Wheels: Ford Territory TS vs. Holden Commodore Sportwagon SV6

[omicron]

John Carey | January 30, 2009

Need a vehicle that's more 'workhorse' than 'wild stallion'? Then your choice is either SUV or wagon. So which makes the best family hauler?



Two or three kids, with friends and gear, who require frequent ferrying to and fro? Holiday breaks spent driving to visit favourite family? Keen on leisure-time activities that involve heaps of hardware? All of the above? Cars that wrap a family-size helping of flexible user-friendliness in an affordable package, with a degree of genuine driver appeal, aren?t what we all want. But they?re exactly what many need through the family-raising, active-lifestyle phases of life.

There?s always going to be a place in the price list at the back of this magazine for things like the Ford Territory and Holden Commodore Sportwagon. Miserable, self-righteous and slightly hysterical car-haters might label them gas-guzzlers without a second thought, or even a first, but all the odium in the world doesn?t alter the fact that some people really do require XL-size transport.



It was back in 2004 that the Territory won our Car of the Year award, but the Australian-designed and developed wagon is far from past it. Just the opposite, in fact. Driving one after a long gap you?re inevitably impressed by its all-round competence ? and reminded that nothing better (for a similar price) has been launched in the intervening years.

While the Territory was the result of Ford?s decision to blur the lines between people mover, SUV and traditional car-based wagon, Holden?s Sportwagon is something else. Commodore-derived, it?s identical to the 2006 COTY-winning sedan from nose to somewhere aft of its B-pillar. Like every other wagon Holden has ever made. What?s changed is that this time they decided to create one with visual appeal. Instead of the hearse-like long wheelbase of the previous generation, Sportwagon instead shares this dimension with the VE Commodore sedan. And the cargo compartment has been shaped to satisfy the eye every bit as much as the desire for bulk cubic capacity. It?s the perfect choice for a style-conscious customer looking for SUV-like space, but with greater fuel efficiency and driving dynamism, says Holden. Are they right? Let?s find out...



As with Commodore sedan, the SV6 is proving the version of Sportwagon most often chosen by individual customers. One of those, then. And, obviously, a Territory close to the Sportwagon?s $42,790 base price. While the AWD version of the Ford, in base TX-spec, is a few hundred more than the Holden, we chose instead the middle model TS, with RWD. For two reasons. First, Territory RWD outsells the AWD, and the equipment of the TS is a closer match for the SV6?s list. The base $43,990 list price of the Ford is $1700 more than the Holden (before haggling, anyway), but the test TS also had the optional third-row seat added.

They might look quite different, but beneath the skin there are plenty of similarities. Both, for example, use a four-link design for their coil-spring rear suspensions. And both have a front-mounted steering rack, for superior steering precision. Four-wheel disc brakes are another common point. Finally, while the Ford has a double A-arm front suspension and the Holden simpler struts, both use double ball joint lower arms.



There?s significant departure when it comes to engines. Territory has a capacity advantage and transmission ratio handicap, the Sportwagon is the other way round. Ford?s big, Australian-made 4.0-litre in-line six may be destined for extinction in 2013, but it?s benefited from decades of steady development and is both smooth and muscular. But it?s hitched to an automatic transmission with only four speeds. Holden?s GM-designed and Australian-assembled 3.6-litre V6 naturally has less torque (340Nm to the Ford?s 383Nm), but revs harder to produce a fraction more power (195kW to 190kW). The Holden engine?s V-layout lacks the supreme six-cylinder smoothness of an in-line design, but it is partnered with an imported five-speed automatic that guarantees smaller steps between gears.



For both performance and fuel economy, the Holden commands a clear advantage. Not only is the Sportwagon swifter by a useful margin, it also consumed significantly less fuel than the Ford during the 750km-plus course of this test. In fact, the Territory sucked 18 percent more unleaded than the Sportwagon over the distance, rather more than the eight percent extra indicated by the official ADR81 consumption test. No surprise here; the Ford is heavier (by almost 200kg) and certainly has greater aero drag to overcome, thanks mainly to its larger frontal area.

Still, the Ford drivetrain has its advantages. For refinement the in-line engine is markedly better than the Holden V6. It?s an issue Holden obviously recognises. And while the four-speed auto might blunt performance a little (first gear is very tall, so off-the-mark acceleration isn?t exactly explosive) the transmission otherwise is hard to fault. It picks the right gear, and holds it for the right amount of time. The Holden?s five-speeder, in contrast, is somewhat dithery, sometimes holding the wrong gear too long, sometimes making unneeded shifts. Thankfully, both Territory and ?wagon transmissions feature good ?manual? modes. Shifting is the right way round (forward for down, back for up) and they hold the selected gear even if revs kiss the limiter.



Drive the Sportwagon on an interesting country road, and you?ll find that the Holden really does live up to its ?Sportwagon? label. As in other Commodore variants, the steering is bloody brilliant. Great feel, superb accuracy and consistent weighting. Better than most current BMWs, in fact.

The handling isn?t bad, either. Sure, the ride is firm at low speed, but the body control is excellent when hustling along a lumpy country backroad. It mightn?t be the first choice for comfort-loving passengers, but drivers will adore the way Holden?s wagon responds to their inputs with promptness and precision.

And the Ford? Well, there?s less grip from the Territory?s 17-inch tyres than the Sportwagon?s lower-profile 18-inch rubber. The Ford?s front end pushes into mild understeer at corner speeds where the Holden is going round like it?s on rails. Still, the Territory can be hustled with impressive speed for an SUV.

The steering is sharp around centre ? sharper even than the Sportwagon ? but once used to the Territory?s reactiveness you discover it can be made to string corners together in fluid, graceful sequences. Its softer suspension means the handling?s rhythm is more relaxed than the Sportwagon, but once you?re tuned in a keen driver will find a lot to like. Passengers will love it too; the Ford?s ride is superbly supple. And while the Territory?s suspension smothers bumps, it also delivers fine body control.



Both Ford and Holden have beautifully calibrated electronic chassis stability systems (Territory RWD originally launched with only traction control, but ESP was added to the standard spec list in mid 2007). Especially on dirt, both display the benefit of local knowledge ? and tuning. Ford?s DSC and Holden?s ESP are based on the same Bosch hardware set, and they provide a reliable safety net without persistent interference with throttle and brakes. If only all car makers could manage this...

Switch off the systems (both Ford and Holden permit total ESP disablement) and you?ll find a pair of dirt- road oversteer champions. Territory and Sportwagon prove that rear-wheel drive, plus a decent wheelbase, good weight distribution, sound suspension calibration and responsive drivetrain, spells sideways machine supreme. Both Ford and Holden seem to have embraced the concept that making a sensible and practical choice shouldn?t mean the end of enjoyment.



But fun for the person behind the wheel, while welcome, is a secondary consideration in cars like these. Passenger seat comfort and flexibility, storage, visibility and cargo capacity are more important reasons for choosing Territory or Sportwagon.

Territory is great on big trips. Long stints behind the wheel aren?t a problem. Visibility ahead and to the sides is good, and the driving position is practically perfect, with a great range of adjustment available on seat and steering column.



The Ford?s rear seat is also great. The width of Territory?s cabin means the second row is a place where three large adults can be comfortable for hours. There?s ample space in every direction and the seat?s cushion and backrest are generously dimensioned, well angled and very supportive. As well, Ford?s interior designers thoughtfully included a bunch of places to stash stuff.

One of Territory?s clear flexibility advantages over Sportwagon is the option of adding a hideaway third row of seating. This costs $1800 ($300 more than at launch), but turns the Ford into a car capable of shifting seven. The third-row package includes the addition of fore-aft adjustment to the 60/40-split second-row seat. You can create enough leg room for adults to squeeze into the third row, but they?re not going to want to spend very long back there.



The Ford also has a clear-cut cargo advantage with 1153 litres (floor to ceiling) behind its rear seat, almost 30 percent more than the Holden?s 895 litres. The inclusion of the optional third-row seat reduces capacity to 441 litres but doesn?t affect the Territory?s load capacity when stowed. With second-row seats folded, both Sportwagon and its rival deliver a practically flat cargo area around two metres long.

There?s little wrong with the Holden?s driving position, but its visibility isn?t as good. VE Commodore?s fat (and strong) A-pillars are as much of a problem in the wagon as the sedan. But it?s behind the front seats that the contrast between Sportwagon and Territory is sharpest. The Holden has a seat that?s almost as good as the Ford?s, but it?s less well equipped back there. For example, there?s only a pair of vestigial, fixed head restraints for the outboard passengers and there are few places to stow stuff. Ford provides three adjustable head restraints, as well as storage for everything from drink bottles (doors) to banana skins (flip-out bin with washable, pull-out liner in rear of centre console).



In the end, the Territory?s nose-to-tail user-friendliness and greater flexibility haul it past the Sportwagon. The Holden is a damned good wagon, with involving dynamics, great looks and strong performance. There?s little else with this blend of abilities for the money.

But the Ford is simply the better family wagon, or part-time people mover, or plain, old-fashioned station wagon. Its fuel consumption is heavier, but this must be weighed against its superior comfort and broader range of abilities. It?s a price worth paying. For those who need to carry people or stuff frequently or far, it?s the better car for life in the large lane.



http://www.wheelsmag.com.au/Road_Tests/Across+the+divide+-+Ford+Territory+v+Holden+Sportwagon.html?open&template=domWheels&fullarticle=yes

[Secret Chimp]

Man, even your mom-mobiles are RWD with cool engines...

[Tave]

That Ford is one ugly son-a-bitch. Put the I6 in the Holden and ship it to me.

[Eye of the Tiger]

I hate Australia

[the Teuton]

Comments:

The Ford looks like a shortened Freestyle.  It looks generic, but it works well.

I also wouldn't be surprised in the least if it made it over here as the next Explorer.

[Tave]

I also wouldn't be surprised in the least if it made it over here as the next Explorer.

Well then not much surprises you, because that isn't going to happen.

[the Teuton]

Well then not much surprises you, because that isn't going to happen.

Anything less would make the Edge more redundant than it already is.

[Tave]

wat

[the Teuton]

wat

Let me break that sentence down for you.

We know the next Explorer will be unibody, so either the Edge is going to be redundant if the Explorer is a 5-seater or the Taurus X/Flex will be if it is larger unless the Explorer has some distinct differences/advantages.

The best possible differentiation it can have to stay true to its roots is RWD or RWD-based AWD.

Therefore:

Anything less

than something like the Territory

would make the Edge more redundant than it already is.

[Tave]

d00d, the Territory itself would make the Edge redundant. Ford isn't going to use a station wagon for its next Explorer anymore than Toyota did for its current 4Runner.

And whatever it does, there's no way in hell it's going to import a small market Aussie platform to take over one of its best-selling vehicles.

[FoMoJo]

It seems to be CUV vs. Wagon.  Both seem quite nice; with admirable torque.  Naturally, I'd take the Ford .

[the Teuton]

Tave:

Prototype:



Concept:



With CAFE creeping up, Ford is not going to keep the Explorer where it is.

[Tave]

I have no doubt that the next Explorer will see major revisions.

I also have no doubt that it will not be a Territory.

[SVT666]

I have no doubt that the next Explorer will see major revisions.

I also have no doubt that it will not be a Territory.

Ford as already said the next Explorer will be car based, but what it will be based on is beyond me.

[Tave]

If I had to take a wild stab in the dark, I'd guess a NA model, but that's just the sanity in me talking.

[TBR]

Of course if Ford has sense (and I believe they do), they will be globalizing the next generation Falcon and its variants, which would include the Territory. While the new Explorer probably won't be the Territory featured in this article, it could very well be the next generation Territory.

[Tave]

Why would Ford globalize the small-market Falcon when they have so many other large-market platforms to choose from?

[2o6]

Why would Ford globalize the small-market Falcon when they have so many other large-market platforms to choose from?

Because FWD and RWD are not the same. The Explorer will likely be a Unibody smaller offroader along the lines of a Pathfinder, 4Runner, or some other small-midsize SUV. The Territory is along these lines. The Territory is more off-road oriented than a traditional Falcon, or the Commedore Wagon featured in this comparo.

[TBR]

Why would Ford globalize the small-market Falcon when they have so many other large-market platforms to choose from?

The only RWD, unibody platforms they have are the Mustang's and the Falcon's.

[Tave]

Isn't the Falcon incompatible with the world market anyway? I don't think it was ever designed for LHD.

[2o6]

Isn't the Falcon incompatible with the world market anyway? I don't think it was ever designed for LHD.

Your point? Engine arrangement and firewall can easily be changed. It's not a Falcon Wagon, it's an entirely new vehicle.

[Tave]

First of all:

Whew. Now that I have that out of the way...

Your point? Engine arrangement and firewall can easily be changed.

On cars designed to be either LHD or RHD, yes. From what I understand, this isn't the case with the Falcon.


I suppose we'll see what happens within the year. All I'm saying is, don't be surprised when the Falcon platform doesn't make it to America.

We're talking a model that sells in modest volume in a small market vs a model that sells in large volume in the largest market. Considering the new Explorer is on its way shortly, I'm guessing they already have a platform for it, and I'll give you 10:1 odds it isn't the Falcon.

[TBR]

Isn't the Falcon incompatible with the world market anyway? I don't think it was ever designed for LHD.

Here's one of my own:

"Of course if Ford has sense (and I believe they do), they will be globalizing the next generation Falcon and its variants, which would include the Territory. While the new Explorer probably won't be the Territory featured in this article, it could very well be the next generation Territory."

We really don't know if the next Explorer will be RWD or FWD based, the former (as teuton indicated) would seem more logical and it would seem even more logical for Ford not to develop an entirely new RWD, unibody architecture for the Explorer, especially considering how radically it sales have slipped.

[Tave]

So we've come full-circle to get back to my point.

Not only is the Territory probably not going to underpin our new (2010?) Explorer, it would, in fact, be physically impossible as the platform is not designed for global markets.


Boy, being right never felt so........pointless.

[TBR]

So we've come full-circle to get back to my point.

Not only is the Territory probably not going to underpin our new (2010?) Explorer, it would, in fact, be physically impossible as the platform is not designed for global markets.


Boy, being right never felt so........pointless.

The Territory could underpin the Explorer, just not this variant.

[Tave]

Wat?

The new Falcon just came out. The new Explorer should be released this year. If anything, it would be the other way around, with our new Explorer platform replacing the current Falcon 5-10 years from now.

[TBR]

The Territory has yet to be revamped.

[Tave]

I doubt it's going to get a whole new platform.

In any event, THE EXPLORER IS COMMING OUT THIS YEAR.

[Cookie Monster]

I doubt it's going to get a whole new platform.

In any event, THE EXPLORER IS COMMING OUT THIS YEAR.

COMMING

[Tave]

Sorry for the hijack, Omi. Here's an older article relevant to this discussion:

http://www.drive.com.au/Editorial/ArticleDetail.aspx?ArticleID=44891

Ford abandons export plans for new Falcon

The next-generation Falcon due in early 2008 will not be built in left-hand drive for overseas markets, reports BRUCE NEWTON.

Ford Australia has abandoned plans to export the next-generation Falcon that?s due in early 2008.

Instead, Ford will focus its export ambitions on the Focus small car after it goes into production here in 2011.