7 hours ago
7
Okay, so 'man drives 5.0-litre V8 and goes broke at the bowsers' is a very 2026 sort of story. So far, so predictable. But what amazed us was how much fuel 'our' Commodore VS SS that we took to the show stand at the Melbourne Motor Show drank even when we were feather-footing it.
Of course, if you were to drive it like you stole it, you'd expect a crippling fuel bill. But when you're just rumbling around for a photoshoot on country roads, I was fairly confident that I'd be writing a story about how economical a V8 could be if you were a bit circumspect.
Sadly not. Or at least not this one.
This VS version of the Commodore featured Holden's 'Iron Lion' V8, built in Fishermans Bend, Melbourne, before the 1999 VT Series II ushered in the era of the 5.7-litre 'Generation III' small-block.
The Iron Lion V8 could trace its history right back to the 1969 HT, being enlarged and improved along the way. While performance and response undoubtedly improved across those 17 years to 1996, fuel economy clearly wasn't a priority.
Road tests back in the day saw fuel figures of over 17 litres per 100 kilometres, but those doubtless included some performance testing and what my partner would probably call 'exuberant driving'.
We did nothing like that. On our suburban and country test route, we ran the car up towards its redline once or twice, and that was it. The rest of the time, we were rumbling along at barely more than tickover, performing passes for photography and manoeuvring the car for static pictures.
The result? A hefty 15.1L/100km when we went back to the fuel bowser and refilled.
A full refill of the 80-litre tank at $2.40 per litre would have set us back an eye-watering $192 for 530km of low-revs noodling.
It's fair to say that things have certainly progressed in that regard.
When you compare this 168kW Holden to a modern 350kW Ford Mustang Dark Horse, which are both normally aspirated V8s, the Commodore has 50 per cent of the power but consumes 50 per cent more fuel. There's progress for you.
Or, if you prefer, it emitted 360g of carbon dioxide per kilometre driven, which would surely give the people who devised NVES an aneurysm.
Would I want to drive it every day? Maybe not. Like you, I've got a queue of other claimants on my disposable income.
Was it worth it to drive back in time for a day? You bet. It was magnificent and, as much as anything else, reminds us how great '90s cars were.
Andy brings almost 30 years automotive writing experience to his role at Drive. When he wasn’t showing people which way the Nürburgring went, he freelanced for outlets such as Car, Autocar, and The Times. After contributing to Top Gear Australia, Andy subsequently moved Down Under, serving as editor at MOTOR and Wheels. As Drive’s Road Test Editor, he’s at the heart of our vehicle testing, but also loves to spin a long-form yarn.
