mattyc

I go to jefferson. BA MK2 Turbo, $350 for a 30,000km service :(

Great idea, hope it works out. I'm more of a simpleton, so something closer to the Subaru liberty GT bonent would suit me better, but everyone to their own.

My MKII JAN 05 build has them..... Must have been a rolling change as XRBloke says....

a server issues guys, nothing we can do unless admins know about it ! EDIT: My firefox has the same problem BAD SERVER

Difference is probably marginal, probably best to look at the ADR figures. Mine sits at about 14.8 l/100, avg speed 38km/h. All city driving, and in a manual that sucks for economy.

I wasn't complaining..... just responding to the topic. Infact its a great tax ride off for my percentage business use.

AHAHAH: I WAS FOR ABOUT 3 or 4 MONTHS!!!!!! she dumped my ass and I was too lonely in my house which I just bought! back on topic; 22 y/o 1 at fault claim when 18, few speeding fines, $2700 p/a RACV 23 y/o no additional claim whent down to $1700 p/a RACV hopefully next year see another drop.

Is it possible for you to post an itemised report of your service? I wouldnt mind seeing how much you were charged for each item.

probably wont be any change in the turbo's, most likely a change in the v8's.

Whilst a funny and interesting topic - spare a thought for some of those young lads who decided that they'd give it a try, and are no longer here to brag about their younger days, as well as their passengers. Cheers all; keep safe!

Was gonna say, not much sympathy over here. Mind you. HOW THE F#$K DID YOU HIT THE RIGHT HAND SIDE ON THAT ANGLE?

Its probably the the car rolling faster down the hill. Just push the gear into manual mode and try 5th gear if you want it to stay at the speed rolling down the hill, and reactivate cruise (I'd use the Set - (minus)), try a lower gear again if your still accelerating. pretty annoying though. All cars with cruise control do this - except for those __REALLY__ expensive ones which can use the break to maintain speed. Unless you have the foot on the brake, the 6sp auto will not kick down a gear to slow you down. Either way though, that would de-activate the cruise control because you've got your foot on the break.

MKII BF due out mid october : New front bumpers, lights, bonnet, and packaging to compete against VE Omega. More importanty, a 6% improvement in fuel economy in the base model. Otherwise exactly the same. Article here: http://www.drive.com.au/Editorial/ArticleD...leID=19160&vf=2 As a side note on my opinion on the VE: Its great to see it FINALLY, if a tad too boring, but should sell very well and be a great basis for the new Falcon to improve on. I can here the HSV/SS croud who once said "too heavy/fat BA falcon is slow" now saying how well the VE will handle so well. Welcome to the world of a "real" chassis and a realistic weight for cars of this size. Cheers. EDIT: No news on the V8 from FPV, which will be totally blown out of the weeds now with VE HSV LS2.

that's the exact problem I have!!! ill have to take it in to get them done.

yep I got it too. been back about 8 times. its still not right, but its as good as its ever been and it aint getting worse so I've given up.....

You are spot on, the worst thing that you can do is labour these cars around in high gears at low speed. We have people call us and say that the transmission has a rumble in it and when we ask further the response is mostly this...... the car has a noise at 50 to 70 kph mainly in 5th gear!!!!!!!!!!!! I tell everybody not to use 5th or 6th under 100kph, these two gears are overdrive gears and should not be used at low speed. You get the best economy when the car you drive is doing it easy not lugging around in high gears at low speeds. Mal ← Funny that, I started using 5th at about 65, and 6th at about 85 and saw a 2l/100km fuel consumption IMPROVEMENT.... go figure...

Problem lies deeper than just the price of oil. We need new kinds of fuel and technology.

it wouldn't matter because as the drive wheels break traction (where the TC normally comes on) the CC cuts power anyway because the wheels are going faster than the set speed. ← yeh good point. I've always though in a bid to get cruise control smoother (not so jerky as it applies throttle), when your travelling at the above set speed (say down a hill), and then slowing down again, the cruise control will come on in slight incremements as you approach your speed again, until it reaches the set speed, then applying the correct throttle to maintain that speed..... never-the-less, I think that in the case above, CC was on, but because he accelerated manually and lost some grip, and it was all a passenger ride from there on in....

What if t/c was set to off?

Another 50 Australians unemployed. ← Funny that. Flip side of the coin is if they keep trying to play second fiddle against a very large GM catalogue of engines that Holden/HSV have access too the local built V8 will always be sh*tter. theres just not enough money in it to develop a competitive engine...

great video, I cant wait to do a track day!!!

can you elaborate on that? how can you only use the clutch for 1st-2nd gear?

I didnt know what "tank slapper" ment, so I googled it. Flash video on "tank slapper" or the "wobbles" http://www.flyingsnail.com/Sprung/tankslapper.html EDIT: P.S "at least you broke it well"

In a word - abysmal. They are heavy suckers. 2 tonne by the time you put a driver and a handful of CDs in. The manual Turbos are the best (naturally) but they are stretched to get any better than 15l/100km in city/burbs and 10l/100km on the highway. Next comes the manual V8, then the auto V8, then the auto 6T. Yes, the auto 6T is the worst for fuel economy. Now I know some people will jump in and tell us what they get and it's better (or even worse) - but I'm quoting from experience the "general" figures most people seem to achieve. PS Another area where the T3 shines ... better on fuel than any of the BAs you are considering (about on par with a manual XR6T). ← While not wanting get into yet another argument over transmissions, the ZF is “supposed” to be more fuel efficient than anything else. Well that’s what Ford are saying in their marketing – and they wouldn’t be stretching the truth now would they ← Well he inferred he was buying second hand so I (probably incorrectly) assumed he'd be looking at the four-speed auto and it was with that in mind that I made my comments. The six speed will definitely be a better proposition, but I still don't think it will match the manual for fuel economy. ← Regarding fuel economy, there is NO WAY an manual is MORE fuel efficient than an auto!!! Givin the same driver (and style), an auto is WAY better than a manual. A 4sp auto has measurably better economy than a 6sp manual, let alone the 6speed auto. Drive got an average 9 - 11 l/100k from the XR6, and a few more ltrs for the turbo on a city/highway test cycle for the 6 speed auto. I can bearly crack below 15 l/100k city/highway in my manual and that's before I start to give it a bootfull!

There are lies, damed lies, and statistics! The LS2 is a FAR BETTER engine that the current BOSS engine in terms of performance, and will ALWAYS be a better engine in terms of performance. The BOSS engine is a low rev, heavy engine with quad cam heads. Its a total mis-match of high breathing/flow heads when the engine barely even uses it. Not only does the LS2 club it for low down torque, it wallops it when it comes to to high revs. The LS2 in HSV at the moment is in such a LOW state of tune, that its almost a joke compared to what it can really push, just like the GENIII when it came out in the VTII. IN 2002, the BOSS was great, in 2006, its pretty much at the back of the pack - no thanks to Holdens catalogue that they can call on from GM U.S. and simply pick the best one that suits.