Holden Epica CDX 2007 Review

Road Test

Check out our pre-configured specification comparator here

Overall rating: 2.5/5.0
Engine/Drivetrain/Chassis: 2.5/5.0
Price, Packaging and Practicality: 3.0/5.0
Safety: 3.0/5.0
Behind the wheel: 2.5/5.0
X-factor: 2.5/5.0

About our ratings

Just park the Holden Epica alongside the previous model Camry and ask people to name the Toyota -- or pick the newer design. Chances are good that a majority will not be able to identify one from the other without resorting to badge-spotting. Although the Epica is sold by Holden, its looks and packaging are straight out of the Gospel according to Toyota.

That's actually a very good thing, believe it or not. Few cars can approach the Camry for its combination of low running costs, size, value and accoutrements.

So why is the Epica proving a slow seller? Well it's not, except by Camry standards. Typically, Camry outsells Epica by about three to one. Then again, Camry outsells a lot of cars in the medium segment by at least that much. There are any number of reasons for Camry being such a big seller. Maybe Toyota can offer better fleet discounts on a locally built car or private medium car buyers still associate Holden with the overtly sporting Opel-designed Vectra. Perhaps the fleet buyers' phone fingers just keep dialling 1800-TOY-OTA instead of 1800-HOL-DEN. We're all guilty of miscreant fingers...

Whatever the case, the Epica is a 'Toyota' that just happens to wear Holden badges. It's mighty quiet, generally well equipped and build quality is actually very good.

Not the most stylish car in the segment, the Epica does tend to put function ahead of form. As a drive, it's utterly conventional, but it does offer a transversely-mounted inline six driving the front wheels, a configuration shared with very few cars on the road -- the Volvo S80 is one that comes to mind -- and certainly none in the medium family car segment.

That engine is available in both 2.0-litre and 2.5-litre forms. In the base CDX model, the 2.0-litre engine is the standard unit, coupled to a five-speed manual transmission. The larger engine is available as an option for the CDX, but with a competent, smooth-shifting five-speed automatic only. This same combination is standard for the higher grade CDXi.

As a 2.0-litre, the small six is ridiculously quiet and refined. It revs with the best of four-cylinder engines -- but that in a sense is a problem. It's a slightly 'undersquare' design, with a bore and stroke measuring 75.0x75.2mm, but there's not enough stroke to provide that torque at low engine speeds.

With the engine hauling around a car weighing 1411kg (tare) -- and that would work out at roughly 1500kg of kerb mass -- the engine needs torque and it needs it from less than 4600rpm. And 195Nm of torque is barely up to the job at any engine speed. There is noticeably better performance once the engine is running harder than 3000rpm, but you wouldn't say there's an abundance of torque anywhere in the rev range.

Combined with its free-revving nature and funereal hush, the smaller engine makes the Epica CDX just a little hard to launch in normal daily driving. It's hard to pitch the revs at the 'sweet spot', meaning the Epica will inevitably bog down or rev unnecessarily high. This is also likely a function of the car's throttle set-up. There's obviously no such problem with the larger engine and the automatic transmission.

So the 2.5-litre engine is a better move? It certainly has a longer stroke and develops more torque (237Nm, but at the same engine speed as the 2.0-litre -- 4600rpm). There's not much more performance, however, since it's driving through a power-sapping automatic transmission. Also, the larger engine is not ultimately as quiet and free of vibration as the smaller one.

On dry roads, traction control is redundant in the Epica, even with the 2.5-litre engine. It's a standard feature, but might as well be basking in the sun on the Gold Coast for all the work it has to do.

You wouldn't say the Epica boasts effortless torque and the 2.0-litre manual just won't trickle away from a standing start, but if you only ever drive on the freeway, the smaller-engined Epica is obscenely economical for a car of that size and in fact, for a 2.0-litre car of almost any size! In combined cycle testing for ADR81/01, the 2.0-litre Epica returns a figure of 8.2lt/100km. Based on our mix of driving for the week, that's entirely achievable in the real world.

Notwithstanding the 'launch' issue with the 2.0-litre, the Epica is a very easy car to drive. The manual gearshift is light and easy to use, but it's also somewhat symptomatic of the whole car's personality. There's very little feedback from the Epica to keep the driver appraised of what's happening. That comment applies to steering, handling, gear selection, driver's seat -- almost everything that could usually be relied on to provide input.

That's a bit of a shame, because the Epica's roadholding is not at all shabby, but the car never 'shrinks' around you as a more communicative car might. It's a safe handling car and most owners are unlikely to drive it beyond its dynamic limits. That's intended more as a credit to the Epica than an indictment of typical Epica drivers.

If driving is not your bag, the Epica will pleasantly surprise you with the very compliant, but well damped ride. Although it is very plush in the bump-absorbing role, there's no float or wallow to go with it.

There's nothing in the Epica CDX that would pose difficulties for anyone raised on a diet of Camry, Magna or Hyundai Sonata. As mentioned already, Epica is easy to drive for the most part. Instruments are very clear and legible for ease of use. Some controls, such as handbrake and indicator stalk feel a bit limp and cheap in the way they operate, but they will presumably prove fairly durable over years of use. The steering wheel feels of a diameter unnaturally large for a car with power steering.

Reverse parking sensors are an option for the Epica CDX when the 2.5-litre engine is specified, but not for the 2.0-litre. Frankly, they're well worth having, since parking is that much easier with them. That pretty much settles the 2.0 vs. 2.5-litre argument in favour of purchasing the 2.5-litre Epica. The field of vision to the rear of the Epica is not that crash-hot and the parking sensors certainly make life easier in that regard.

Speaking of making life easier, the seats in the Epica -- whilst not especially supportive or grippy -- are easy to vacate and the rear seat legroom is commendable, even by the standards of medium segment cars. The measurement for the Epica (960mm) narrowly shades the same dimension for the brand-new-to-market Ford Mondeo.

Seat trim is relatively prestigious for what is an inexpensive family car. It combined well with other trim materials and, overall, the interior presentation was both attractive and functional. Subdued use of chrome highlights balanced the Epica's 'practical' virtues.

As other cars in the segment, the Epica will re-secure itself after the driver has unlocked the car with the remote central locking, if a door is not opened within a set time. This is a 'fail-safe' to ensure that if the driver accidentally unlocks the car while placing keys in a pocket, the car will not remain unsecured for the rest of the day.

It's not a bad feature, but can be occasionally annoying if you happen to unlock the car and then find yourself waylaid in conversation with someone. Also, the range of the central locking transmitter is so great that the car could have easily resecured itself in the time it takes you to walk from the furthest limits of the transmitter's range to the car.

It's increasingly common, but worthy of praise anyway; the MP3 player input for the audio system is a very welcome addition for Gen X and Gen Y buyers who like to have their music with them at all times.

Talk about the sum of its parts... There you have Epica. It's a good size car, well built, refined and it remains a well-priced package, but what your money is getting you amounts to a car much like a TR Magna in character. That will be enough for those who like the TR Magna, but the rest of the world has moved on since 1991.

To comment on this article click