Review: Holden Rodeo 4x4 LT & 4x2 LX

[FISH]

http://carpoint.ninemsn.com.au/car-review/1631927.aspx

Holden Rodeo closes the gap between passenger car and working-class hero


7-day Test

2006 Holden Rodeo 4x4 LT and 4x2 LX Crewcab utes
RRP: $41,990, 4x2 LX manual $29,990
Distance: 347km (LT) and 382km (LX)
Road tester: Steve Kealy
Date: March 2006




Holden's Rodeo ute has been around an awfully long time and in many guises -- trayback, pick-up, crew-cab petrol, diesel, two-wheel drive, four-wheel drive, manual and automatic, and in varying trim levels from building site to city suite. And in a sign of the automotive age in which we now live, this GMH-badged, Japanese-sourced light truck is actually built in Thailand.

For now, we'll examine the range-topping 4x4 crewcab and its more utilitarian 4x2 cousin, fitted with Holden's 'made-in-Melbourne' new 3.6-litre Alloytec V6 engine and five-speed manual gearboxes.

Repeatedly refreshed over the years, the latest Rodeo iteration has a bigger cab: 42mm more legroom, 36mm more headroom and 40mm (up to 200mm) in the seat-slide.

But that comes at the price of a shorter load-bed -- so short that even a kid's dirtbike travels diagonally. Short it may be, but it's also surprisingly deep. We didn't try, but you might still get a cubic metre of mulch in there.

Suspension spring rates were always going to be a compromise between passenger comfort and load-bearing capacity. The five seats and small load bed give a clue to the end result -- it's comfort that gets the nod, and the up-spec LT version, with its deep velour seats, carpet and well-balanced controls should be an easy place to spend a long journey. Except that the driver's seat is offset to the left of both the steering wheel and pedals, so that in a relatively short time, backache creeps in. Or you can sit to the right side of the wide, flat seat.

Offset controls are often the unavoidable result of converting a car designed to be left-side steer to right-side steer -- components under the dashboard or floor, or behind the scuttle, are positioned to facilitate a driver on the left side of the vehicle, but when those controls are moved to the other side of the cabin, many components cannot be readily relocated. However, the Holden Rodeo-Isuzu KB is Japanese -- it was designed to be right-hand drive.

Besides that, the overly high left footrest that forces the knee to bend more than is comfortable, is a minor inconvenience.

In operation, the drivetrain differs considerably between the 4x4 and 4x2 versions -- the all-wheel drive gets equally-spaced ratios that make for effortless pull-off and relaxed cruising, but the low-range option is really low range. On our favourite steep, rutted, gnarly marble-strewn downhill, first gear in low range was too low -- we needed second or third gear to run against compression and keep moving.

The push-button selection 2H, 4H or 4L sometimes needed a little help to engage -- 2H to 4H can be selected on the fly, 4L requires you stop first, but a flashing icon would indicate that the selection wasn't instantaneous and rocking the car back and forth would see it clicking in or out. However, it certainly beats wandering around the front of the truck, manually engaging grubby locking hubs.

In contrast, the ratios in the 4x2 have larger gaps, but the 3.6 litre V6's broad spread of power overcomes them.

The new V6 adds 10kW (up to 157kW) and a generous 33Nm (up to 313Nm), but the engine's torque curve is flattened for use in the Rodeo from its more normal passenger-car guise.

Getting back up our steep rutted descent was, of course, not a problem in 4H -- and in 4L, the Rodeo could accelerate right up to fifth gear. That said, most impressive was the manner that both LX and LT also made it up in two-wheel drive, the limited slip diff restricting slippage to being barely noticeable. When the road is dry, only a few 2WD vehicles -- even with traction control -- can usually manage the ascent. Getting an unladen ute up it without lots of clutch-slip and dust is rare.

Despite it's commercial roots, the Rodeo now offers very good comfort -- not only for the front row, but also in the three seats in the rear -- leg, head, hip and shoulder room is very good and happily the rear seat-back isn't dead vertical -- in fact, rear seat comfort is probably better than in the Commodore/Ute-based Crewman, depending upon your shape.

Yet with so much thought and development,...

Continued:http://carpoint.ninemsn.com.au/car-review/1631927.aspx

[Bravada]

Rodeo is an absolutely great name! If Isuzu applied them to their rebadged GMTs in the US, they could get out of the dump immediately

And if Isuzu eventually goes down in the US, GM should recycle this name and scrap the stupid Canyon nameplate (the truck itself is very nice, it is the pretty one of the D-MAX/GMT twins).

[NedKelly]

This would be a Chevy Colorado/GMC Canyon with a 210HP/233Torque V6. No V6 in the US though, for appears to be the same platform(?).

[GM-10]

Originally Posted by Bravada

the stupid Canyon nameplate

What??? What in the hell are you talking about???...have you been hanging around a Polmos plant sampling room too long...???

[ponchoman49]

Proof that GM could do much better with the US offering by fitting it's 3.6 liter HF V6 in there with 240-250 hp, making the optional bodyside moldings body color and making it tow more. Plus this truck just looks a bit more upscale than ours.

[kenman923]

Agreed. GM needs to expand use of the 3.6L HF V6

[GM-10]

Originally Posted by kenman923

Agreed. GM needs to expand use of the 3.6L HF V6

Agreed. Agreed.

[Black Rabbit]

This would be a great application for the 3900 V6.. cheaper, equivalent power, and a throaty growl truck owners usually like... and it probably fits

[monza164]

Is it just me or is it bizarre that GM would offer the 3.6 in compact pick up in one country, and not offer it in a luxury sedan here (like the Lucerne). How much 3.8 inventory does GM have? Pontiac's and Buick's are begging for something like the 3.6.

Wouldn't the 3.6 be too expensive and have too little bottom end torque to be adequate for pickup use. Especially when GM has other less expensive more torque sixes.

Another point; how come Australia gets a six cylinder pick up and all we get is a five?

[69Firebird400]

Originally Posted by Black Rabbit

This would be a great application for the 3900 V6.. cheaper, equivalent power, and a throaty growl truck owners usually like... and it probably fits

I'd like them to put the 3900 VVT as the base engine in the Camaro, but as far as I know, it is not engineered for rear wheel drive applications yet. However, if they went to that trouble to do it for the Colorado/Canyon in the near term, it would already be on the shelf to use in the base Camaro in a few years.

[SUPERBADD75]

Originally Posted by Black Rabbit

This would be a great application for the 3900 V6.. cheaper, equivalent power, and a throaty growl truck owners usually like... and it probably fits

yeah, that's what i hate the most about the 5-banger... the sound. it sounds wheezy and wimpy when you step on the gas. i need something that's either quiet or rumbles, the 5 is neither. it's loud and sounds horrible.

[komododave]

Originally Posted by ponchoman49

Proof that GM could do much better with the US offering by fitting it's 3.6 liter HF V6 in there with 240-250 hp, making the optional bodyside moldings body color and making it tow more. Plus this truck just looks a bit more upscale than ours.

Its a nice thought to try and approximate the HP, but do the math.
157 kW equals 210 horsepower. thats LESS horsepower than the I-5 engine we use now. As for torque, the V-6 only gets 5 more ft/lbs. This engine would be a useless addition to the north american market. However, it does prove a V-6 will fit. there is hope yet

[johnny smallblock]

Originally Posted by komododave

Its a nice thought to try and approximate the HP, but do the math.
157 kW equals 210 horsepower. thats LESS horsepower than the I-5 engine we use now. As for torque, the V-6 only gets 5 more ft/lbs. This engine would be a useless addition to the north american market.

And the sterring wheel's on the wrong side!!!

[Z28x]

I don't want the 3.6L unless it is a 280-300HP Direct injection version. It is only 0.1L bigger. The I5 is rumored to be bumped up to 3.7L. But this does prove an important point. A V shaped engine does fit. Bring on the 4.8L small block V8!!!!

[BBDOS CV8]

Holden gets it because they make the motors - as they did their own unique 3.8 Ecotec RWD variant, which was changed quite a bit from the US version.

As these cars are replacing the Holden One-Tonner and Crewman, they need to be somewhat comparable to the competition, which is the 4.0 litre DOHC Ford Falcon six. Holden tailors the engines themselves to suit applications.

Don't assume the 3.9 will fit just because the 3.6 does - the HFV6 with it's manifolds is physically very small, tiny compared to the old 3.8, and may well be a narrower block than the OHV unit. Plus these are RHD cars, so the LHD stuff may interfere.

And the article makes the point that while HP has been reduced, it's been done to as to boost bottom end. The hi-po 190Kw HFV6 makes 80 percent of it's peak torque at 1800 rpm - so one presumes they fitted a different overlap cam, revised ECU mapping, smaller throttlebody and larger flywheel to increase stump-pulling power even more at low RPM.

With a vehicle of this sort, operators want something that can navigate around a farm or on muddy building site with a shipload of stuff in the back - they're not fussed about 0-60 figures.