VW Passat CC vs Commodore SV6 (and RNS vs IQ) - a surprising comparison

[Leagle]

I know what you are all thinking: WHY this comparison?

Its common ground that the CC aspires to compete with much better cars (from the House of Europe). Yes, the Commodore is a cheaper car. Yes the CC has vastly different styling and it is in a different class altogether.

However a recent drive of a new rental car (SV6 Commodore) in Tasmania made me realise that the Passat CC (and R36) actually have a number of striking similarities. I also realised (perhaps paradoxically) what great value BOTH cars represent at their different price points. The fact that the SV6 that I had was also equipped with the brand new touch screen (called the IQ) which is probably the closest thing to the RNS510 that the VW has also made the comparison irresistible.

First the striking similarities that I noticed:

1. After my CC, I thought the Commodore would seem S-L-O-W. I was wrong (sorry for borrowing your phrase JC!). In fact the SV6 has nearly the same power as the CC/R36 (210kw vs 220Kw) from its 3.6L V6 motor. Torque I believe is nearly identical at around the 350nm mark. Both cars weigh about the same too (around 1700kg). I was pleasantly surprised that the SV6 sounds pretty similar to the Passat CC too, very quiet at idle, nice growl when pressed (though a little coarser to the silky smooth CC at higher revs). Definitely a vast improvement over the last (base) Commodore I drove! Of course, stepping back to my CC (post Tassie) nevertheless confirmed to me that the CC still is the faster, more responsive car - I think the DSG deserves a lot of the credit for this but the CC definitely revs a lot more and is still the sportier of the two too. Of course, put the DSG into sports mode and the difference between the SV6 and CC is far greater.

2. Another surprising similarity was ride. One thing that the big Aussie Sedans seem to mostly get right is their ride/handling balance and their suitability to varying aussie conditions. The SV6 rode (and handled!) very impressively. Once again - vast improvement over the previous Commodore I drove. A lot sharper and even fun to drive. Upon returning to Sydney, I was surprised how similar the CC's ride/handling characteristics were in the "standard" ACC (chassis) setting. This might sound like faint praise but I reckon the VW CC is one of the few Euro cars I have driven/owned that actually gets this ride/handling balance right and is actually suited to our Aussie roads. Of course the big plus (and difference) with the CC is that I can play with the ACC (chassis) settings. Horrible roads? I make the ride better by selecting "comfort". Nice billiard smooth twisties ahead? I select "Sports" mode. The fact that I can do this is the icing on the cake for me.

3. Now for the part that many of you may have been waiting for: RNS510 vs Holden's IQ interface. How did it compare? I did say strikingly similar. Well lets put it this way: the IQ interface is probably the closest thing to the RNS510 that I have seen in any other make of car. Different but same. Like the RNS510, the IQ has a combination of hard buttons surrounding a touchscreen. As a result it is very intuitive and easy to use (like the RNS510). Both have sharp graphics (the IQ is "flashier", the RNS is "classier"). Both the RNS and IQ are very responsive. There are subtle differences of course. The RNS510 has a massive 30gb hard drive and can store a lot more music (as MP3). But the IQ is a lot easier to use in storing music - its party trick (which the RNS cannot do) is ripping music onto the hard drive straight from a CD. The IQ also comes with blu tooth built in and did a great job streaming music from my iphone (my Kufatek equipped RNS510 can do this too but the IQ comes standard with this feature and there is a greater level of control from the interface). It was very easy to pair up my mobile phone too, although the Kufatek equipped connection on my VW still has the advantage of easier access to my phone book. The SV6 did not have GPS, but I believe that the RNS510 is superior. Although the IQ interface did impress, the Commodore's MFD on the other hand was very frustrating (compared to the CC). For example I could either view the digital speedometre or odometer but not both at the same time! I definitely missed the feature on my CC which tells you WHICH door was open. As for the analog instruments, the Commodore's are almost illegible compared to the sharp graphics on my VW. Red illumination was not flattering on the Commodore either (full kudo's to the CC's sharp white illumination). Whilst the IQ interface is great, the Commodore is definitely let down by its instrument panel and MFC (why are the graphics on the analog speedo so small on the Commodore?)

Of course - as you would expect - I did not fail to miss numerous differences including:

1. The Commodore looks like a buffed bouncer next to the supermodel physique of my CC. No one turned to admire the (still handsome in a blokey sort of way) Commodore as they would with my CC.

2. My CC has a 5 star hotel grade interior (with real aluminium on the dash) whilst the Commodore had a pleasant 3.5 star ambience to it (with fake aluminium trim). Gotta admit though, it is spacious inside the Commodore and the fabric seats were almost as comfortable (if not as supportive) as the climate controlled nappa leather seats on my CC. The Commodore was almost as quiet as my CC when cruising at lower speeds too (though not at higher speeds) but I did notice wind noise and a rattle developing around one of the windows on the Commodore after a week (my 1 year old CC in comparison is still rattle free). OK the Commodore was a rental car, but it still only had less than 1,000 kays when I took delivery!

3. The large rear wing on the Commodore probably contributes to the SV6's stability but I would hate to park this car in traffic (no sensors either!) Given the parking assistant in my CC parallel parks the car for me, I was pleasantly surprised to find that I could still park the SV6 though...

4. Whilst the Commodore is quite tech savvy for an Aussie car (6 airbags, ABS, Traction Control, ESP all standard) it still feels all like a well equipped Windows based machine compared to a cutting edge Apple computer (no flaming please, you know what I mean). The Commodore had auto lights but no auto wipers. The SV6 had no parking sensors, the mirrors did not dip when reversing. There was no reverse camera on the SV6 (which I have optioned on my CC and which BOTH the SV6 and CC really should come standard with). Although I only have standard cruise control on my CC, it is still far more useable than the clunky cruise control on the Commodore. I can incrementally increase speed to a predetermined limit in my CC, in the Commodore I had no idea what I was doing. I found myself using cruise far less on the SV6 as I would on my own car. There is no doubt the CC is vastly easier to cruise in. The Commodore did have a fatigue warning light feature but I found this irritating as it went on even after I swapped drivers!

All in all though I was still impressed with the SV6. There is no doubt that Aussie cars have come a long way and the new Commodore represents fantastic value for money for what you get for the price it is at. However, I also came away appreciating where my extra spend for the VW CC went. And made me realise what fantastic value for money the CC/Passats (And VWs in general) have become. The CC is one of those rare cars where I do not feel ripped off in getting an exotic looking and gadget laden premium Euro car. Like the Commodore, it represents fantastic value for money at its price point.

[kleung]

However a recent drive of a new rental car (SV6 Commodore) in Tasmania made me realise that the Passat CC (and R36) actually have a number of striking similarities. I also realised (perhaps paradoxically) what great value BOTH cars represent at their different price points.

I've also recently returned from a holiday, ironically also from Tassie, and also after driving a rented SV6 (Sportwagon). Leagle is right - it's hard not to compare the two, even though *technically*, a Calais-V would be a closer match to the CC V6/R36.

In my case, I got an 8000km old SV6, and despite the interior looking decidedly 'preloved', I was pleasantly surprised. Also like Leagle, I drove a rented Commodore VZ a few years ago, and found the VE to be a vast improvement.

In fact the SV6 has nearly the same power as the CC/R36 (210kw vs 220Kw) from its 3.6L V6 motor. Torque I believe is nearly identical at around the 350nm mark. Both cars weigh about the same too (around 1700kg).

Size wise, they're not a great deal different either, at least in the case of the Sportwagon vs R36 wagon. The two engines also appear to be of a similar configuration too - narrow-angle V.

I was pleasantly surprised that the SV6 sounds pretty similar to the Passat CC too, very quiet at idle, nice growl when pressed (though a little coarser to the silky smooth CC at higher revs).

That's not what I found. I found the SV6's engine/exhaust note to be noticeably muted compared to my R36. Perhaps the exhaust note is more muted in the CC than it is in the R36.

I also found that the 3.6 SIDI engine didn't have a great deal of punch down low, so consequently when going up slight inclines, when the transmission downshifted into 5th, I couldn't really tell any difference. Mind you, if you nail the throttle, it did go pretty hard, despite being loaded down with 3 adults and 5 adults-worth of luggage.

Definitely a vast improvement over the last (base) Commodore I drove!

Couldn't agree more. The VZ Commodore I had did get the 3.6 Alloytec engine, but it was the 175kw vesion, not the hi-output version. The biggest disappointment with the VZ was the mushy suspension and the appalling 4sp auto. The SV6 gets sportier suspension, and the 6sp auto, while not a patch on the DSG, is an absolute revelation in comparison to the 4-cog antique it replaced.

Holden should have standardized on the 6sp auto way back when they introduced the Alloytec engine, rather than persisting with the 4-cog. That way they would have stolen some of Ford's ZF-powered thunder.

The SV6 rode (and handled!) very impressively.

Infinitely better than the VZ, but it's not entirely a fair comparison. The VZ Exec got the standard suspension, where the SV6 variant got a sportier tune. There's another step up in the form of the FE3 sports suspension (I think the SS gets that suspension), which would be tauter again.

Of course the big plus (and difference) with the CC is that I can play with the ACC (chassis) settings.

You suck.

Although the IQ interface did impress, the Commodore's MFD on the other hand was very frustrating (compared to the CC). For example I could either view the digital speedometre or odometer but not both at the same time!

In fairness, the higher-spec models get the 3-window trip computer, which WOULD let you view all that informaton simultaneously.

I found the MFD in the SV6 a little limited. I imagine if I had some time to sit down with the manual and play with it a bit, I'd get more out of it.

As for the analog instruments, the Commodore's are almost illegible compared to the sharp graphics on my VW.

Did the VE2 SV6 still get the white lettering on light-grey background? I found the dials very difficult to read during the day, but the white backlight at night was fine.

Red illumination was not flattering on the Commodore either (full kudo's to the CC's sharp white illumination).

The red backlight in the SV6 MFD didn't particularly bother me. I was too busy trying to read the white-on-lightgrey dials.

1. The Commodore looks like a buffed bouncer next to the supermodel physique of my CC. No one turned to admire the (still handsome in a blokey sort of way) Commodore as they would with my CC.

The Commodore has never really been an ugly car. It's just not really anything special. That said, the lurid green color of my rental started to grow on me by the end of the week.

Gotta admit though, it is spacious inside the Commodore and the fabric seats were almost as comfortable (if not as supportive)

Plenty of sprawl-space, but I found the seats to be lacking in support. I know that it's not a fair comparison between the R36 bucket seats and the SV6's, but even compared to the seats in my old Accord Euro, they weren't as supportive. Comfy though.

but I did notice wind noise and a rattle developing around one of the windows on the Commodore after a week (my 1 year old CC in comparison is still rattle free). OK the Commodore was a rental car, but it still only had less than 1,000 kays when I took delivery!

Mine had just on 8000kms on it at pickup, and the interior was decidedly more worn than any 8000km-old car has a right to be, even taking into account that is a rental. The plastic backs of the front seats were badly scuffed up, as were the door trims. The luggage comparment was fine though.

3. The large rear wing on the Commodore probably contributes to the SV6's stability but I would hate to park this car in traffic (no sensors either!)

My SV6 had rear parking sensors (I think SV6 wagons got them standard). I didn't find it any harder to park than my R36. If anything, it was easier to park when on a hill, because I didn't have to worry about rollback/rollforward because of the DSG.

There was no reverse camera on the SV6 (which I have optioned on my CC and which BOTH the SV6 and CC really should come standard with).

The camera is optional on the SV6 and standard on some higher-spec models.

Although I only have standard cruise control on my CC, it is still far more useable than the clunky cruise control on the Commodore. I can incrementally increase speed to a predetermined limit in my CC, in the Commodore I had no idea what I was doing.

You can increment or decrement the speed on the Commodore's cruise as well. Just twist the lever up or down. I still prefer the old tiny-button controls from pre-VX Commodores though - they had buttons mounted on the end of the indicator stalk. You didn't have to take your hand off the steering wheel to operate them.

In fact, I think I'd prefer the tiny-button cruise controls over the separate lever that's on the Passats. My old Accord Euro had buttons on the wheel itself for cruise. I think the cruise lever on the Passats is less intuitive to use compared to other makes, until you get used to it.

All in all though I was still impressed with the SV6. There is no doubt that Aussie cars have come a long way and the new Commodore represents fantastic value for money for what you get for the price it is at. However, I also came away appreciating where my extra spend for the VW CC went. And made me realise what fantastic value for money the CC/Passats (And VWs in general) have become. The CC is one of those rare cars where I do not feel ripped off in getting an exotic looking and gadget laden premium Euro car. Like the Commodore, it represents fantastic value for money at its price point.

Well said, and I agree wholeheartedly. The VW Passat range represents remarkable value for money for what you get.

Thank you for posting this comparo. It's an interesting read. I have a few more thoughts I'd like to add, as soon as I've dug my notes out of my backup - the Windows installation on my desktop PC imploded on Sunday, so I'm still in the proces of putting the pieces back together.

[Greg Roles]

In a recent trip to Shepperton in Vic, I got a SV6 for the 400k round trip from Melbourne. I was excited walking over to it, looked tough, and I was looking forward to some time in a "real" car after 3 years in a hairdresser Golf. I was amazed how big and comfy it was, but the one thing that blew me away was how dull, underpowered, and just plain gutless it felt compared to a daggy little TDI. I gave up putting my foot down, a good thing in low tolerance Vic, and drove it like a Yaris. Guess I'm spoilt having such a punchy and engaging little tractor. I can see why it's popular, looks the part, but if ever a car needed a V8....that's the one.

[Pana]

I wouldn't say the Passat cruise control is better than the Commodore - I actually can't remember whether I need to push the button or pull the stalk to increase the speed by 1km/h or whether it decreases it (haven't had coffee yet so that's probably why) - the VE cruise is more intuitive to use.

[PA.]

I wouldn't say the Passat cruise control is better than the Commodore - I actually can't remember whether I need to push the button or pull the stalk to increase the speed by 1km/h or whether it decreases it (haven't had coffee yet so that's probably why) - the VE cruise is more intuitive to use.

Can't agree here. Just out of a Commodore and into a CC. The CC stalk is so much easier and more functional to use.

Flick it up and 10 km added, flick it down and 10 KM reduced, pull it towards you adds 1 km or resumes if off, press the button on the stalk to reduce by 1 km and push it away a little to cancel.

[kleung]

the one thing that blew me away was how dull, underpowered, and just plain gutless it felt compared to a daggy little TDI. I gave up putting my foot down, a good thing in low tolerance Vic, and drove it like a Yaris. Guess I'm spoilt having such a punchy and engaging little tractor. I can see why it's popular, looks the part, but if ever a car needed a V8....that's the one.

Respectuflly disagree. The SV6 I had went like stink if you got the engine spinning in the top half of the rev-range. Perhaps it's the lack of low-down torque that made it feel gutless?

I wouldn't say the Passat cruise control is better than the Commodore - I actually can't remember whether I need to push the button or pull the stalk to increase the speed by 1km/h or whether it decreases it (haven't had coffee yet so that's probably why) - the VE cruise is more intuitive to use.

The Passat's cruise control is definitely less intuitive to use than the Commodore's, but it does have that neat extra function of being able to round down or up to the nearest 10km/h. Of course, it doesn't help that the manual that came with my R36 is flat out wrong about the cruise control - it says you have to push the lever up or down to increase or decrease the set speed by small increments. In actual fact, you have to press the button or pull the lever towards you for that function.

The best one I've used was on my old Accord Euro - four buttons on the steering wheel:

- Main On/off
- Cancel
- Set/+
- Resume/-

[R36 Dreamer]

I wouldn't say the Passat cruise control is better than the Commodore - I actually can't remember whether I need to push the button or pull the stalk to increase the speed by 1km/h or whether it decreases it (haven't had coffee yet so that's probably why) - the VE cruise is more intuitive to use.

Your comments on the commodore cruise control might be correct, but I hope you were exaggerating when you say you cant actually remember how to use the cruise control in your own car properly....

[Pana]

The best one I've used was on my old Accord Euro - four buttons on the steering wheel:

Agree - our CR-V has the same system - works very well

but I hope you were exaggerating when you say you cant actually remember how to use the cruise control in your own car properly....

I've used the cruise control on my car a handful of times in the almost 2 years I've had it. My commute to work doesnt allow it and we've only been on one big trip in the car. So if by "properly" you mean I couldn't remember off the top of my head whether I pressed the button to reduce speed on the stalk (because you know - thats completely intuitive ) - then I guess I'm not exaggerating. Apologies for bringing down the average IQ of R36 owners.

[R36 Dreamer]

Apologies for bringing down the average IQ of R36 owners. :

Apology Accepted.

[Leagle]

Hey - great to see some fantastic responses (we need to keep up some threads with Passat, Golf GTi and R seem to have all the action!)

Kleung, agree re SV6 instruments - analog speedo illegible by day (bad contrast, small lettering) but clear at night (nice crisp white though not as good as CC).

Interesting to see a bit of debate about the cruise though. For me what makes the CC's easy compared to the Commodore's was the following:
1. The CC stalk is within easy reach (the Commodore's by comparison was a bit of a stretch).
2. Flicking the CC's cruise control up and down (in increasing or decreasing speed in 10 kay increments) is a lot easier than reaching up to the Commodore's stalk and twisting it (which increases or decreases speed in unknown increments).
3. When twisting the Commodore's stalk I couldn't really tell how much it was increasing or reducing speed by. On the CC, it tells you on the MFD.
4. Resuming speed on the CC is easy and predictable. It tells you on the MFD what the last setting was at (eg 60km'h). When you resume you know exactly how fast the car will be travelling.
5. You can also change speed increments on the fly WITHOUT resuming. Very handy when you are off cruise control mode but are approaching a school zone speed camera. It says 40kms so flick it to 40 and resume when the camera is within sight.

[kleung]

Hey - great to see some fantastic responses (we need to keep up some threads with Passat, Golf GTi and R seem to have all the action!)

We Passat drivers are too busy out enjoying our cars, not writing about them

(nice crisp white though not as good as CC).

Blue needles are better again!

1. The CC stalk is within easy reach (the Commodore's by comparison was a bit of a stretch).

I find the Commodore's less of a reach than the Passats - I have to reach down to get to the cruise stalk on the Passat, but I see where you're coming from re: the Commodore. You have to reach further in order to twist the stalk, as opposed to just flicking the lever.

Additionally, I find it difficult to 'cancel' - I always end up pushing the lever too far and turning the cruise system off altogether.

(which increases or decreases speed in unknown increments).

I used to have a 96 VS Berlina (with the tiny-button cruise controls). According to the owner's manual, the increments were in 1.6km/h units. Smells of a cheap MPH to KMH conversion to me.

3. When twisting the Commodore's stalk I couldn't really tell how much it was increasing or reducing speed by. On the CC, it tells you on the MFD.

The set-speed display is remarkably handy to have. I'm surprised that more cars don't have it. In fact, I think the cruise set-speed display and the round-up/round-down functions are actually fairly unusual, outside of VAG cars.

5. You can also change speed increments on the fly WITHOUT resuming.

Cool! I didn't know this. Good to know.

Now...I managed to find my notes (ain't backups wonderful?)

The first thing that struck me about the car was the looks - the colour is called 'Poison Ivy' - a lurid metallic green colour. It looks good, in a chunky, masculine, muscular sort of way. The doors definitely don't have that lovely solid 'thunk' when you close them. The Sportwagon's tailgate hinge is cleverly set back into the roof, which allows the tailgate to be opened in remarkably narrow spaces. Panel gaps looked pretty consistent, no squeaks or rattles in the car we had.

What I liked about the SV6:
- Auto-crank - just turn the key to the 'start' position and let go. The engine continues cranking until it catches. This is definitely something that the Passat could do better. I recall reading about this as a criticism of the Passat, where if you don't hold the key in for long enough, you've got to the key right out before you can try again.
- The 6sp auto - as mentioned before, an absolute revelation compared to the old 4sp. Shift quality is pretty good, but it does tend to hunt a little bit, especially under load. Sport shift is around the wrong way (IMO) - push to downshift, pull to upshift. The Passat has it the right way around (pull to downshift), and the R36 gets paddles to boot. For some reason, the SV6's shifter felt like it was a loooong way away. Not sure why.
- Air conditioning is efficient and does not noticeably impact engine power - similar to the Passat. As I understand it, both the Passat and the Commodore use Delphi compressors, so this may go some way to explaining why.
- Fuel economy was surprisingly good, at 10.3l/100km average. We were doing mostly between 45km/h-80km/h up and down the hilly and curvy roads around Tassie, with 3 adults and 5 peoples-worth of luggage on board. I can't get the R36 under about 11.5l/100km with just me on board :/
- The suspension is well tuned for Aussie roads. It can be just slightly boaty at times, but it reacts well if you sling it into a corner. Unfortunately I had limited opportunities to test this out because the other people with me got car sick. Doh! The R36's suspension is significantly tauter than the SV6's, to the point of harshness over certain surfaces.
- Central locking-horn chirp - if one of the doors or the tailgate were not shut properly, the horn would chirp if you tried to lock the car. Unfortunately, the doors would lock anyway, and you would have to unlock the doors again to re-shut the door or tailgate properly
- The SV6's High beams are excellent, and light up the roads very well for conventional halogen headlights. But they just aren't a match for the bi-xenon cornering lights in the R36/CC.
- The AC fan in the SV6 has a huge number of speed increments, but it can be a bit difficult to find the lowest fan setting.

What I didn't like so much about the SV6:
- While the cabin is nicely designed, Holden seems to not have paid a lot of attention to the little details. Something a simple as the bolts fastening the fixed end of the front seat belts should not be exposed to the cabin. They should be concealed like they are in the Passat.
- The indicator stalk has long, imprecise travel. You have to move it a LONG way to get it to the 'on' position. This may be because it has become something of a Commodore trademark - the long-travel indicator stalk has existed since before the VS-series, and probably dates all the way back to the VN.
- The front seats in the SV6 are comfortable, but aren't particularly supportive. I guess I may have become somewhat spoiled by the R36 seats.
- There is no vertical cargo blind/net in the SV6, like there is in the R36. I guess this may be because many cargo-carrying Sportwagons ultimately get fitted with hard-grilles.
- SV6 has no auto-down on rear windows, no auto up on any of the windows, Passat gets auto up/down on all four windows.
- The engine note is muted in the SV6, and isn't particularly inspiring when revved.
- Road noise in the SV6 is pretty severe on coarse-chip roads.
- The window and door lock controls are positioned awkardly on the SV6 on the centre console, so I had to physically look at them to find the controls, and you have to arch your arm back uncomfortably to operate them. The Passat's, on the other hand, come easily to hand.
- The handbrake lever design is unconventional in that it sort of 'hides' away into the centre console in the released position. But for some reason, the SV6 I had, the handbrake was quite awkward to release.
- The brakes on the SV6 are a bit funny and hard to judge - I kept misjudging the brakes and not applying enough pressure, which resulted in a few undignified stops.
- The fuel and temperature guages have funny angled gradients on them, positioned a long way from the end of the needle, making it a bit difficult to work out exactly where they are pointing, until you get used to them.

It might sound like I have a lot of criticisms of the Commodore, but on the whole, I did enjoy driving it, and considering the price it goes for, I think it's pretty good value.

[Highlander]

SV6 lacks the basics - no turn indicators

The VE I hired had no turn indicators or must have been wired incorrectly.

Every time i wanted to indicate that i was going to turn or change lanes the bloody windscreen wipers came on.

[Ozsko]

Respectuflly disagree. The SV6 I had went like stink if you got the engine spinning in the top half of the rev-range. Perhaps it's the lack of low-down torque that made it feel gutless?

This has been a Holden problem since God played full back for Israel. I had a VS 304 auto Statesman and I still rate as a good car except when towing. Cruising at 120 it was doing about 1900 rpm in top and producing about 85HP. because the peak torque was at 3500 as soon as it saw a hill with the trailer (650KG) on it went back to third and began to hunt from third to fourth constantly. I bought a 2.0 litre TDI DSG Skoda and that motor and gearbox combination will walk all over a Holden when towing because Holden persist in setting the power and torque peaks so far above the cruise RPM. They do it for economy reasons and in the older cars the throttle linkage was not linear to disguise the problem. I looked at three cars when I was buying, Holden Sportswagon 6 litre, Passat and Skoda TDI and it was a close call between them all but I could not reconcile the towing issue along with the fuel penalty it involves otherwise the Holden would have got the nod I suspect.

[weasel]

Great thread guys,

I too rented a VE SV6 last week with the SIDI engine. Went from Brisbane to Surfers and back for 6 days. The comments written all ring true with my thoughts.

I had a grey spedo and could not for the life of me read how fast I was going during the day.....
The steering wheel was like a truck.

It was so easy to compare it to the R36. There was plenty to like and dislike about it. I could write about it all day, but won't.
Fuel economy was very close to the R36. I expected better from the SV6.

Peter

[weasel]

I forgot to add.....

we could not find the boot release......until I said to mysef. Surley it's still not in the glove box.

Yep it was!

In this day and age I don't understand how or why they are not able to change this from the VB commodore days.

Peter