Holden's billion dollar VE Commodore no safer than previous model
At the launch of the VE Commodore in July last year, Holden management were quick to point out that more than a billion Aussie dollars were sunk into developing GM's new global RWD architecture, and that thousands of miles of testing were conducted for the latest version of Australia's most popular car.
Holden is now on the back foot following the four-star crash test rating its VE scored in last week's Australasian New Car Assessment Program (ANCAP), the local equivalent of the Euro NCAP and America's NHTSA crash test ratings. The latest result means the all-new Commodore is no safer than the previous VY model released back in May 2003. Worse still, in some cases, such as the offset impact test, the new VE was rated less safe than the previous car.
Holden's official response is that the ANCAP doesn't represent real-world conditions, and that 80 cars were crash-tested during the VE's development in addition to more than 5,000 computer-simulated barrier tests. When questioned about the poor result by Australia's GoAuto, Holden chairman Denny Mooney could only respond that he didn't have the test data in front of him. Remember, this is the same platform that GM's RWD ambitions are riding on. It's the same basic structure that will spawn a host of new models including the Camaro and Impala, and the car is already coming to the US as the Pontiac G8, so there's a great deal riding on it.
[Source: GoAuto Online]
Get a WordPress.com Blog
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
felipe 11:39AM (6/21/2007)
you'd think Holden/GM would have been focusing on something like safety improvments on a project this big.
denny, how does a big bag of duh such as yourself get to be Chairman? degree in stupid answers maybe
Reply
SSBR 11:39AM (6/21/2007)
I wouldn't be caught dead in the new G8 aka Commodore. Looks like even if I did, I wouldn't have to worry!
http://www.rolesor.com
Reply
James 12:14PM (6/21/2007)
PS #2, grow your own opinions next time don't just read them on some biased fanboi site and spread the hate, k? That nasty little link at the bottom of your post kinda spoils any credibility one might attach to 'SSBR'. As i'm sure you are an expert on Australian cars I won't fill you in on how good the new VE AKA G8 actually is to drive. I'm sure you've driven one, haven't you? Because it would be very childish and amateur of you to form opinions about never being caught 'dead' in one without having a test drive first eh?
Andy 3:18PM (6/21/2007)
I detect a low IQ as well.
Corey L 11:46AM (6/21/2007)
Keep in mind that 4*'s is not bad at all. On top of that, the Commodore's a large vehicle, thus in 2-vehicle crashes, it'll have an advantage over smaller cars.
Reply
Jason 11:47AM (6/21/2007)
Is the modern 4-star rating really all that horrible...?
Reply
Cliff 11:58AM (6/21/2007)
No 4 star is not at all bad, it's just not the best.
Just another anti-GM article from autoblog. ...why do I read this stuff?...
Reply
Vectortrance 2:50PM (6/21/2007)
I see nothing in this article that suggests the author of this article has a vendetta against GM...
Look back a few weeks and you'll see all the comments regarding Toyota's recent 4 star crash ratings on one of their trucks. Nobody cried foul about Autoblog hating on Toyota.
The reality is, these manufacturers scored a 4 out of 5. Not bad, but not great either, and I think that the average consumer will likely consider a safer alternative.
I really hope GM can improve their ratings for the G8 in North America.
james 12:00PM (6/21/2007)
Well I saw the results of this rating on the news, they actually tested a few new cars at once, not just the Commodore. The general consensus was Car makers were being slack offering only a lap rear middle seat belt (of which the Commodore has lap/sash) and lack of side airbags (of which the Commodore has as options, standard in higher models). Why specifically the Commodore was bad-mouthed during the article was never revealed, perhaps it was thrown in just to attract attention, and why it only received 4 stars was also not disclosed. Interesting how a car designed from scratch with extensive computer modeling can't even get a 5 star rating. Even so, I'd much rather crash in one of these than a supposedly 5 star WRX. Nuff said.
Reply
bmoredlj 12:01PM (6/21/2007)
Why not title the post "Commodore buyers braver due to higher chance of horrible death."
Ouch...first a post about a Toyota-sourced Grand Prix superchargers catching fire in 5 year old cars, and now a post implying that the 4-star Commodore - and hence the Camaro and G8 - are virtual death traps.
Apparently It's splitting-hairs-slash-GM-bashing day at Autoblog.
I guess its to be expected, after all of the negative Tundra posts of late. You guys can't say you're not unfair and balanced.
Reply
British_Rover 12:11PM (6/21/2007)
Come on now Eaton makes the Superchargers for the various W body and H body cars not toyota.
Eaton makes the superchargers for nearly every production supercharged engine.
rob 12:55PM (6/21/2007)
whiny whiny whine. thats all i ever see you do on these posts.
bmoredlj 1:18PM (6/21/2007)
British_Rover - you are correct; Eaton, not TRD. My bad.
rob - you're MEAN!!!!
(runs upstairs in tears and into room, slamming door)
bmoredlj 12:03PM (6/21/2007)
....
Reply
rrr 12:12PM (6/21/2007)
What i don not get is this, GM knew that this car would perform on 4 star level...but did not hold the production to do more testing and correcting the problem.
This is too important of a platform for GM to allow it to have such a HUGE mistake. Before it even was prodused in USA it is already behind Accord and Camry.....sure they can get 4 stars to, but to overcome those two GM needs to be BETTER than Camcord....., not only is GM not better, it is worse. I think GM should postpone everything from G8 to especialy Camaro and try to fix this....and everything else possible before this new platform goes on sale in USA. The new Mustang will be here when Camarro comes out,new Accord will be here as well, people will compare all these cars side by side and i bet that 4 star will play a huge role.
Look Toyota postponed Corolla by 3 years and Prius by a year....why can't GM postpone this for a few months and fix the damned thing?
Reply
Brett 12:26PM (6/21/2007)
Why do people think the Camaro and Commodore are the exact same car? They share the platform, not all the safety related parts. I.E. the A & B pillar is different, the wheelbase is different, the front suspension is paced different, the airbags are in different spots. Cmon people! Not to mention just because a car gets a 4 star ANCAP doesn't mean it will "for sure" recieve a 4 star NHTSA. I'll take anyones bet the Camaro gets 5 stars. The only car that would get the same result as a commodore is the G8 if tested in Aus. Things are different in the U.S.
British_Rover 12:29PM (6/21/2007)
Both Audi and BMW had trouble getting 5 star ratings on the Q7 and X5 respectively. They went back and corrected the problems rather quickly. I don't see why GM can't do the same. Also keep in mind that the Australian and European NCAP tests are much harder then the US NHSTA crash test. A four star rating on NCAP is probably five star on NHSTA.
Guenther 1:59PM (6/21/2007)
This is part of what can happen when you send all the experienced help home. What this mostly seems to point to, is that they didn't design-to-test as well as they could have. Same as with the Tundra. It got 4 stars instead of 5, while 3 older trucks got 5 stars. Sorry to muddle in a toyota refrence...
Ben 12:15PM (6/21/2007)
To all you poor GM ( Garbage Machines) fans that are crying foul ... as in don't bash GM ...
Awwwwwwwwwwwwww !!!!!!!!!!!!!
Reply
Puffy C 12:24PM (6/21/2007)
There is no "problem" and there's nothing to be "fixed". this is just one of those non-issues marque bashers like to get all frothed up about.
Reply