Is Hsv W427 Worth $150k-$170k?

[Beer Baron]

Wrong. They would be good cars if they were 90k NOT 170k.

There is NO way on Gods green earth that 170k worth of design and development has gone into this thing.

Good cars for 170k? Have you lost it mate? 170k is good money for a GTR.

You know what Holden is saying? Its more expensive which means better than this...

What a crock of shit. who would choose the holden over the fully loaded M3?

lol, probably a lot of you... and thats sad.

sorry, i was talking about holdens in general, not just teh W427. yeah it's probably overpriced. but remember probably $30K of that is just 'fluff' they added to the price since it's limited to 200 cars and they know there will be more than 200 people willing to buy it.

but look at a nice SS V8, or even a GTS. what do they cost? both under $100K from memory, and overlooking brand cache for a minute they are ever bit as good as a basic 5 series beemer (although at under $100K we would only be looking at 3 series anyway). more fun to drive (tell me old school rwd with torquey V8 is not fun), bigger interior, just as many appointments (heated seats, TVs, leather, etc). and 3 and 5 BMW are a bloody dime a dozen where I live and work and no-one would look twice at them.

I'm not saying I would choose a holden over the M3. I would probably choose something altogether different if I had 170K to spend on one car. BUT my point is this:

Why can't you just appreciate that they are decent cars, with (mostly) reasonable price tags, with lots of feature, with good looks, with big, fun, powerfull engines? and that most aussies love 'em. I think we should be proud that even our most conservative car maker is pump out big comfy cars with silly amounts of power. and they sound glorious.

[Yidz]

Why buy a HSV when you could buy an M3?

RS4?

S Class?

C Class AMG?

AMG 63 CLS?

All of these cars offer superb luxary and heaps of poke too

Any car can be looked at in that light:

Why buy a GTHO as opposed to choosing between two of the next 3:

- Lamborghini Gallardo

- Ferrari 430

- Porsche Turbo

- Mercedes CL63 AMG

It's all about people's wants and needs.

They vary between different demographics. People would say to me why did you spend $13k on your R32 when you could of bought a brand new Getz with factory warranty etc.

[GTS4WD]

Why buy a GTHO as opposed to choosing between two of the next 3:

- Lamborghini Gallardo

- Ferrari 430

- Porsche Turbo

- Mercedes CL63 AMG

It's all about people's wants and needs.

They vary between different demographics. People would say to me why did you spend $13k on your R32 when you could of bought a brand new Getz with factory warranty etc.

Theres 4 there

Demographics:

Bogans Vs. Middle Ages CEO's

Getz vs R32 is very different subject..

[Beer Baron]

in fact when I sell some of my cars I might even buy an aussie V8 just for a change (and to make you mad adam!).

maybe even a wagon. not bad value. 310rwkw at cost $38K. I can race you in your wagon.....http://www.carpoint.com.au/used-car/HOLDEN/COMMODORE/ACT/csn5278661.aspx

and yes I'm kidding I don't want a commodore wagon. but I really do like the 08 model GTS commodore. they are very nice.

[swanny180]

This topic is a pisser!!

Personally - would never buy it or spend that much on anything Holden has made.

BUT

M3GTR - Its really funny some of the things youve been saying in this topic (and others too, who have been knocking Holden).

Im not at all, not even in the slightest trying to have a go at you in what Im about to say, just giving a different perspective...

Basically, the general consensus among a lot of people in this thread is that:

- $170k for a Holden is a hell of a lot of money

- The car has very limited use of any form of new/complicated technology

- $170k for a car with such limited technology is a hell of a lot of money

Right?

Your opinions I feel, are very true. But 100% completely irrelevant from a business perspective.

Holden is a BUSINESS. Thats the ONLY relevant factor for them. And from a business perspective, they have outdone Nissan, Porche, basically everyone and anyone who has sold a car for $170k.

I keep hearing in this thread that a $170k car *should* have more technology used in it, or conversely that a car with such limited technology *should* cost far less money.

Well guess what? That simply goes to show that Holden has a far better knowledge of their own market than almost everyone in this thread (myself included).

I cant comprehend why anyone would pay so much for a car that ultimately is a Holden, and also is very very basic in a technological sense.

But its not relevant what I can understand, or what I personally would do. It all revolves around the fact that Holden not only believe they can, but indeed have *already* found 200 people willing to part with that sort of money for that sort of car.

Spending money on different technology/more moving parts (as youd have if you moved away from a pushrod setup), more interior gadgets etc etc, it would all be dead money for the business.

Why on earth would you spend money developing and including things that you simply dont need for the market they are selling to?

The single most important thing for people to realise, is that an item is worth what someone is willing to pay for it.

Not what *you* are willing to pay for it.

Not what likeminded people are willing to pay for it.

What *someone* is willing to pay for it - that can be anyone, anyone at all.

There may only be 200 people on the face of the earth who would buy this car for this much.

But if Holden have managed to find every last one of them and have spent the absolute minimum outlay by not including unneccessary items and put the price up as high as possible while maintaining buyer interest, then it sure seems like from a BUSINESS perspective that they've done a remarkably good job on this one...

Dont you think?

[B-Man]

Farken hell - no one is forcing anyone here to buy one. I think this thread has gone to the dogs.

So if you don't want one - shuddyup - they will sell.

I love my 6.0L taxi :-)

[m3gtr]

Why buy a HSV when you could buy an M3?

RS4?

S Class?

C Class AMG?

AMG 63 CLS?

All of these cars offer superb luxary and heaps of poke too

Bloody heck, is a CLS AMG in that price range?

[m3gtr]

This topic is a pisser!!

Personally - would never buy it or spend that much on anything Holden has made.

BUT

M3GTR - Its really funny some of the things youve been saying in this topic (and others too, who have been knocking Holden).

Im not at all, not even in the slightest trying to have a go at you in what Im about to say, just giving a different perspective...

Basically, the general consensus among a lot of people in this thread is that:

- $170k for a Holden is a hell of a lot of money

- The car has very limited use of any form of new/complicated technology

- $170k for a car with such limited technology is a hell of a lot of money

Right?

Your opinions I feel, are very true. But 100% completely irrelevant from a business perspective.

Holden is a BUSINESS. Thats the ONLY relevant factor for them. And from a business perspective, they have outdone Nissan, Porche, basically everyone and anyone who has sold a car for $170k.

I keep hearing in this thread that a $170k car *should* have more technolo

gy used in it, or conversely that a car with such limited technology *should* cost far less money.

Well guess what? That simply goes to show that Holden has a far better knowledge of their own market than almost everyone in this thread (myself included).

I cant comprehend why anyone would pay so much for a car that ultimately is a Holden, and also is very very basic in a technological sense.

But its not relevant what I can understand, or what I personally would do. It all revolves around the fact that Holden not only believe they can, but indeed have *already* found 200 people willing to part with that sort of money for that sort of car.

Spending money on different technology/more moving parts (as youd have if you moved away from a pushrod setup), more interior gadgets etc etc, it would all be dead money for the business.

Why on earth would you spend money developing and including things that you simply dont need for the market they are selling to?

The single most important thing for people to realise, is that an item is worth what someone is willing to pay for it.

Not what *you* are willing to pay for it.

Not what likeminded people are willing to pay for it.

What *someone* is willing to pay for it - that can be anyone, anyone at all.

There may only be 200 people on the face of the earth who would buy this car for this much.

But if Holden have managed to find every last one of them and have spent the absolute minimum outlay by not including unneccessary items and put the price up as high as possible while maintaining buyer interest, then it sure seems like from a BUSINESS perspective that they've done a remarkably good job on this one...

Dont you think?

Youve rasied some excellent points and ive taken no offense. All well and good. From a "business" perspective it makes a heck of a lot of sense.

But why anyone would spend 170k on a commodore, from a buyers standpoint has not only me but many puzzled. Sure, Holden is in the business to sell cars and this one will be a sellout but for many its neither practical nor reasonable.

Hence the discussion. Im not knocking holden - it may seem like it but im not. Its just that never in any of my years have i ever considered buying a Commodore and i dont feel like im missing out on anything. I much prefer Euros and Japanese cars for the obvious reasons as has already been stated.

I couldnt care less if 3 people on my street buy M3's - that tells me we can all appreciate a good car with top class engineering that COMMANDS the price it rightfully deserves BECAUSE of all the research and development that has gone into it - and the accolades expectedly pour in.

Some of the crew on here have taken it to what they regard as bashing holden but ive firmly made my argument that:

1. 170k is a ridiculous sum of money to pay for a Commodore

2. It is nothing revolutionary nor has anything technologically groundbreaking.

3. Commodores would be no where without the Chev motor

4. Theres an absolute cream load of exotica on offer for the same money and even less

5. Those investing in this to store it away for the next 40 years so it can appreciate are nuts.

6. At the end of the day ,.,...its still a commodore.

While i appreciate the comments of others to help me see the different sides of the situation, i still stand by my reasoning behind my opinion.

If you have 170k to spend and want to buy this thing - you bloody well should...youre crazy if you do but if its what you want there should be nothing thatll stop you.

Im so over the whole " OHH wow, theres only 200 of these things made!!! I better get one so ILL be SPECIAL!"

So overrated.

So..i should be whooping for joy then because my Sti Fonz will be one of only 8 next year in Australia. Was that a reason to buy the car? Absolutely. Will i bank on it? Not sure yet. But heck, its 1 of 8!! Thats rarer than rocking horse shit.

Please oh please tell me you can detect my sarcasm...

[marchGTR]

in my opinion 170k is an insane amount of money for a commodore.... for that sort of money you would expect a car to be built on a totally new platform ground up..like the new gtr.

It will be a no contest against the new gtr...ide go as far as saying that an R34 GTR would give it a run for its money. standard turboes with some boost and good tune (260rwkw) would see a 34gtr in high 11's flat 12's territory... I cant imagine this hsv being any quicker (i predict mid 12's consistently at best)...on a track gtr will be quicker and in the wet...well we all know what would happen there. i think this hsv will be closer in performace to a R34 GTR than R35.

[Roy]

Wrong. They would be good cars if they were 90k NOT 170k.

There is NO way on Gods green earth that 170k worth of design and development has gone into this thing.

Good cars for 170k? Have you lost it mate? 170k is good money for a GTR.

You know what Holden is saying? Its more expensive which means better than this...

What a crock of shit. who would choose the holden over the fully loaded M3?

lol, probably a lot of you... and thats sad.

So BMW dressing up a 3 series is perfectly fine but if HSV dress up a Holden? What is the price difference between the TT 330ci and the M3?

And no way you can put your kids and ski gear in an M3 and go away for the weekend. Or take off on long touring drives with the kids in an M3.

Why buy a HSV when you could buy ..

RS4?

S Class?

C Class AMG?

AMG 63 CLS?

All of these cars offer superb luxary and heaps of poke too

Now here is a man with the real question. I would take an RS4, simply because it looks great and is a tad smaller, but i woudl get the wagon What are these cars priced like compared to the HSV?

[typevu]

haha awesome thread especially m3gtr's side of the argument

As for the original thread topic question in hand - HELL NO I would not pay that much for a Commodore.

[Roy]

One more thing. There is a market for these cars. Just like there is a market for Sports cars, utes, wagons etc. No one car suits the population.

To dismiss the new Holdens as rubbish is unfair, every major model revision they close the gap to other manufactures, still nto quite there but they are getting better

[kralster]

why do most people say "it's just a holden" hate to break it to you but nissans aren't king dick either. in fact most of their product line up is complete shit that not many people on here would buy. How many people own the awesome new micra or tiida? they are both f**king pathetic cars. and dont' give me the bullshit of "they are good for there intended purpose" thats absolute crap, a honda jazz is about a million times better than a micra, and a focus, mazda 3, or if you've got a bit more money a VW golf is also much better than the shitty new tiida.

Nissan would have to be the most overhyped brand in import circles.

[Roy]

I keep wanting to like the 350Z but i keep comign back to a new VE SS for the same money. The Zed is just too expansive to play with and get power from

[bozodos]

m3gtr i know this is off topic, but could you please explain what the difference between a STi Fonzie and the regular version is? I haven't been able to find anything on them on the net!

at the end of the day, this is a car meant to satisfy the cerebral thrill of driving a massive, responsive v8, its probably going to be quite a brute compared to the European cars and the GT-R, but I think that would be the point of the entire excercise, not to mention it's still punching above its weight with the upper end of town.

Simply put most euro cars look as boring as a white VT - the amount of silver bmw's around her is mindboggling, as well as R33's in every colour, why would anyone buy something that everyone else has if they are truly passionate about cars? (obviously the W427 isn't going to attract your average mid life crisis guy or a rich bogan family looking for a people mover)

A BMW M3 is hardly exotic these days, I think that's more a term used alongside say Ferrari F50?

People storing them for high resale values in the future being nuts? Gee i bet all those guys who bought VK Group A's or Walkinshaw's or GT Falcons and stored them away sure feel like idiots that 40 years later their cars are worth over 100k!

Compared to the rest of the Commodore range, these ARE the creme de la creme - I can't recall of any other production Holden/HSV with dry sump lubrication, 6 spot brakes, carbon fibre bodywork etc.

170k isn't really that much for a car of this calibre, many people were happy to pay 100k for the GTS with a 300kw 5.7 litre when it was released!

And saying that its still just a commodore, well you could say a GT-R is just a skyline after all

[sh@un]

So BMW dressing up a 3 series is perfectly fine but if HSV dress up a Holden? What is the price difference between the TT 330ci and the M3?

$55,000

but the change from normal 3-series coupe to M3 is fairly substantial: every external panel is different (carbon roof, too), before you even start on the mechanical changes

[Amir]

Wrong. They would be good cars if they were 90k NOT 170k.

There is NO way on Gods green earth that 170k worth of design and development has gone into this thing.

Good cars for 170k? Have you lost it mate? 170k is good money for a GTR.

You know what Holden is saying? Its more expensive which means better than this...

What a crock of shit. who would choose the holden over the fully loaded M3?

lol, probably a lot of you... and thats sad.

The w427 would eat an m3 in performance in every respect. Even the 70K priced FPV F6 accelerates faster than the m3.

The engine has proven itself in the corvette. It'll have to have a new or reworked drivetrain. Will come with massive brakes. Revised suspension and so on. I doubt it will resemble any VE series HSV. Gauranteed it will wallop even the m5. The R35 GTR is in the class which includes porsches so on. The W427 is not.

[chris_r31]

lol, all these 2.5, 2.6ltr guys sticking up for nissan..

my uncle ownes a ve r8 manual.. yer he has money as why he just threw me the keys at the start of the year.. and let me just say, with only zorst, lowered its is one tuff sounding handling machine..

the next car i get will be a ve r8 manual, as itss worth every cent.. you cant knock them till you drive them, and drive them the proper way..

just the grunt under your ass, and the torque, lol im on a hard again..

dump first at 5k, then crack second gear after 2secs from the traffic lights leaves atleast 50 to 100 meters of straight lsd lines of heavy smoke...

they are so well made its a dream car to cruze with, go on long trips with, to drift in at the track, race, and have heaps of fun in...

all you narrow minded nissan guys living in a nissan bubble need to get out more, lol and interact with other cars.. i am a r32 rb20 lover and that will never change, but i still have dreams about the day i drove my uncles r8..

[bozodos]

It's kind of ironic actually, my best mate is selling his modified VX SS because he bought a HR31, and I'm getting rid of my modified 5 litre in favour of the GTS4 that I recently bought, but then we've both owned our V8s for 3 years or so, they have their good points - for our styles of driving we both chose nissans in the end, but if say I wanted to go fast in straight lines or chase top speed, or get cheap power in general, the chev powered commodores really are unbeatable! In addition to that, throwing the VX into first whilst doing 50km/h and being tossed about the car like a ragdoll while leaving a trail of smoke and rubber was brilliant! Those gearboxes, while having the shift quality of a tractor, really can take a young man's thrashing in their stride!

I'd buy a W427, but the current VE range hardly makes me cream myself, especially when the dirty old VN can give the V8 ones a run for the money (gotta love a good power to weight ratio!)

Edited June 4, 2008 by bozodos

[Duncan]

roy - the 350z is probably the standard best road car at the price point

if you want to modify it or track it, the above statement does not apply. simple.

chris_r31. yes if you put enough cubes and enough kw into a poor chasis it will go quick in a straight line. that has been proven over and over.

having said that, the same people bitching about holden adding 1l (6.0 to 7.0) think that nissan adding 1.2l is brilliant (2.6 to 3.8) lols

post did not make sense. but alcohol does. i',m sure there are valid points in this post somewhere.