• Jun 21st 2007 at 11:26AM
  • 27

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]

I'm reporting this comment as:

Reported comments and users are reviewed by Autoblog staff 24 hours a day, seven days a week to determine whether they violate Community Guideline. Accounts are penalized for Community Guidelines violations and serious or repeated violations can lead to account termination.

    • 1 Second Ago
      • 8 Years Ago
      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.
        • 8 Years Ago
        riiight..cause i never see you on here bashing the imports. i forgot that its okay to be biased when you're an idiot.
      • 8 Years Ago
      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.
        • 8 Years Ago
        British_Rover - you are correct; Eaton, not TRD. My bad.

        rob - you're MEAN!!!!
        (runs upstairs in tears and into room, slamming door)

        • 8 Years Ago
        whiny whiny whine. thats all i ever see you do on these posts.
        • 8 Years Ago
        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.
      • 8 Years Ago
      My problem is more that the new model will be heavier, less fuel efficient, and probably have dull steering feel. It'd be nice if most newer vehicles nowadays weren't so fat and bovine.
      • 8 Years Ago
      To all you poor GM ( Garbage Machines) fans that are crying foul ... as in don't bash GM ...

      Awwwwwwwwwwwwww !!!!!!!!!!!!!
      • 8 Years Ago
      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
      • 8 Years Ago
      Do I wish the Holden/G8 got 5 stars? Absolutely. Will this affect me buying this vehicle? No.

      A 4 star Austrailian crash rating is surely 3 times safer than my 2000 Trans Am convertible which is my DD now.

      Like I've said.....G8 GT, red/red, M6 please!
      • 8 Years Ago
      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.
      • 8 Years Ago
      BFD. People who buy RWD V8 sedans are not the mommies who want the safest possible nerf box to crash in.

      Overbuilt pillars and doors stuffed with airbags to survive a crash with a concrete wall without a scratch are a big part of why the sightlines are so terrible in recent cars.
      • 8 Years Ago
      Here's a couple of facts this story didn't point out:

      * The Toyota Aurion (essentially a new Camry) scored the same 4 star rating in the same test.
      * The Commodore scored almost identically to its predecessor in frontal impact, the older model already having among the highest scores in its class, so they made no real progress in a category they were already above average in.
      * They did, however, make major gains in the side impact score, only denied a perfect score by one door coming ajar in the impact.
      * The ANCAP has a maximum score of 37, and the Holden got 27. A point is awarded for each seat that has a seatbelt reminder light, and points are awarded for the presence of airbags; had the Commodore had a knee airbag it would have recieved the score necessary to get a 5 star rating. Innovations such as occupant height and size-detecting airbags, anti-whiplash headrests and basically anything outside of airbags and seatbelt warning lights have little to no impact on the score.

      The point of all this is that in the eyes of many (including myself) the ANCAP system of ratings is somewhat irrelevant and in areas just plain bizarre. In any event, the score is more based on features lists than platform architecture so you don't have to worry about your future Camaros, Impalas etc.
      • 8 Years Ago
      I wouldn't be caught dead in the new G8 aka Commodore. Looks like even if I did, I wouldn't have to worry!

        • 8 Years Ago
        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?
        • 8 Years Ago
        I detect a low IQ as well.
      • 8 Years Ago
      the only reason it missed out on a 5 star rating is that they used the lowest, base model variant for testing, that had no side airbags.
      Not as an act of spite, Holden themselves supplied the model, as no doubt they wanted to see what crash rating they could achieve.
      All models up from (i think including this one too?) have side air bags as an option so are ostensibly worthy of 5 star crash ratings.
      This is a complete non-issue and barely news worthy.
      • 8 Years Ago
      Well the good thing is, the have an opportunity to fix it before the G8 goes on sale. Still a very nice car. I would buy the Impala edition of this car over the Pntiac. God it takes a painfully long time for GM to launch a new model.
    • Load More Comments