 6 years before the Explorer was moved to it? As the saying goes, a broken clock is right twice a day. The Territory could have just as easily been an Explorer.
Actually, the GTO/G8/SS proves what happens when you don’t amitorize the the WHOLE platform. Just like none of the ’60s era muscle cars would have been successful without basing them off of a platform that also works for volume models, this is where GM fumbled it. Again…see the Mopar LX platform. The secret was affordable and economical lower end models that could do anything some appliance could only better while also making a strong enough platform to make a performance machine also. Max out your options on a camry, impala, Taurus etc and all you have is a fancier appliance. The SHO at least has SOME performance creds, but never will a V6 fwd plaform deliver the visceral thrills as a torquey rumbling V8 –or even an excellent hi po I-6 and the superior handling dynamics of rwd.
These Holdens were quite successful in that very small market. Imagine if that full line was brought here. The Impala might be a respected nameplate as a performance car, not just a high volume people mover and rental queen.
And Ill take a jacked up wagon based on a rwd platform as a lighter offroader and has the requisite towing/hauling capabilities ANY day over some CUV (glorified minivan with regular doors) that’s based on a rinky dink fwd platform and offers marginal utility over any other sedan. A ‘crossover’ doesn’t by definition have to be a sawed off minivan on stilts. The AMC Eagles, AWD Magnum/Charger/300, Explorer SportTrac, any ute, Chevy Avalanche and plenty of others prove that out. Its just that anything fun, interesting, or actually desireable has been completely distilled out of that segment leaving nothing but sensible shoes.
Thank you for this, Will. As you may have seen in Ed’s recent “last of the rwd v-8” article, I bought a 2015 Chevrolet SS brand new and loved every minute of it for 20k+ miles. A divorce and job change forced its sale, which was very sad because I had intended to own it forever.
I currently have a Cadillac CTS-4 (awd car) with the 3.6 as well. Plenty of power, yes- but nothing like that wonderful 6.2 LS3 in my commodore!
Please, GM: the Alpha cars are great indeed, but retool for the Zetas somewhere else. Don’t let Elizabeth’s art die in vain.
Also- your Falcon is dope. I also have a 330i, and everyone knows the sweet song of a 24-valve inline six is pure magic.
Thanks again. 😀
Paul N, if you’re reading, my “Ed” above should have said “Paul”. I could deflect and say I was using the Car and Driver – style “Ed.” … but really it was just bad editing on my part. I blame auto-correct! Nah, I’m just a dummy writing too fast. Sorry about that, sir – and thanks for this excellent site for all of us car nerds. 🙂
Adam, your original comment did say “Paul”, but I changed it to “Ed” as it was Ed Stembridge’s article, not mine.
Now I’m not so sure what your intent actually was.
The Falcon 6 was a great engine. Mrs jim had a succession of company cars which she got to choose within certain limitations. Each change we’d trek around dealers and inevitably chose the Falcon. This routine ended before the 3.6 appeared on the Holden forecourts, but the lasting impression of the 3.8 was of a thrashy gutless unit. And the centre consoles were ridiculously wide.
The Falcons were run to something under 100K before swapping and the only problem ever was the dreaded crank angle sensor. And a battery that was cooked running Canberra to Melbourne one summer last century.
The surprising thing about the FG was the amount of room around the engine, you could see the ground which was a bit surprising – the 4 must have looked very lonely. And the rear doorcards were styled to blend into the rear squab which I thought was nice. Not Big Bird loveseat nice, but still cool.
I’ve never heard of the turbo 6 called durable…a friend had his go bang in an expensive way. This was in a Toxic Green XR6 ute so there may have been some causation on his part, but he’s typically pretty careful with his cars, also has 2 old Mustangs, and he has some sympathy with machinery.
An aside…during one of selection processes, and pretty much only because I had a thing for Chryslers, we tried a Neon. First car that was eliminated from the list of potentials in less than 100m. Awful little thing.
Other than modified cars, the main issue I’ve heard of is failing oil/water heat exchangers. I agree though the Commodore V6’s had no answer for the torque of the Falcon engine, even n/a. The DOHC Barra engine was so good Holden dropped the supercharged V6.
The only thing wrong with the Falcon 6 in this country is the gearing, its too tall for our paltry speed limit.
One of your most enjoyable reads Will! As a North American, I can definitely say you filled in a lot of gaps regarding these two cars I’ve only known from basic details I’ve read about them before, and not anything in person.
Needless to say, these are both truly better driver’s cars than anything Ford or GM offered homegrown in N.A. Performance aside, I think I prefer the more muscular styling of the Holden better, though the Ford has a seemingly nicer interior.
Both appeal good choices, and I’m glad you got to own one of them!
Aside from the inherent features (and in this case goodness) of these Falcons, as an American I find it fascinating that Ford Australia was happy to keep that nameplate for 50-something years. Here we had Falcon, Maverick, Fairmont, Tempo, Contour, Fusion (have I forgotten one?) in that market segment over the same period. No wonder Americans stopped being brand-loyal.
One snippet is that the Fairmont name, which dated back to 1965 was dropped for the 2008 FG model, replaced by G6 and G6E for the former Fairmont Ghia, ostensibly because the names were too “old man”. The consequence was people had to be re-taught the model range.
Nice article Will.
I loved the look of the VE Commodore from day 1, and the G6E eventually grew on me. (Actually, the final facelift is pretty elegant, given its basis.) The one big problem the Falcon has for me, is because of its success: that tall dashboard, and the sound of the 4l 6 will always say “taxi” to me.
ps. Why all of the american spelling? Aussie cars deserve Aussie english!
Good point. But conversely, is there a reason Ford had such a lock on the taxi market with these? You almost never saw a Commodore taxi. I suspect it was longevity, as that Ford six seemed to rack up insane mileages.
Nice write up on police cars and Taxis the taxi pack Falcon evaporated in NZ, Toyota offer 300,000km warranties on hybrid camrys for taxi duty, that kinda put the Falcon out of the market, but our police run a huge fleet of 3.6 Commodores in all colours, they are leased cars and white is harder to sell, the ditched the V8s a few years ago the only high speed chases they do are catching kids in riced Jappas and most chases are either suspended for safety reasons or end with the jappa wrapped around a pole so no need for excessively fast patrol cars.
Thanks for this which adds a lot to my knowledge on both these cars.
Without having tried either, I’d probably go for the Holden – it just looks so right and i think it is perhaps the best looking GM worldwide for many years, whereas the Ford looks a bit like a Mondeo that went large with that. Interiros lok good on both, and I guess the choice is down to personal preference.
But a Holden for me, with a V8 of course.
The new Mondeo is actually a little wider than the Falcon, shoulda test flown some while you were down here we have some great drivers roads, but I’d try a Falcon next time.
Holden wins hands down on the styling–it’s just a great job, with a proper dose of long hood short deck and nice taut surfaces. The Falcon, on the other hand, looks like the evolutionary missing link between the 1st-gen Fusion and the current Taurus. Attractive, but the family resemblance is very strong. (The current Mondeo/Fusion clearly shares the genes also but has less outright resemblance.)
Speaking of the Mondeo, how did the Falcon compare in size? Ford was criticized over here for having two cars that were too close in size with the 2013+ Fusion and the Taurus, and unless the Falcon is much bigger than it looks, I imagine Ford AUS would have had the same problem. They’re even similar in weight (the Fusion is a surprisingly hefty 3600 lbs. in SE trim.)
Taken as a whole, though, I can see why you’d choose the Falcon in the two trims compared. Better looks outside and a little more handling prowess may not make up for the other dynamic differences.
The Mondeo very close in size to the Falcon with the exception of being shorter overall in length (just over 3.5″), it is even slightly wider. Likewise interior dimensions swap between one car or the other having an advantage.
Yes and yes – I bought a new Chevrolet SS (VF Commodore) in 2015 and would have it back in a second. Sadly, divorces are costly.
I’ve also had multiple E39, E46, and E90 BMW’s in both sedan and Touring forms. My current 2006 330i recently crossed through 170k miles. I’ve had the car since about 105k so it’s given great service even with some expensive maintenance along the way.
But I’ve found myself thinking about what I’d replace it with if/when the time comes. What’s most troubling is this car is exactly the way I would have ordered it then, and the configuration is rare: triple black, 6 speed manual, Sport Pack, Cold Weather Pack, Premium Pack, and **no ugly extra-hump nav screen**. Alas, I’m not sure I’d ever duplicate that one. 😥
great write up; thanks. I didn’t have to read past “4.0 liter I6″to know which one I’d buy! Inline 6’s to me are perfection.
We have(had) these Holdens (aka Chevrolet) as Police cars on the island. But they are slowly being replaced by Ford Explorers.
From a different perspective, I’ve recently traded my 2010 Ford Falcon FG XR6 Ute, for a 2016 Holden Commodore VF SV6 Sportswagon. I’m a residential carpenter and work primarily on architect designed custom homes, I need a vehicle I can store my tools in securely, materials are delivered to site so I just carry tools. The Ford is an awesome car, the stand out is that Barra straight six with the ZF six speed behind it, mountains of torque, smooth shifting and plenty of power at the top end, redline was like 5000 rpm. The Holden needs more revs to get it moving but once it is, it is very quick, the upgraded six speed and extra torque they’ve squeezed out of the 3.6 Sidi V6 makes it more Falcon like but it still falls a little short. To summarise I’m enjoying the Holden’s more modern interior, but I miss that Falcon it was basic and showing its age, but had everything needed to drive quickly and comfortably over long distances.