AU into VT. Mixed feelings

[MAD_MIKE]

Stupid question but the OP says the AU seats fold down. I for the life of me cant find a button to push or lift in order to get my rear seats down in my AU...is there a secret lever hidden somewhere? Or is it a job for Captain Obvious. Car is AUII mont

[AU Mont]

theres a tag which is joined to the latch n the side of the seat, between the two upper separate cushions

if you cant see it sticking out, then obviously has fallen off and you have to squeeze your hand in there and release it

[mike_nofx]

Any more info on how to access hidden data mode on AUII??

[lockieoc]

You forgot to mention how pathetic and down right scary it is trying to overtake in a VT.

[Bill M]

There is a good article on VT in the current Unique cars issue 341
It refers to the missing lateral toe control links on the semi trailing rear suspension, know of any VT Commodore with evenly wearing rear tyres?
Bill.

[MAD_MIKE]

Originally Posted by AU Mont

theres a tag which is joined to the latch n the side of the seat, between the two upper separate cushions

if you cant see it sticking out, then obviously has fallen off and you have to squeeze your hand in there and release it

Found the tag!!! Thanks mate for the tip

[svo supporter]

Originally Posted by Bill M

There is a good article on VT in the current Unique cars issue 341
It refers to the missing lateral toe control links on the semi trailing rear suspension, know of any VT Commodore with evenly wearing rear tyres?
Bill.

Unfortunately that article isn't entirely true. The biggest problem with the VT Commodore (Actually before the VT) wearing tyres is the camber problem on the rear. Holden started to get it half right after the VX, when they moved the trailing arm fixing points...This reduced the camber on the rear, which helped improve the tyre wear....They relocated these points on every model after the VX, but never solved the problem entirely, until they redesigned the rear end on the VE range.

The laterial toe control links didn't appear until the VX series II. This did help reduce the tyre wear, but not solve it.

Hope this clears it up

[seven7]

Originally Posted by mike_nofx

Any more info on how to access hidden data mode on AUII??

yes i want more info on this as well thanks

35 seconds of button presses don't seem like too much trouble
but what do u get for it?

[FordFalconBF]

Why rehash a thread from 2 years ago?????

[Kryton]

Originally Posted by FordFairlaneAU

Why rehash a thread from 2 years ago?????

Why not.
It has all the relevant info and it saves asking the same old questions over and over again.
Good to see some people actually use the SEARCH button, just a shame there's always someone to whinge about it.

[Moo Man]

Originally Posted by mike_nofx

Any more info on how to access hidden data mode on AUII??

Originally Posted by seven7

yes i want more info on this as well thanks

35 seconds of button presses don't seem like too much trouble
but what do u get for it?

Have a look at this thread. http://www.fordforums.com.au/showthr...au+diagnostics

The procedure is a bit fiddly but I got it on the second attempt....

Post #2 explains it all and post #49 makes getting the timing right a lot easier..

[MAD_MIKE]

Originally Posted by Kryton

Why not.
It has all the relevant info and it saves asking the same old questions over and over again.
Good to see some people actually use the SEARCH button, just a shame there's always someone to whinge about it.

This.

[flooded one]

I use a my head unit display with a cd playing for my stopwatch when trying too get the hidden function on an AU dash. most of my mates VTs i've driven/ been in have had very hard lives. so i'll try not too compare them. I have however driven a VX that was in great condition. i've found fuel was slightly better in the commo but the AU has good fuel economy too. out on thie highway is where you notice the difference performance wise between the AU and VT/VX. the AU leaves the holden behind!!! thou the VX commodore was willing to overtake happily just not as easy as the falcon. I found the AUs abit more happy too slide about in the wet then the VT/VXs but if you drive sainly your pretty safe. mechanically wise AU is better. I just wish i could drive more commodores with automatics that dont hunt gear unnecessarily. thats my biggest problem with the commodore. I've only drive a few that dont. early AUs brakes arent as good as the latter ones. thou my preference is AU. i actually dont mind the VX. i'd have a VX over a VT thou. lookwise i think the AU keeps looking better the older it gets. the VT/VX looks very dated now where as AU looks like it could of came out not that long ago. thats my opinion thou one last thing i know a few people that constantly chew out rear tyres on their VTs. I just blame them for the way they drive them. have heard the stories about them chewing rear tyres thou so i think their might be some truth in that story

[greenfoam]

I've driven all three models extensively. When they are all in good condition they are all average cars. A standard irs vt is a little more stuck to the road. The standard au steers more accurately than a vt or vp. The vp is slightly quicker than the au then the vt is slowest. Au's use the least fuel, then vp then vt. The vp in irs is overall the best drivers car but in standard live axel I'd take the au even if is the only one of the three likely to be rusty. The au is a stiffer car than either a vp or vt. All three are quite crap compared to a modern car that is for sure.

[svo supporter]

Originally Posted by wildrider

.. . early AUs brakes arent as good as the latter ones. thou my preference is AU. i actually dont mind the VX. i'd have a VX over a VT thou. Au series 11 (I think)is when they bought out twin piston calipers....So the braking is better than the series 1...VT was the first with twin piston calipers in the Holden range......There isn't much difference between a VT and VX....About the only mechanical change was a toe adjuster fitted to the series 2 VX, so I fail to understand how you would consider a VX better than a VT
one last thing i know a few people that constantly chew out rear tyres on their VTs. I just blame them for the way they drive them. have heard the stories about them chewing rear tyres thou so i think their might be some truth in that story

The inside edge of the tyre on IRS equipped Commodores chew out, rather than the whole tyre.....The VE has a problem of chewing the whole tyre out, as the rear is too soft, therefore it moves round on the road, causing the tyre to wear out. It's to do with the rubber bushes they fit.

[svo supporter]

Originally Posted by greenfoam

The vp in irs is overall the best drivers car .

Difficult to comprehend, considering the VP and VT IRS are identical....It wasn't until the VY did Holden revise the mounting points for the IRS. They also revised them again with the VZ. Otherwise, the whole rear end is interchangeable. With the exception of the toe adjusters, which came on stream with the VX series 11 and continued through the VY and VZ range.

You can still add toe adjusters to the pre VX series 11 range...You have to weld the locating tabs on the control arm for the toe adjuster and drill out the stub, where the tierod end goes in.

[greenfoam]

The vp is at least a hundred kilos lighter, thats the only difference but it feels a lot different to drive being that much lighter. Weight is 90% of everything plus the irs version is a lot more planted than the overly tail happy live axel commodores. I'm still.diving an au once in a while now. It's getting very rusty but has been mechanically perfect, good car in that way.

[flooded one]

my prefernce is with its looks. the VXs boot looks so much better. I also found the VX more responsive. that could be due too two things. 1) as I said that the VTs i have driven have been flogged and not cared for or 2). its due too the extra 5kw the VX had (VX 152kw to VT 147kw) it might not seem like much but you do notice a better response with a slight power increase. VT series 1 is heavier then then series 2 and VX, weight was a problem with the series 1 VT. thats why it wasnt as quick as the VS V6

[crazycatlady]

Originally Posted by SteveJH

I thought the AU had IRS? Or was it a wagon?

I agree very incf

[EDManual]

au's sure have no grip on wet bumpy roads, IRS makes a huge difference! Even taking off from a standstill in wet, the IRS cars drop at the back more causing more weight over the back wheels compared to the live axle.

[BENT_8]

I've had both VT1 and AU2 in recent years.
The VT1 Acclaim i bought was 1 owner with 130k's on it when i got it, running 16" calais rims.
I lowered it with kings lows all round. As its on gas i was advised to use a stiffer spring to support the weight.
The suspension tech said it was more to do with the irs capabilities as opposed to poor design.
He also said that the early Commodores were better as they were lighter, but the main issue was that the irs was adapted from a Calibra and just not up to the load requirements of a large rwd sedan.
The VT1 is the fattest of the lot and as a result it bogs down under acceleration on its soft factory springs exposing the inner edge to drag, as if the tyre were yawing instead of running true, hence the rapid uneven wear.

Although my VT was lowered slightly, the rear springs didnt allow the back to bog down as they are a stiffer spring, the offset is that the irs cradles are prone to cracking with stiff lowered rears, so anything bigger than a 16" rim is transfering too much load to the suspension.
The car is now with my inlaws and has clicked over 220k's.
As the rears got low i moved the fronts back and put 2 new ones on the front, i did this once and they have done it twice,the last 6 weeks ago, so thats 6 tyres in 5 years and 90k, hardly an issue even in a lowered car.

Having said all that, the AU kills it in every dept apart from bogan appreciation, which the VT claims hands down.
If i was thrown the keys to both minutes before a long distance trip, the VT wouldnt get consideration.

[RAPID_BA]

I have a VT2 but it has a tuned LS1 in it. So my comments will be about VT traits rather than LS1 traits.

I took the Mrs and Bub out for a cruise in the VT over the weekend. When you first sit in the car, seats feel sort of snug and fitted and you think well this is nice and cosy as the ford seats you sit on and they dont really get too cosy.

But after 2 hours of driving both myself and the Mrs were getting restless and uncomfortable in the VT seats (its an upper spec model too).

For a longer trip id take the ford anyday, seats that sure arent as snug to begin with but dont get you restless, also interior room is just a bit more here and there in the ford which is more comfortable.

But as a plus for the VT, its a bit smaller than the BA model and the AU model, which is also a good thing, you dont always need to drive around a tank.

Short trips id favour the VT and long trips id favour the ford.

[svo supporter]

AU series 2 or 3 (can't remember exactly, but gut says series 3) was the first with the IRS...AU series 1 was the coil sprung rear...

The Commodore IRS was copied from the Merc....But Holden failed to get it as good as the Merc. Other manufacturers also tried to copy it, but also failed....

The main issue with the Commodore IRS (That's from VQ onwards) was because the car squats on acceleration, causing the load to push the rear wheels at the base, outwards, therefore causing more load to be placed on the inner edge, rather than over the entire tyre.....(same applies when lowered, or weight put in the back) Holden tried to correct the problem by relocating the arm mounting points in the VY and VZ, which was partially successful, but not entirely...When the VE was produced, Holden redesigned the rear end entirely, so it's a cradle set up, similar to the BA onwards Ford.

Personally, I have never seen a IRS arm on a commodore crack, unless the car has had an accident of some sort....And I have worked on some pretty low IRS equipped commodores...

[BENT_8]

Originally Posted by svo supporter

AU series 2 or 3 (can't remember exactly, but gut says series 3) was the first with the IRS...AU series 1 was the coil sprung rear...

The Commodore IRS was copied from the Merc....But Holden failed to get it as good as the Merc. Other manufacturers also tried to copy it, but also failed....

The main issue with the Commodore IRS (That's from VQ onwards) was because the car squats on acceleration, causing the load to push the rear wheels at the base, outwards, therefore causing more load to be placed on the inner edge, rather than over the entire tyre.....(same applies when lowered, or weight put in the back) Holden tried to correct the problem by relocating the arm mounting points in the VY and VZ, which was partially successful, but not entirely...When the VE was produced, Holden redesigned the rear end entirely, so it's a cradle set up, similar to the BA onwards Ford.

Personally, I have never seen a IRS arm on a commodore crack, unless the car has had an accident of some sort....And I have worked on some pretty low IRS equipped commodores...

Opel senator, not calibra,

The VP Commodore SS in October 1991 introduced independent rear suspension (IRS) which made a huge difference over uneven surfaces but brought a new set of problems. Because the Commodore's IRS was a cheap adaptation of the old Opel Senator system until the VX Series II in August 2001, it missed out on the extra control arms that Opel introduced in 1987.

This means the VP Commodore SS IRS system is the same as the Datsun 180B, Triumph Stag and the first BMW 3 Series, all of which display the same lack of camber control and splay out the rear wheels when lowered or loaded for extra tyre wear. They also share the same evil handling on the limit after the outside semi-trailing arm can no longer resist sideways cornering forces and begins to steer of its own accord.

From car advice

As for AU, it recieved IRS from series 1 but only standard on upspec models ghia etc.

The VT subframe cracks where the spring upper mount is, or so im told, havent seen it myself either.

All i can tell you is the experience i had owning one and looking after it now its with my relies.

[svo supporter]

Originally Posted by BENT_8

Opel senator, not calibra,

The VP Commodore SS in October 1991 introduced independent rear suspension (IRS) which made a huge difference over uneven surfaces but brought a new set of problems. Because the Commodore's IRS was a cheap adaptation of the old Opel Senator system until the VX Series II in August 2001, it missed out on the extra control arms that Opel introduced in 1987.

This means the VP Commodore SS IRS system is the same as the Datsun 180B, Triumph Stag and the first BMW 3 Series, all of which display the same lack of camber control and splay out the rear wheels when lowered or loaded for extra tyre wear. They also share the same evil handling on the limit after the outside semi-trailing arm can no longer resist sideways cornering forces and begins to steer of its own accord.

From car advice

As for AU, it recieved IRS from series 1 but only standard on upspec models ghia etc.

The VT subframe cracks where the spring upper mount is, or so im told, havent seen it myself either.

All i can tell you is the experience i had owning one and looking after it now its with my relies.

Commodore IRS was introduced with the VQ statesman....Not the VPSS....May I suggest you do some searching over that....

The only difference between a VT and VX series 11 rear, was the addition of a toe adjuster...The toe adjuster was introduced to help take the "load" off the inner edge of the tyre, by allowing some sort of adjustment, which wasn't previously available from the factory. Whilst a good idea in theory, in practice it was ineffective, as camber wears tyres quicker than toe.

The IRS was introduced in the Commodore range partly because of one Mr P Brock....Mr Brock had enjoyed the handling charastics of the IRS from an OS visit..So being "in" with Holden, he requested it become part of the Commodore and they obliged...

The Merc was first with the IRS system...The other manufacturers tried copying it and weren't too successful...

The IRS cracking control arms...I do at least 2 IRS Commodores a day, due to me being a suspension person....The only cracked control arms I have ever seen has been the result of accident damage.....Even then, the majority I see, bend rather than crack....

[BENT_8]

Originally Posted by svo supporter

Commodore IRS was introduced with the VQ statesman....Not the VPSS....May I suggest you do some searching over that....

Im well aware that the VQ was the first production vehicle to feature the irs, but this thread and my comments were in regards to Commodores.

Originally Posted by svo supporter

The only difference between a VT and VX series 11 rear, was the addition of a toe adjuster...The toe adjuster was introduced to help take the "load" off the inner edge of the tyre, by allowing some sort of adjustment, which wasn't previously available from the factory. Whilst a good idea in theory, in practice it was ineffective, as camber wears tyres quicker than toe.

The IRS was introduced in the Commodore range partly because of one Mr P Brock....Mr Brock had enjoyed the handling charastics of the IRS from an OS visit..So being "in" with Holden, he requested it become part of the Commodore and they obliged...

Brock fitted the Senator derived irs to only 2 HDT Directors, it was an optional setup and not the production standard. this was also the same time brock and Holden split so i'd say brock's opinion held little sway over the final decision to implement it 2 years later.

Originally Posted by svo supporter

The Merc was first with the IRS system...The other manufacturers tried copying it and weren't too successful...

The IRS cracking control arms...I do at least 2 IRS Commodores a day, due to me being a suspension person....The only cracked control arms I have ever seen has been the result of accident damage.....Even then, the majority I see, bend rather than crack....

Again, i can only tell you what i have been told, the person who told me is also a suspension specialist who has been in business for a long time.
Im not arguing with you, just pointing out what i've been told and my experiences with his advice.
6 tyres in 5 years and 90k doesn't seem like an issue to me.

[RAPID_BA]

is this AU/VT discussion restricted to the 6 cylinder models?

[Mr Hardware]

Yes pretty much hulk. The LS1 vs ford V8 debate has been done ad nauseum. We're just basically talking about the inherent characteristics of the bulk of the models on the road.

[svo supporter]

Originally Posted by BENT_8

Im well aware that the VQ was the first production vehicle to feature the irs, but this thread and my comments were in regards to Commodores.

The differnce between a Statesman and Commodore aren't much at all....

Brock fitted the Senator derived irs to only 2 HDT Directors, it was an optional setup and not the production standard. this was also the same time brock and Holden split so i'd say brock's opinion held little sway over the final decision to implement it 2 years later.

The Brock split with Holden was in the VL era ....he came back in their favour with the VN, hence the IRS being introduced with the VQ as standard and then optioned from the VP to VS...VT it was standard.

Again, i can only tell you what i have been told, the person who told me is also a suspension specialist who has been in business for a long time.
Im not arguing with you, just pointing out what i've been told and my experiences with his advice.
6 tyres in 5 years and 90k doesn't seem like an issue to me.

Only putting forward what I've seen ever since the IRS has been round

[RedHotGT]

Originally Posted by HULK_BA

is this AU/VT discussion restricted to the 6 cylinder models?

Shame really - my AU II V8 Fairmont Ghia is great - sure it's not that quick - its just the stock 175kw (from memory) but it does what I want.

I could spend money on upgrading peformance - but for what? It will never be a performance car.