Talk:List of Holden vehicles

Removal of Holden Limited Edition, GTS and Panel Van

The above were removed with reason given as "were never standalone models but rather specification levels of others". May I ask for clarrification please on what "other" models they were part of. GTHO (talk) 00:12, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

According to Red Book, the Limited Edition, GTS and Panel Van were not stand alone models as per the following pages:

• Limited Edition: part of Monaro lineup, badged as "LE" [1]
• GTS: part of Monaro lineup [2]
• Panel Van: bodystyle of Kingswood range. [3]

The Holden Limited Edition brochure H591 of July 1976 makes no mention of the word Monaro and the photos in the brochure clearly show that there are no Monaro badges on the car. I suggest that Red Book have been a bit creative in calling it a Monaro LE GTHO (talk) 05:59, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Red Book aren't the only ones calling the Limited Edition this [4]. Nevertheless, I've re-instated the Limited Edition to the list. OSX (talk • contributions) 02:58, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

A double page spread on the HZ GTS, reproduced from a sales brochure, appears on pages 198 & 199 of "The Holden Collection" (by A.C. Bushby). It mentions the GTS name nine times but does not use the term Monaro at all. In light of this I don't believe that we should consider it to be a Monaro. GTHO (talk) 09:26, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Done OSX (talk • contributions) 02:58, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

I believe that there is a strong case in support of the inclusion of the Holden Panel Van as a stand alone model. The following table summarizes findings from relevant GMH brochures (where available), the GMH publication “Holden Heritage : Eighth Edition” and the book “100 Years of GM in Australia”. The Sandman has not been included in the table as it is already accounted for in the List of Holden Vehicles page.

Series	GMH Brochures	Holden Heritage : Eighth Edition	100 Years of GM in Australia
FJ	Holden Panel Van	Holden Panel Van	Holden Panel Van
FE	Unavailable	Holden Panel Van	Holden Panel Van
FC	Holden Panel Van	Holden Panel Van	Holden Panel Van
FB	Holden Panel Van	Holden Panel Van	Holden Panel Van
EK	Holden Panel Van	Holden Panel Van	Holden Panel Van
EJ	Holden Panel Van	Holden Panel Van	Holden Panel Van
EH	Holden Panel Van	Holden Panel Van	Holden Panel Van
HD	Holden Panel Van	Holden Panel Van	Holden Panel Van
HR	Holden Panel Van	Holden Panel Van	Holden Panel Van
HK	Unavailable	Belmont Panel Van	Belmont Panel Van
HT	Unavailable	Belmont Panel Van	Belmont Panel Van
HG	Unavailable	Belmont Panel Van	Belmont Panel Van
HQ	Unavailable	Belmont Panel Van	Belmont Panel Van
HJ	Unavailable	Holden Panel Van	Belmont Panel Van
HX	Unavailable	Holden & Kingswood Panel Vans	Belmont & Kingswood Panel Vans
HZ	Holden & Kingswood Panel Vans	Holden & Kingswood Panel Vans	Belmont Panel Van
WB	Unavailable	Not specified	Holden & Kingswood Panel Vans

From the above I think we can safely say that the Holden Panel Van existed as a stand alone model from the FJ through to the HR series and that HK to HQ Panel Vans were Belmonts. Then it gets difficult due to the conflicting information but my money is on there being a Holden Panel Van from the HJ through to the WB series. GTHO (talk) 02:08, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

I disagree. The "Holden Heritage" is no longer publisher in book form, but rather as three PDF files on the GM Media website (making it an official source) as The Holden Heritage - 13th Edition (Part One, Part Two, Part Three). Part One cites that the FJ came in the following models: Standard sedan, Business sedan, Special sedan, panel van and utility. Note that "panel van" is written without capitalisation of the first letter. This is similar to how Holden previously to referred to the base model Holden Ute as simply the "Holden Ute", while in the case of the VX series; the performance versions were designated "Holden Ute S" and "Holden Ute SS". Unsurprisingly, the updated models follow this format. For example the HR: Standard sedan, Special sedan, Premier sedan, Standard station wagon, Special station wagon, Premier station wagon, panel van and utility. The HQ models are listed as: Belmont sedan, Belmont station wagon, Belmont panel van, Belmont utility, Kingswood sedan, Kingswood station wagon, Kingswood utility, Sandman panel van, Sandman utility, SS sedan, Premier sedan, Premier station wagon, Holden cab/ chassis truck, Monaro coupe, Monaro GTS coupe, Monaro GTS 350 coupe, Monaro LS (‘Luxury Sports’) coupe, Monaro GTS sedan, Statesman sedan and Statesman De Ville sedan.

This is interesting as both lots of data originate from same "The Holden Heritage" source. The difference being that your copy is version eight, whereas mine in thirteen. I would advise you go take another look at your "Holden Heritage" source to confirm that it does uses capitalisation to denote the panel vans ("Belmont panel van" or "Belmont Panel Van"). If your copy does turns out to be written as “Panel Van”, I would assume that the newer version of the publication would take precedence. Regards OSX (talk • contributions) 05:46, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

I can confirm that the Eighth Edition of Holden Heritage uses “panel van” rather than “Panel Van” and I apologise for the fact that the table didn’t accurately show that. However I don’t think we should ignore the fact that GMH used the upper case “Holden Panel Van” or “Holden Panel Vans” in the main text of (at least) the FJ, FE, FB, EK, EJ, EH, HD, HR & HX brochures. Copies of some of these brochures can be seen by clicking on the 50th Anniversary logo at top of the page at The Sixties Holden Archives Cheers, GTHO (talk) 02:01, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Although this may seem a bit hypocritical, I still stand by my previous decision. Holden also referred to the utility variants as the "Holden Utility" as well, but these were not standalone models. To be honest Holden, like most people/organisations/companies is guilty of over-capitalisation. It looks more official to capitalise "utility". Evidence of this is shown on page 95 of Heart of the Lion: The 50 Year History of Australia's Holden (1998) which has an advertisement of the "Holden Panel Van" (FJ). The caption to the right of the image reads, "The FJ panel van gave Australia's Own a new type of practicality". Likewise, the first Holden station wagon was known as the "Station Sedan" (note the capitalisation). This, however, does not make the "Station Sedan" a separate model. You have proved your case for the Limited Edition and GTS, but have not provided substantial information highlighting the panel van body style as an individual model. I would also like to emphasise again that the Holden Heritage, an official GM Holden publication does not classify the panel van or pre-1990 utility models as separate models. OSX (talk • contributions) 08:24, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

The “Holden Station Sedan” from FE through to HR always had an additional name, i.e. Holden Standard Station Sedan, Holden Special Station Sedan or (from EH onwards) Holden Premier Station Sedan. These variants are covered in the “List of Holden Vehicles” by the Holden Standard, Holden Special & Holden Premier entries respectively and I have no problem with that. On the other hand the pre HK “Holden Panel Van” was not a Holden Standard Panel Van or a Holden Special Panel Van, it was simply a Holden Panel Van (I’ll stick to the official GMH brochure capitalization for now). But where is it covered in the “List of Holden Vehicles”? GTHO (talk) 23:54, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Questions and suggestions

Hi OSX. I just thought I would add my 2 cents to the Holden section. I‘m not computer literate, so I don’t even know whether I’m in the correct section on not. I have a few questions & suggestions.

• Why is the Commodore Royale, stretched Limosine included in the Holden model list. It is not a Holden model & was built outside GM-H by a private company, in the same way ambulances & hearses are made. There was a SWB Royale model for the VK (& VL??) series built by GM-H in New Zealand, but never in Australia. Terrybebb (talk) 11:22, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Someone else brought that up here: Template talk:Holden timeline#Getting rid of Royale. Holden undertook the Royale development themselves. This was because the car had to meet ADR requirements et cetera, but your right the conversion itself was not undertaken by Holden. But since there seems to be reference to it at Red Book et cetra, I have removed the VN Royale. I have a question through. I have seen VP and VR versions of the Royale (possibly not badged Royale though) around as disabled taxis (nowadays they are retired and used privately). However, these VP/VR versions have a high roof. Do you know anything about these? Also, I have added the VK and VL Royales (see: Holden Royale) as well as the VS Royale. OSX (talk • contributions) 00:22, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

• In the List of Holden models you mention an HZ Belmont. There was no HZ Belmont ever built. For HK, HT, HG & HQ, the Belmont badge was fitted to the base model sedan, wagon, ute & panel van. For HJ & HX the base model utes & vans were now simply badged Holden & the Belmont badge was only fitted to the base sedan & wagon. For HZ the base sedan & wagon were now Kingswoods & the mid level sedans & wagons were now called Kingswood SLs. Terrybebb (talk) 11:22, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

HZ Belmont removed. OSX (talk • contributions) 00:22, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

• Also in the List of Holden models you do not list the Monaro GTS for the HK to HX series, but you correctly list the HZ GTS. The Monaro GTS was a full step up from the base Monaro, which only appeared in the HK to HQ series. It was as different as Kingswood is to Premier. You also missed the Monaro LS in HQ/HJ, which again is a fully fledged separate model. Terrybebb (talk) 11:22, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

• Why is the HQ SS listed as a separate model. It is a limited edition, in similar vein to the HX LE, Vacationers, Equipes & Esteems etc. Later models, like Acclaim, S, SV6, SV8 or SS are more valid for a separate listing than the HQ SS. Terrybebb (talk) 11:22, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

• You list the Calais model line as beginning at the VK series but the Berlina beginning at the VX series. In fact, the Berlina was a separate model from VN onwards. For VK & VL the Berlina was a badge variant of the Commodore (with both Commodore & Berlina badges), but for VN onwards it was a stand-alone model. The Berlina was grouped with Commodore model in the sales brochures up until VT & then grouped with Calais for VX onwards, but this is not how they were listed or badged. It’s a bit like the Commodore/Ute badging, a little GM-H inconsistency. Terrybebb (talk) 11:22, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

I have always been confused by this. I am aware of the absence of badging, but Red Book lists the Berlina from VX onwards. Also in the 1997 book An Australian Legend in The Making by GMH, "Commodore Berlina" is used in lieu of "Berlina", while "Holden Calais" is also used in lieu of "Commodore Calais". The book clearly differentiates the Commodore from the Calais by stating: Commodore Executive, Commodore Acclaim, Commodore Berlina, Commodore S, Commodore SS, and Holden Calais (See discussion: Talk:Holden Commodore#VT Commdore Berlina or VT Berlina). Despite this, I have included VN-VT models in the Berlina section OSX (talk • contributions) 00:22, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

• Correct model code for the Suburban is K8. The C/K letters refer to US chassis prefixes for the different variants. Terrybebb (talk) 11:22, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Done, but this seems to contradict your book (Bebbington, Terry (1999). 50 Years of Holden. Hornsby, New South Wales: Clockwork Media. ISBN 0947216596.) which is where I got this code from. OSX (talk • contributions) 00:22, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

• IMHO the panel van & ute are in fact separate models if preceded by the word Holden. The rules I would use in this case is: if it has its own model number (i.e. 2104) then it is a separate model. If it has a model suffix, then it is not. I think this also applies to the FX Business sedan. For FX it was 48/215-457, but for FJ to FC it was FE/217, a separate model. Terrybebb (talk) 11:22, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

• You make no mention of the VQII series. This is in fact a separate series, being the VP upgrade version of the VQ Statesman & Caprice. VN is to VP as VQ is to VQII. Terrybebb (talk) 11:22, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Done, but this may lead to confusion as to why other "Series II" and even "Series III" models are absent. OSX (talk • contributions) 00:22, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

• I know it would take a major re-write, but would it be better to list the model under series headings. What I mean by that is in HR for example you have the Standard, Special & Premier as the 3 trim levels, but in VH Commodore you also have 3 levels called SL, SL/X & SL/E. These are just as important but you have not listed them. Using this method you could then include all the lesser known limited release & optional packages, like S, SS, LE & Sandman. (Terrybebb (talk) 11:22, 5 January 2009 (UTC))

Yes, GM-H did do some ADR compliance work for the Rolaye stretch Limo but they did this also for Jakab (for the LWB ute/ambulance conversipns & also for HSV & none of these are Holden models. The hi-roof LWB VN/VP Commodores were commonplace in Sydney as handicap taxis. Again these conversions were carried out by private companies.

In regard to models, I would not follow Red Book, I would follow GM-H model charts in parts catalogues etc. As I said, I find the best rule is:- if it has a unique model number, then it's a separate model, if it just has an option number or model suffix it is NOT a separate model. This will overcome the ambiguity with regards to the different Monaros (LS,GTS, GTS 327 & GTS 350) & Commodores L, SL, SL/X & SL/E which ARE all separate models but would disqualify LE, SS & Sandman etc. which ARE NOT separate models, thse are just option packs. This also makes the Berlina a unique model from VK onwards, even though the first 2 are badged Commodore Berlinas. P.S. didn't this happen with the Fairmont when first introduced, weren't the XP & XR version - Falcon Fairmonts. Following Red Book & sales brochures can cause dramas, I have found parts catalogues & workshop manual to be more consistent.

In reference to the K8 Suburban, I found this info after '50 Years' was printed, The C/K was the only official code I could find at the time, but alas it was incorrect.

VQII is in the same basket as HBI & HBII along with UBSI & UBSII, where they are indeed a separate model series to be treated as such. All of the other series I, II & III are only mid-model upgrades. This difference should be explained. (Terrybebb (talk) 06:35, 6 January 2009 (UTC))

Terry, could you correct me if I'm wrong. In 50 Years of Holden, first level sedans and station wagons are noted as "VK19" and "VK35" respectively. Second level models are denoted as "VL", with third level written as "VX". These model codes confuse me because second level models are given identical designations when they are badged Commodore SL/X etc, Commodore Berlina, and simply Berlina (Berlina being a separate model to Commodore). Also why do Holden owners manuals have the title: "Holden Commodore/Calais" with no mention of Berlina? If the "Holden Sandman" (opt. XX7 and XU3 depending if fitted with auto or manual) is considered and option pack and not a model, why is it written as a model? I am not trying to discredit you, but I am just in need of clarification. Thanks OSX (talk • contributions) 08:24, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Yes, Commodore models & trim levels, especially the early series are a little confusing.

Firstly I should add that in my new book (60 Years – out soon) I have more clearly distinguished the difference between regular production models & limited production models as well as regular production option packs & limited production option packs. I’m sure you will be impressed with the way I’ve listed all these variations.

To explain the anomalies more fully, in the first series VB Commodore, the three models (K, L & X) were badged Commodore, Commodore SL & Commodore SL/E. In the next series (VC), the base model was re-badged to Commodore L, but SL & SL/E remained. For the next series (VH) the badges were re-jigged yet again, this time to Commodore SL, Commodore SL/X & Commodore SL/E. This is where it became confusing, because the old mid-level model name (SL) was now used on the base level (K) car. You mention VK19 & VK35 for base sedan & wagon. In Commodores some sedans are 19 style & some 69. The difference is whether it has an extra window in the rear pillar. VB to VH are 69, VK to VS are 19, VT onwards revert to 69 style. Statesmans are the same. HQ to HZ are 69, while WB & all the later VQ to WM series are 19 style.

With regard to the Commodore & Calais thing, GM-H have tried to push the prominence of the Calais badge over all others. Even though we now have (for VT-VZ) Executive, Acclaim, SV6, SV8, SS, Berlina & Calais all based around the 3 levels (K,L & X), they still refer to it as the Commodore/Calais range. I wouldn’t let any of this distort the real meaning of what constitutes a separate model. By the way, the next 2 models up from K, L & X (Statesman & Caprice) use the ID letters of Y & Z. Variants such as Acclaim, S & SS etc, were usually K (base) cars plus an option pack.

With regard to the Sandman, it was always perceived by the public as a ‘model’, but was never more than an option pack. By the way the difference between the XU3 & XX7 Sandman variants is the tyres. XX7 was the ‘standard’ Sandman, where it was fitted with GTS 6” rally wheels & passenger rated radial tyres. The fitting of these tyres meant that it no longer had the full commercial load rating of 15 cwt, it was now only 10 cwt. If you wanted to retain the 15 cwt full commercial load rating, you could order the XU3 version, which was identical but had the same tyres as normally seen on non-Sandman commercials. Further to that, if you wanted passenger rated tyres fitted to a non-Sandman commercial (to gain a more comfortable ride) you could tick option number XU4. XU3 & XU4 option packs are quite rare. (Terrybebb (talk) 01:36, 8 January 2009 (UTC))

Many thanks for the reply. Be sure to let me know when 60 Years of Holden is released, and will it be available in shops or just online? I don't know if this is too late as the book may have been sent to the printing press, but several of the images in 50 Years are incorrectly labeled, you may or may not have fixed these already. If you would like me to list them I will be more than happy too.

Another quick question. In 50 Years utilities are written as:

• VG: Holden VG Utility ("utility" is capitalised, making it a Holden model).
• VP: Holden VP utility ("utility" is decapitalised).
• VR: Holden VR Commodore utility.
• VS: Holden VS Commodore utility.

So is the VG Utility actually a model, if so what is the VP supposed to be, and are the new VU–VE models defiantly called the "Holden Ute"? OSX (talk • contributions) 01:54, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Yes, for VG onwards, the Ute or Utility (they use both terms in advertising & brochures) is a separate model. It is not just one model either, there are option packs. For VG to VS the Utility S is the standard issue model but there was a more basic version which is the A9K (base) Utility (along the same lines a the base HZ A9K Kingswood). In VS there was also a limited edition Utility SS (option number A9F or A9G for man/auto). For VU to VZ the base ute was now the standard model & the S or SS versions were option packs based on that. For VE the Omega is the standard model with SV6, SS & SS-V option packs above that.

Re: the 60 Year book, it will be a normal printed book (approx. 400 pages A4 colour) available in bookshops & online through some of those & yes, the caption errors etc. have been properly addressed. (Terrybebb (talk) 23:06, 11 January 2009 (UTC))

(Indent reset) So are the VR and VS utilities not called "Holden Commodore utility"? Because there is a Commodore badge mounted within the side protection moldings. OSX (talk • contributions) 01:51, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Now this is the biggest query I have with Holden badging.

As far as I'm concerned the only late Utes that are called Commodore are the VP, VR & VS Utes including their variants. All the others make no mention of the Commodore name. Even the VE Omega Ute is not badged a Commodore. Can anybody elaborate on this. (Terrybebb (talk) 11:09, 13 January 2009 (UTC))

Well Terry, as of late, I actually believe that the "Holden Ute" may infact be a "Commodore". As you have probably noticed, the Holden Sportswagon ads make no mention of "Commodore" anywhere. Holden's web site also lists Sportwagon as a separate model, as do many of their press releases etc. For a while, I went along with this until I noticed a Sportwagon on the road with "Commodore" and "Omega" badging. Ditto for SV6, SS and SS V, but not for Berlina, Calais, Calais V (as they are not Commodores by name). What I am saying is that because Holden has placed so much effort in differentiating the Commodore and the Sportwagon, maybe they have done the same with the Ute, except in the absence of Commodore badging on some models. However, Ute sales are separated by FCAI (December 2008 - 5413 Commodores - 1629 Utes) [5]. Although it seems to that wagons are too (August 2008 - 4,814 (3,305 sedans and 1,509 wagons) [6]. You would think that Holden would want the Ute/Commodore figures to be combined due to the fact that the Corolla is rivaling very close in sales. OSX (talk • contributions) 00:55, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

I think that the significant difference between the Commodore Sportswagon and the Ute is that Holden do (sometimes) market the former as the Commodore Sportswagon (please see All-new Commodore Sportswagon) and it is badged as a Commodore Sportswagon whilst the Ute is not marketed as a Commodore Ute and is not badged as a Commodore Ute. On the broader topic of the format of the List of Holden Vehicles, I feel that expanding it to show Holden Commodore L, Holden Commodore SL, Holden Commodore SL/E etc etc separately (not to mention all the Torana models, all the Gemini models, all the Astra models etc) is going to grow the list to the point that it becomes rather unwieldy. I suggest that we save these details for the individual model articles and restrict the list to the “primary” model names used in the badging & marketing of the vehicles, i.e. Holden Berlina, Holden Calais, Holden Commodore, Holden Torana etc. If we adopt this policy (which is pretty much the way the list has evolved to date) we should add some relevant words to the intro, eg “Listed below are the primary model names under which these Holden vehicles have been badged and marketed.” We could also add a Comments column to the list for the purposes of clarifying any contentious issues. GTHO (talk) 09:27, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

VG/VP/VR/VS utilities use the "VK" code like the Commodore, unlike Berlina (VL), Calais (VX), Statesman (VY) and Caprice (VZ). I guess you could interprit utes as Commodores. Do the VU-VE Utes use this "VK" code? Because if they use another code, it would pretty much prove that VG-VS models were Commodore, and VU-VE are Utes. OSX (talk • contributions) 01:47, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

There are only 5 main levels in the Holden line-up (prior to VE). They are K, L, X, Y & Z. L = Berlina, X = Calais, Y = Statesman & Z = Caprice, but K is used for all the others. This means Ute, Executive, Acclaim, Omega, S, SV6, SV8, SS & most of the specials including Vacationers, Equipe, Esteem, Lumina etc. etc. In the VE they introduced the 'P' level which is for the SS-V. Getting back to the early Commodores, the SL, SL/X & SL/E are as different as Exec, Berlina & Calais. I think this differentiation is important. If you follow GTHO's line it just becomes a list badge names, not a proper list of models. (Terrybebb (talk) 06:58, 17 January 2009 (UTC))

"Do the VU-VE Utes use this "VK" code?" Yes, all utes from VG to VE are based on the K level car. (Terrybebb (talk) 02:18, 21 January 2009 (UTC))

Revamp

I am proposing a revamp of this list per Terry's suggestion above. I would rather avoid going by model code, as this is really going to confuse a lot of people. Anyway, here is an example list based on the VT Commodore/Berlina/Calais, although I cannot find data for some fields. Please note: I will eventually create "Series II" categories at the Commons, hence the current use of "N/A".

Series	Model range			Release date		Image	Notes
	Level	Body style	Code	Year	Month
VT	Commodore Executive	Sedan	8VTK69	1997	09	[7]
		Station wagon	8VTK35
	Commodore 50th Anniversary	Sedan	8VTK69 (opt. A9J)	1998	06	[8]	LE
		Station wagon	8VTK35 (opt. A9J)
	Commodore Equipe	Sedan	8VTK69 (opt. A8S)	1999	03	[9]	LE
		Station wagon	8VTK35 (opt. A8S)
	Commodore Acclaim	Sedan	8VTK69 (opt. A8J)	1997	09	[10]
		Station wagon	8VTK35 (opt. A8J)
	Commodore S	Sedan	8VTK69 (opt. A9D)			N/A
	Commodore SS	Sedan	8VTK69 (opt. A9F)			[11]
	Berlina	Sedan	8VTL69			[12]
		Station wagon	8VTL35
	Calais	Sedan	8VTX69			[13]
	Calais 50th Anniversary	Sedan	8VTX69 (opt. ???)	1998	07	N/A	LE
VT II	Commodore Executive	Sedan	8VTK69	1999	06	[14]
		Station wagon	8VTK35
	Commodore Olympic	Sedan	8VTK69 (opt. ???)	1999	09	[15]	LE
		Station wagon	8VTK35 (opt. ???)
	Commodore Acclaim	Sedan	8VTK69 (opt. A8J)	1999	06	[16]
		Station wagon	8VTK35 (opt. A8J)
	Commodore S	Sedan	8VTK69 (opt. A9D)			N/A
	Commodore SS	Sedan	8VTK69 (opt. A9F)			[17]
	Berlina	Sedan	8VTL69			[18]
		Station wagon	8VTL35
	Calais	Sedan	8VTX69			[19]
	Calais International	Sedan	8VTX69 (opt. ???)	2000	??	N/A	LE

OSX (talk • contributions) 08:54, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

I'm in favour of retaining the current format. GTHO (talk) 10:11, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Is that because you fear the article will become difficult to navigate? I think Terry's proposal makes sense. For example, we currently list the Berlina, but not the Commodore Executive. The Executive is just as much a separate model as the Berlina (see model code table), but is not listed purely on the basis that it is the "Holden Commodore Executive", and the "Holden Executive". Currently, as Terry put it, we have a list of badge names but not models, which goes against the intention of the list ("List of Holden vehicles" not "List of Holden nameplates"). If the complicated coding is also deterring you, I will put my hand up now to make all the changes required (over time of course).

Also, we currently have duplicated tables of the Belmont, Kingswood, and Premier (Commodore, Berlina, et cetera), whereas under the proposed format everything can be collectively listed under Kingswood (being the most common name) and the Belmont and Premier sections can consist of a brief paragraph explaining what they are and a link to the Kingswood section with the actual content. OSX (talk • contributions) 06:59, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

I like what you are doing but I feel that the level of detail you are looking to include belongs on the individual model pages rather than on this "List". It's going to get horribly long once you have included every trim level of every body style of every model that has ever been sold under the Holden name. I see nothing wrong with the list being based around the prinary nameplate. If you drive a Holden Commodore Executive chances are you would tell your grandmother that you drive a Holden Commodore. If you drive a Holden Belmont you would not tell her that you drive a Holden Kingswood. GTHO (talk) 13:48, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

I understand what you are saying, but this list currently contains no information that Template:Holden timeline does not, and I feel that the timeline presents the information much better than this list. Also, general consensus is to present information (in articles) as prose. The above table does not really fit into individual model articles as these are not lists: the information can be better presented as prose:

Commodore Executive sedans and station wagons launched in September 1997... Series II versions arrived in June 1999.

Can you think of another way of doing this? The current format that I first began using in April 2007 was chosen primarily because I did not understand the wikicode well enough to do anything more complicated. I do not believe the current format is particularly effective, but with only the two of us active on this page, how are we to reach consensus? OSX (talk • contributions) 02:04, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

As for your example "If you drive a Holden Belmont you would not tell her that you drive a Holden Kingswood", what about the Berlina? You say Berlina and many will think you said Barina, hence Berlina owners often just say Commodore. OSX (talk • contributions) 08:42, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Bear with me while I give this some more thought. Are you proposing that the primary sort for the list be Series or nameplate or something else? GTHO (talk) 11:10, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

(indent reset) I would like to keep the current nameplate-based title setup (Commodore), with a table for the series (VT) and then cells within the table for the specification levels (Commodore Executive, Berlina). OSX (talk • contributions) 03:21, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

I have put together an example here. OSX (talk • contributions) 08:25, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

I can see some value in your proposed change however I still feel that the reader would be better served if the Kingswood details remained under "Kingswood" and the Premier details remained under "Premier" etc etc., obviously with some basic cross-referencing included where relevant. Re that particular example it must be remembered that the Premier was not always an upmarket Kingswood. GTHO (talk) 09:59, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

"I can see some value in your proposed change", does this mean you support it, or just that you like it but would not like the change made? As for the separate Premier and Kingswood sections, etc, don't you see this as excess content duplication? The list will only be bigger. Using the Berlina and Calais example, we could also link "Berlina" and "Calais" to their respective sections on the list making it even more obvious. Berlina, Calais, Premier, Caprice... etc, these are simply "trim levels" (not officially) of low-spec models, but to separate them Holden simply omit the lower-spec badge. This is why we have a Commodore article, but no Berlina article, a Statesman article, but no Caprice article, etc—same cars.

As your the Premier, we will obviously need to disambiguate between the "two types" (Special/Kingswood), like we have done at Holden Premier.

Also, are there any changes that you would like made to the proposed table's layout. I am still currently trying to figure the new VY/VZ/VE VIN codes, so I will probably need Terry's help for that. OSX (talk • contributions) 11:24, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

On balance I support the change, although I'm still not happy about the proposal to list details for some models under other model headings. I guess I can reluctantly live with "see Holden Commodore" under the "Holden Calais" heading given that the Calais is part of the "Holden Commodore" range in all but name. But the "Holden Premier" cannot really be be said to have been part of the "Holden Special" range or the later "Holden Kingswood" range, it was simply part of the mainstream "Holden" range. What if we place the 48-215 through WB model details under "Holden" at the beginnning of the list, where the original 48-215 would appear anyway. The "Holden" listing can then be followed by the "Holden Adventra", "Holden Apollo" etc with "Holden Premier", "Holden Special" etc referenced back to the initial "Holden" section. As for the table layout itself, it looks OK to me. GTHO (talk) 10:00, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

I think I see what you mean now about Belmont/Kingswood/Premier/One Tonner/panel van/utility, etc. At least we are on the same level regarding the list format, but as for the layout I am puzzled. Here are some possibilities.

• Group Belmont/Kingswood/Premier: now decided against.
• Group by model code: a bad choice for all but 48 through to WB models.
• Group by model code (for 48-215 through to WB) and by model (for all others): I do not like this option my self, but am just listing all possibilities.
• Group by model, and exclude 48-215 through to WB and have a separate "List of Holden vehicles by series" including only 48-215 through to WB models: probably the best option, and will help counteract the length issue. Then we can have the "Holden Premier", "Holden Special" etc referenced back to the "List of Holden vehicles by series" article.

For similar models, i.e. Monterey, Sunbird, Berlina, Calais, Caprice, etc, I am assuming these can be grouped under their respective donor models, with "see Holden Commodore" under "Holden Calais" etc as you stated above? OSX (talk • contributions) 03:13, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

I’m against removing the “traditional” Holden models and would much prefer one list rather than two. If we must use the “Holden Commodore” heading as an umbrella to summarize all related nameplates under series then it makes sense to me to use a “Holden : 48-215 to WB Series” heading at the top of the list to summarize all related nameplates under series. This is simply an extension of your model code under umbrella name concept given that there is no actual umbrella name for Belmonts, Kingswoods etc other than “Holden”. Of course we don’t have to agonise over umbrella names if we use the model code under nameplate system that we have now. There’s still something about finding the Belmont codes under the Belmont heading and the Sunbird codes under the Sunbird heading that appeals to me. GTHO (talk) 02:55, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

(indent reset) Models like "utility", "panel van", "SS", et cetera make the series code set up necessary. I must admit and am not a fan of the "Holden" section at the top of the current list, as it would be confusing to most and plain ugly. With the proposal, under the Belmont section for example, there would be a description similar to what I did with the Berlina here and a link directing readers to the List of Holden vehicles by series article. In Terry Bebbington's book 50 Years of Holden (1998), 48 to WB models are listed under "Holden FJ", "Holden HQ", "Holden WB", et cetera. UC Sunbirds are listed under "UC Torana" and Berlina, Calais, (and even) Statesman, Caprice are listed under "V[R/S/T] Commodore". I will draw the line at body styles, but maybe we could include Commodore-based models in the List of Holden vehicles by series as well as this one. Having non full-size/"mainstream" models in the list would be rather useless, as these are rarely (if ever) referred to in that way. OSX (talk • contributions) 08:27, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Obviously we have two differing schools of thought on this proposed revamp.

One is to table the Series, Levels, Bodystyles and Codes under each nameplate on one page headed List of Holden Vehicles, with table entries restricted to that nameplate only.

The other is to list the Series, Levels, Bodystyles and Codes under each nameplate except where nameplates share Series designations. In these cases the table is to be placed under the “main” nameplate, except in the case of the traditional Holdens and maybe the Commodore related models which are to go on a separate page headed “List of Holdens by Series”.

I suggest that a reasonable compromise is to table the Series, Levels, Bodystyles and Codes under each nameplate on one page headed List of Holden Vehicles, except where nameplates share Series designations. In these cases the table is to be placed under the “main” nameplate with the traditional Holdens listed under “Holden”. This compromise would have my support. GTHO (talk) 10:14, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

I have given this a total rethink and too have come to a compromise.

• List of Holden vehicles: with two sections:

• Section: List of Holden vehicles by nameplate: listing each individual nameplate only (inc. Berlina, Premier, Monterey, etc), but no specification levels, model codes, series codes, body styles, release dates, etc. An italicised “Main list: List of Holden vehicles by nameplate” will be included.

• Actual: List of Holden vehicles by nameplate: actual list similar to proposed [here], except Berlina, Calais, Premier, etc information listed under the actual nameplate (as you wanted). No initial “Holden” section, therefore nameplate-less models like “utility”, “panel van” will be absent. An appropriate disclaimer will explain this, directing readers to the “List of Holden vehicles by series”.

• Section: List of Holden vehicles by series: listing each “mainstream” model code (i.e. 48 to WB, and VB to VE (inc. VG, VQ, VU, V2, WH, WK, WL, WM) only). No specification levels, model codes, series codes, etc. An italicised “Main list: List of Holden vehicles by series” will be included.

• Actual: List of Holden vehicles by series: actual list. The HQ section for example, will follow a format similar to that proposed [here], with utility, panel van, Belmont, Kingswood, Premier, Monaro, Sandman, etc. Also, body styles, model codes, release dates, etc will be included.

Please see an this version of the list to see what I mean. OSX (talk • contributions) 02:13, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Lets do it!! Oh, please don't forget that the first Holden to be sold without a nameplate was the 48-215 (1948-1953). GTHO (talk) 10:20, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Brilliant! Some parts done. OSX (talk • contributions) 12:29, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Is there any reason we have included Monaro LS and Monaro GTS in the "List of Holden vehicles by nameplate" when the intention was to exclude specification levels? GTHO (talk) 00:29, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

The Monaro LS and Monaro GTS were fully-fledged separate models. They had there own model codes (not option packs) and are thus included. Terry pointed this out previously:

"The Monaro GTS was a full step up from the base Monaro, which only appeared in the HK to HQ series. It was as different as Kingswood is to Premier. You also missed the Monaro LS in HQ/HJ, which again is a fully fledged separate model."

Besides those two, that is it I think. OSX (talk • contributions) 01:32, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

But isnt the "List of Holden vehicles by nameplate" supposed to be just that. We have not included other models which have different model codes but share the same basic nameplate. GTHO (talk) 23:46, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

(indent reset) But the the GTS and LS are separate nameplates. Just because the contain the name "Monaro", that does not make them "Monaros" per see. The best example of this occurring elsewhere is Oldsmobile. They had the the Cutlass Calais compact, the mid-size Cutlass Ciera, the Cutlass Cruiser station wagon, and the Oldsmobile Cutlass Supreme personal luxury car. Another example would be the Mitsubishi Pajero iO. OSX (talk • contributions) 05:23, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

I notice that the Oldsmobile Cutlass article refers to "Cutlass" as being "one of the most popular nameplates" even though, as you say, it covered various size models, market segments and both FWD and RWD layouts. The Monaro however has always been basically a "full size" RWD "performance" model and yet we are splitting it up in to different nameplates according to the way it was trimmed/coded. Wasn't the HK Monaro GTS327 coded differently to the HK Monaro GTS? Are we then to make this yet another nameplate? I feel very strongly that we should stick to a concept of nameplate in the purest sense without this new level of diversification. GTHO (talk) 01:09, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Alright, I see what you mean. Gone.

However, Terry stated that in his new book he has more clearly distinguished the difference between regular production models and limited production models as well as regular production option packs and limited production option packs. When the book comes out (when?) I'll see what he has done with them. OSX (talk • contributions) 02:23, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi Guys. Sorry, but I've been a bit busy with work commitments of late. My book will be available in a matter of days. I have already received a few 'advance copies' which were air freighted in. Where do you blokes live, we should get together on this. (Terrybebb (talk) 11:01, 4 October 2009 (UTC))

Hi Terry, good to hear from you. I'm from the Sutherland Shire, not sure where in Australia GTHO is from though. I have emailed you through the GM Inside News site, so check your emails there. OSX (talk • contributions) 13:15, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

I'm from Adelaide. GTHO (talk) 09:02, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Regarding the Statesman

In the timeline of Holden vehicles, there is a text note at the bottom stating "HQ–WB Statesmans not marketed under the 'Holden' brand, but rather the separate 'Statesman' brand." This is incorrect.

The Statesman was marketed as a Holden product (or more correctly as a GMH product, as General Motors-Holden was the official company name), and continued to be so until the final series in production. HQ-WB series may not have carried Holden badges, and were considered separate from the Kingswood and Commodore, but this is not the same as saying they were not marketed under the Holden brand.

As proof, I refer you to an image from an original WB Statesman brochure I have uploaded to Google Docs, which clearly says "Statesman by General Motors - Holden's". I have also uploaded an image of an advertisement for a HX Statesman from a 1977 Newsweek magazine which says the same too, as well as a brochure for a HZ Statesman Caprice which says "Statesman [GMH logo]", which was produced by General Motors-Holden's Sales Pty Ltd.

Yes, I agree they weren't the "Holden Statesman" (although they were later called "Statesman by Holden), but I feel the wording of the text is misleading. I therefore request that this text either be updated accordingly, or deleted. Blammy1 (talk) 15:16, 21 October 2020 (UTC)