Tech, power update for Commodore?

[csv8]

Tech, power update for Commodore?
BARRY PARK
April 9, 2010
Comments 3


A more potent V6 in the US Chevrolet Camaro has raised hopes that the locally produced Commodore could share the same engine.

Holden's humble Commodore could soon be pumping out more than 230kW from its 3.6-litre V6, and feature a head-up display for the first time.

The car maker's US parent, General Motors, today pulled the wraps off a mid-life update of the Australian designed Chevrolet Camaro featuring a version of the Commodore's engine, but worked to pump out significantly more than the 210kW used in performance-oriented renderings of the large family sedan. Torque also gets a boost, rising from 350Nm in the Commodore to 377Nm.

In another hint of what might be just around the corner for a mid-life spritz of the Commodore, GM also announced that the Camaro, which shares much of the same engineering as the Commodore, will get a head-up display — only the second model wearing the Chevrolet bowtie to feature the technology.

The extra performance from the V6 has come as a surprise to GM.

''The 304 horsepower (233kW) in the 2010 Camaro was actually a conservative rating on our end,'' GM V6 engineer Tom Sutter said.

''But we knew already that this award-winning engine produced at least the amount of power we stated, but now we've gone the extra step in certifying the engine for this application and have verified an additional eight horsepower.''

Performance comes at the higher end of the scale, however. Peak power kicks in at 6500rpm, about 100rpm higher than for the Commodore's high-performance V6, while torque peaks at 5100 rpm compared with the Commodore's much lower 2900rpm.

Meanwhile, the head-up display has been designed to give the driver information including speed, tachometer, paddle gear-shift indicator on automatic models, and vehicle messages, among other more mundane things such as turn signal indicators and high-beam warnings.

[dannyhilton]

Many people will say these things are useless, but I disagree. While a head up display may be overkill for some, it's a great little feature for others. Auto up/down on the windows is a prime example of this, while it's not difficult to hold the button in, it is more convenient to have this feature. Power fold mirrors is another one, and this would enable me to enter my garage without having to manually close both mirrors then reversing in. I can live without it, but darn, it would come in handy when it's ****ing down rain outside. This is where the Commodore is coming up trumps, and if the rumours about a touch screen centre display are true Ford will fall further behind. Ford should be at the forefront here, look at the US, Ford SYNC and MyFord are changing the way people and cars work together. Why this features is left off an updated Falcon, along with many other handy bits I'll never understand.

The Falcon is 8/10 to perfection. These minor things are the difference between a really good car and a great one, and like it or not can be the difference between a sale and not...

[mik]

Originally Posted by dannyhilton

Many people will say these things are useless, but I disagree. While a head up display may be overkill for some, it's a great little feature for others. Auto up/down on the windows is a prime example of this, while it's not difficult to hold the button in, it is more convenient to have this feature. Power fold mirrors is another one, and this would enable me to enter my garage without having to manually close both mirrors then reversing in. I can live without it, but darn, it would come in handy when it's ****ing down rain outside. This is where the Commodore is coming up trumps, and if the rumours about a touch screen centre display are true Ford will fall further behind. Ford should be at the forefront here, look at the US, Ford SYNC and MyFord are changing the way people and cars work together. Why this features is left off an updated Falcon, along with many other handy bits I'll never understand.

The Falcon is 8/10 to perfection. These minor things are the difference between a really good car and a great one, and like it or not can be the difference between a sale and not...

the fold up mirror thing might be usefull to some, it been around for some time, my brothers 86 supra has it, i`m yet to see him use the feature, i guess they can only add so many feature`s each year without putting the price up majorly, compare the features of a 2010 falcon to a ea falcon the difference is mind boggling, i would`nt be in a rush to overload the car with unneeded options at the expense of the good work that has been done on the rest of the car, if i wanted lots of extra`s in exchange for a mediocre dynamics i`d by a camry thats just my view though.

[dannyhilton]

Originally Posted by mik

the fold up mirror thing might be usefull to some, it been around for some time, my brothers 86 supra has it, i`m yet to see him use the feature, i guess they can only add so many feature`s each year without putting the price up majorly, compare the features of a 2010 falcon to a ea falcon the difference is mind boggling, i would`nt be in a rush to overload the car with unneeded options at the expense of the good work that has been done on the rest of the car, if i wanted lots of extra`s in exchange for a mediocre dynamics i`d by a camry thats just my view though.

Thank you for your post. It's good to get some feedback that isn't of a smartass nature, and actually offers some insight into the debate as apposed to nothing. I can definitly see your point by the way, these options would add cost. But their marketability is greater.

I suppose all I can really say is have a look at what the top spec Mondeo Titanium or XR5T has and compare it with the G6E Turbo. It makes the Falcon seem quite old hat.

[mik]

Originally Posted by dannyhilton

Thank you for your post. It's good to get some feedback that isn't of a smartass nature, and actually offers some insight into the debate as apposed to nothing. I can definitly see your point by the way, these options would add cost. But their marketability is greater.

I suppose all I can really say is have a look at what the top spec Mondeo Titanium or XR5T has and compare it with the G6E Turbo. It makes the Falcon seem quite old hat.

i have sat in a mondeo ,i like the interior, i would say its almost pretty lol , that said i think big falcon has a pretty good interior (i still prefer the falcon overall), but i see your point,
back on topic, the power upgrade in the commy v6, it might go ok but i don`t think it it will help the economy of this engine(and economy is their selling poit) that already needs to be reved to make torque, if it needs to go out 5100 rpm for max torque, i think i`d be using it for a boat anchor.

[Nikked]

230kw for the base model? thats just silly.

[snappy]

Originally Posted by Nikked

230kw for the base model? thats just silly.

Its not base model it the calias

[snappy]

Head up display would be fantastic you wont need to take your eyes of the road to check the speedo . Not sure on the touchscreen great every now and again and great to say it got touch screen . But ive got a touch screen phone and if the sun is shining anywhere near the it i cant see a thing.

The motor is probly fantasic in the camaro and it producing alot of power . But in the commodore the torque needs to down low in the rev range . An i have a feeling with the next set of upgrades the I6 will again cement it place as the king of the sixes .
Now that i think about it the 3.6 is I6T money so no competition .

[dannyhilton]

But it'll probs find it's way into the SV6, Calais and Calais V, with 230kw. If this is going to be the case, then the base models will probs get 210kw or something like that, in a base car. The XR6Turbo had 240kw back in the day, and that was deemed a full on performance car. 30kw more than what the top of the line six has from Holden today? Then again, I suppose you only have to look back in the day, the AU XR8 had under 200kw. Everyone is going to advance I suppose, I just hope the punters who buy these cars can handle the power...

[csv8]

Originally Posted by dannyhilton

But it'll probs find it's way into the SV6, Calais and Calais V, with 230kw. If this is going to be the case, then the base models will probs get 210kw or something like that, in a base car. The XR6Turbo had 240kw back in the day, and that was deemed a full on performance car. 30kw more than what the top of the line six has from Holden today? Then again, I suppose you only have to look back in the day, the AU XR8 had under 200kw. Everyone is going to advance I suppose, I just hope the punters who buy these cars can handle the power...

Nah !! Harold Scruby will have something to say about it !!!!!

[Auslandau]

Its tit for tat over there ... worse than FPV vs HSV with their boot badging.

More Power for the V-6? Not So Fast

For 2011, Chevy will make up the power deficiency—on paper, at least—that was served by the latest 305-hp V-6 Mustang, which just so happened to beat the current Camaro V-6’s rating by a single horsepower. The 2011 Camaro V-6 will put down 312 hp at 6500 rpm (100 rpm later) and 278 lb-ft of torque at 5100 rpm (100 rpm earlier), the latter an increase of 5 lb-ft. The updated output numbers are not the result of any changes to the engine, though. Chevrolet says its original numbers were conservative and that these new ones are SAE-certified.

We fearlessly predict that the “power increase” will make more difference in the bragging-rights department than at the strip. Our 0-to-60-mph time for the 2010 Camaro V-6 is 5.9 seconds, while the 2011 Mustang V-6 we recently tested got up to speed in 5.4; it’s unlikely that an extra 8 hp and 5 lb-ft would close that gap—especially because they were already there in the first place.

http://www.caranddriver.com/news/car..._bump-car_news



| [/url] |

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by Auslandau

Its tit for tat over there ... worse than FPV vs HSV with their boot badging.


http://www.caranddriver.com/news/car..._bump-car_news

Camaro needs premium for the 312 hp figure while Ford makes its 305 hp on regular 87 pump gas.

[Deco28]

Originally Posted by jpd80

Camaro needs premium for the 312 hp figure while Ford makes its 305 hp on regular 87 pump gas.

Wrong. Camaro is on regular.

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by Deco28

Wrong. Camaro is on regular.

GM recommends Premium fuel for Camaro SIDI, you can use regular but it won't make optimum horsepower.

It is not the same tune as Commodore SIDI - that engine is tuned for regular.

[vztrt]

What will all the bogan p-platers do??

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by vztrt

What will all the bogan p-platers do??

What do you mean? P plater can drive any 6 cylinder, as long as it isn't turbo'd or a Nissan 350/70Z, BMW M3. Power to weight ratio bit the dust in 2007, except in QLD I believe, anything over 200kw is banned.

[NC1183]

Originally Posted by Big Damo

What do you mean? P plater can drive any 6 cylinder, as long as it isn't turbo'd or a Nissan 350/70Z, BMW M3. Power to weight ratio bit the dust in 2007, except in QLD I believe, anything over 200kw is banned.

As far as I'm aware, the 200kw rule is still in for all states, IE. if it makes more then 200kw regardless of weight it is classed as a performance 6 and is banned.

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by NC1183

As far as I'm aware, the 200kw rule is still in for all states, IE. if it makes more then 200kw regardless of weight it is classed as a performance 6 and is banned.

3.0 DISI and Falcon 4.0 are still just under 200 Kw, insurance companies?

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by NC1183

As far as I'm aware, the 200kw rule is still in for all states, IE. if it makes more then 200kw regardless of weight it is classed as a performance 6 and is banned.

Not here in Victoria.

Originally Posted by vztrt

125kw/ton still exists in Victoria, as well as no V8/turbo rule.

Fortunately, it doesn't, it went out with the new rules in 2007 or with the introduction of turbo exemptions last year.

[vztrt]

Originally Posted by Big Damo

What do you mean? P plater can drive any 6 cylinder, as long as it isn't turbo'd or a Nissan 350/70Z, BMW M3. Power to weight ratio bit the dust in 2007, except in QLD I believe, anything over 200kw is banned.

125kw/ton still exists in Victoria, as well as no V8/turbo rule.

[350125GO]

Originally Posted by vztrt

125kw/ton still exists in Victoria, as well as no V8/turbo rule.

sucks to live in VIC then :



oh wait we are talking about not being able to drive a commodore

[Outback]

Originally Posted by vztrt

What will all the bogan p-platers do??

They will stick to driving Fords like they have always been doing.

[HULK EF]

Originally Posted by Outback

They will stick to driving Fords like they have always been doing.

Thought crummydores were "the ********" for p platers.. well in sydney anyhows...

[Stoney!]

LOL, your seriously mistaken if you think Bogans only drive Commodores, they drive any cheap powerful car they can get their hands on. Commodores, Falcons, Valiants, skylines, even V6 (and 4 cyl) Magnas now.

In fact these days you also have the Ecobogan, who get around in their share of 4 cyl small pot machines. A lot of the time they would be ford Lasers and Telstars to with the odd Daewoo, and corolla in the mix.

Stoney!

[Chopped]

^ With honesty like that you must be a troll !
------

The New Mustang V6 and V8s are doing some impressive numbers. I think I read a 12.7 1/4mile for the NA V8 !.

Camaro is a fatty ! (looks nice though and makes a cool transformer)

[vztrt]

Originally Posted by Outback

They will stick to driving Fords like they have always been doing.

Yet you drive a Holden.

[Antwon]

Am I the only one that noticed it says 3.6L? Isnt 3.6L the old alloytec motor, and the SIDI is 3.0L and 3.5L?

[burnz]

Originally Posted by Antwon

Am I the only one that noticed it says 3.6L? Isnt 3.6L the old alloytec motor, and the SIDI is 3.0L and 3.5L?

SIDI is 3.0/3.6..

i dont think its a power upgrade just under estimated then corrected after SAE test.

[FPV GTHO]

Holden had the option of 225kw and 370nm when they first used the SIDI engines, the opted instead for slightly less peaky tunes to the engines.

Nothing new here IMO.

[Swordsman88]

Originally Posted by FPV GTHO

Holden had the option of 225kw and 370nm when they first used the SIDI engines, the opted instead for slightly less peaky tunes to the engines.

Nothing new here IMO.

Indeed. Apart from the Heads up display thing (which is ok for a gimick and sales featurei suppose) there is absolutely nothing interesting or new in this report.

In fact given the oft negative stories about many other manufacturers (incl. ford) i am shocked this story didn't read as 'GM embarasingly corrects power figures on current engine' etc. I mean can't people understand what these two lines atcually mean??

'The 304 horsepower (233kW) in the 2010 Camaro was actually a conservative rating on our end,'' GM V6 engineer Tom Sutter said.

''But we knew already that this award-winning engine produced at least the amount of power we stated, but now we've gone the extra step in certifying the engine for this application and have verified an additional eight horsepower.''

So the 233 figure (up from 227kw) is actually the real power number but it was 'underquoted' or whatever? So best case GM did NOTHING and now have the gall to say the 'uprated' number is worthy because....ah....they can't dyno their own engines properly?? FFS how many free kicks are these guys getting LOL!

Everyone worth their salt (clealry not this barry park numnut) knows that this is all because GM is in the poop and can't afford real engine updgrades at all. So they just 'change' the sticker number and yippee...problem solved. I mean the car will not be any quicker now will it, since nothing was atcually changed. At least have the cahones to 'pretend' to have made some changes.....like an intake duct or something so you can spin it that you made 'improvements'. This is sad.

Of course its all marketing related....now that Ford sneakilly outgrunted them by 1kw or whatever on the 3.7 duratec V6. The funniest bit though is that Ford quoted that number as the rated figure.....but dyno tests have shown the Ford V6 makes more grunt easilly...up to 308hp and 287ftlb torque easy. So should ford come out now and redo its numbers becaue they aren't accurate??

Really though it isn't GM i should be abusing, its this muppet of a journo. I dont know how a 're evaluation' of a power number in the US has anything to do with the ausie spec version?? If there are not mechanical changes waht is his point?? GMH had the exact same tech spec available to them from GM powertrain when they chose to tune the current engine. Holden would never tune the alloytec in that fashion anyway for the comodore....as everyone one here knows. Peak torque at 5000+rpm is just stupid in a large pasenger sedan....