User Tag List

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 91

Thread: FPV GT to hit 0-100 in 4.9 seconds

  1. #61
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    GoldCoast
    Posts
    302

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by luke 3mps View Post
    where not talking about the track!! where talking about driving on roads with other drivers and speed limits. falcons are boring on the road they just dont excite me ( if i wanted to hit the track every weekend i would have a dedicated track car)
    Where or we're ?
    08 VW GTI PIRELLI DSG - 1 OF 400
    S3 HEART WITH 229 kw OF APR GOODNESS


    SOLD - 06 MPS3 / CPE CAI / CPE HKS BOV / CPE HV2 BELLMOUTH DUMP & METALLIC CAT / CPE MOUNT / COBB SUSPENSION / DBA SLOTTED ROTORS C/W HAWKS PADS

  2. #62
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    9,459

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nirvandan View Post
    The topic was about the new GT doing 1-100 under the 5s mark, not about wether it was fun or not for Luke 3mps.

    Under 5s for a car of that size and weight is impressive, period.
    thanks for this
    i dont care so much about the whole interior etc, i will never own a car like this... but i prefer fords to holden so im just happy that they finally have something to compete at least in terms of performance
    and the 4.9 seconds 0-100 time is enough to scare the performance sedans/grand tourers from europe... which whilst the local cars cost half the price, performance wise they are competitive, i like to keep my money local, so im glad to see our local cars doing so well
    Newbie FAQ My Build Thread
    From stock, to GT3071, to substantially less modded, many lessons learned!
    3" HTP | 100 Cel DP | Autotech HPFP | AP V3 - Self Tuned on E20 | JBR RSB | CPE S2 REM | JBR Shifter Bushings

  3. #63

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bd581 View Post
    Fords overstated power claims is FACT, not opinion.
    Holden use SAE measurement, as does the majority of manufactures, ford use DIN. If ford was to use SAE they would get a lower number, so if Holden was to use SAE they would be higher.
    When tested by wheels or motor magazine (whichever it was) Holden showed a much smaller percentage difference in power claims to actual recorded power than the fords did.

    Also read what kmh (mal) wrote about chassie dynos. He is 100% correct. They are useless for comparing cars. So I couldn't care less if somebody claims they got 250kw at the wheels in a stock car. There is so many variables, that statement is pointless. And if you want to argue that if it made 250kw then add 15% for drivetrain loss. That's also rubbish. That's a myth. Again, proven by SAE (society of automotive engineers)
    The rest of what you say is correct.

    I've driven without exageration hundreds of falcons and commodores.
    The holdens were mostly very consistent. Build quality, performance between identical models were much the same.
    The fords were all over the place, some were brilliant, some were absolute rubbish.
    Although you do get some freak motorcars on occasions. Dad and my brother will back me on this, my old stock manual 3ltr VL was such a car. So much quicker than any other VL I've driven, even some turbos.

    One thing that gets to me though, people get all worked up over different cars, which is fine, if we all liked the same car it will be boring. But why is it so often than a cars quality or desirability is based purely on it's performance?
    There is so much more than that.
    Can you please tell me which magazine this was because I recall reading that article but my memory tells me the result was actually the other way around.

    If comparing chassis dyno results is pointless, does that then make that magazine article pointless?

    Another little tid bit when talking about quality. The 2 Mazda's I have owned (04 Mazda 3 and 2010 Mazda 6) have had more problems than the 2 Falcons I have owned (1 BA and 1 BF). Actually the M3 had more problems than both Falcons combined and had many rattles when we sold it.

    It is also interesting to note that most people in this thread have been talking about the 5.4L FPV and not really talking about the new supercharged 5.0. I for one will be looking forward to the first reviews comparing them to the HSV's. I think there will be a new king in town.
    Last edited by naddis01; 10-10-2010 at 08:34 PM.

  4. #64
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Bathurst
    Age
    42
    Posts
    1,930

    Default

    Was wheels or motor.
    I'm positive that it was the fords down on power.

    Can't compare chassis dynos unless they are tested on the same dyno, same operator and as close to same weather conditions as possible.
    As was done in the said test


    On the topic of the opinion that ford understates their power on the F6 because they are quicker than the GT.
    There is more to performance than peak power.
    The F6 produces more torque, weighs less, and has a much broader power band than the very peaky 5.4 boss V8
    That's why they are faster.
    And when you already have 300+kw, 7kw difference is bugger all. Not a big percentage.


    On the actual topic again.
    I think that the new motor will be a huge step forward, more power,more torque, less weight, and more fuel efficient. There is no downside to this engine.
    I don't think HSV/Holden will be too worried though.
    Boss of HSV has said that they don't try to compete with Ford/fpv because they realize that the majority of their potential customers are ford fans, or Holden fans. Very few sit on the fence or will jump ship. The majority of HSV's new customers come from European car owners.
    Besides, Holden and HSV will gladly direct you walkinshaw performances way if you really feel the need for more power and that supercharger whine!

  5. #65

    Default

    Been doing a little research to compare track times.

    Ford BA MKII GT-P Bog Stock Standard, only changed brake fluid, 1:12.6 around wakefield.

    Australian Ford Forums - Wakefield track day. Times?

    Mazda 3MPS Standard aside from brake pad and fluid upgrade, 1:14.8, same track.

    http://www.ozmpsclub.com/forum/track...wakefield.html

    Wakefield is known to be a track that requires a good handling car.

  6. #66
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Brisbane-North-City
    Posts
    5,310

    Default

    Not so bad for a car said to be around corners

  7. #67
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    NSW
    Age
    47
    Posts
    789

    Default

    Maybe its not so BOOOOOOOOOORING now..........

  8. #68

    Default

    To me.. yup.

  9. #69
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    hunter valley
    Posts
    6,403

    Default

    Good luck to ford.....
    Last edited by RedDjinn; 12-10-2010 at 05:17 PM.

  10. #70
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Warranwood, Victoria
    Age
    35
    Posts
    1,546

    Default

    @ walkishaw, HSV/Holden shouldnt have endorsed them so much cause now the engineers at HSV have been told 325kw is the limit on power they should put out (on a badge) cause next step is too close to walkishaw and/or unreliable for the daily driving.

  11. #71

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bd581 View Post
    Fords overstated power claims is FACT, not opinion.
    Holden use SAE measurement, as does the majority of manufactures, ford use DIN. If ford was to use SAE they would get a lower number, so if Holden was to use SAE they would be higher.
    When tested by wheels or motor magazine (whichever it was) Holden showed a much smaller percentage difference in power claims to actual recorded power than the fords did.
    Still say it is FACT?

    June Wheels magazine 2008...


  12. #72

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bd581 View Post
    Was wheels or motor.
    I'm positive that it was the fords down on power.
    Seems you may have rejected reality, and substituted it with your own.

  13. #73
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Bathurst
    Age
    42
    Posts
    1,930

    Default

    Nope, still stand by my claim, didn't see that article.
    One I remember was before that.
    And if you note, I said that the story had SS and XR8s included, so obviously it was a different review.
    They were BF's in the story I remember.

    I know that dads old VX SS would give my bosses BF GT boss 302 a good run for it's money, and even he admits my mps is as quick
    He

  14. #74
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Coorparoo, Brisbane
    Age
    43
    Posts
    3,771

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bd581 View Post
    Nope, still stand by my claim, didn't see that article.
    One I remember was before that.
    So even though the article above indicates that the FPV out performs the HSV, you still don't buy it?

    All's I can say, is bring on the Coyote Supercharged V8 in the new GT!
    2015 Audi S3 | MTX | Sedan | Sepang Blue | Sunroof | SPP1 | Assistance Package | BW - Week 17 | Delivery June/July '15... Hopefully...

    Help support OzMPSClub - Become a VIP Member today! - Click here for more details...

  15. #75
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    9,459

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bd581 View Post
    Nope, still stand by my claim, didn't see that article.
    One I remember was before that.
    And if you note, I said that the story had SS and XR8s included, so obviously it was a different review.
    They were BF's in the story I remember.

    I know that dads old VX SS would give my bosses BF GT boss 302 a good run for it's money, and even he admits my mps is as quick
    He
    i remember that article... was motor mag a few years ago
    and can agree with what is said here, the V8 fords were down on power, the turbo 6's up, and the HSV's were about right... well, should clarrify, the V8's lost more power from flywheel -> wheels, the HSV/holden's were in the middle, and the turbo 6's had the least % loss from quoted flywheel -> wheels
    Last edited by SarcasticOne; 13-10-2010 at 09:04 AM.
    Newbie FAQ My Build Thread
    From stock, to GT3071, to substantially less modded, many lessons learned!
    3" HTP | 100 Cel DP | Autotech HPFP | AP V3 - Self Tuned on E20 | JBR RSB | CPE S2 REM | JBR Shifter Bushings

  16. #76

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bd581 View Post
    Nope, still stand by my claim, didn't see that article.
    One I remember was before that.
    And if you note, I said that the story had SS and XR8s included, so obviously it was a different review.
    They were BF's in the story I remember.

    I know that dads old VX SS would give my bosses BF GT boss 302 a good run for it's money, and even he admits my mps is as quick
    He
    I can't find the one you mention but how about this one with an FG XR8 and a VE SS? How far back do we need to go before we find a chart that has the Holden in front? Since this thread is actually about the upcoming supercharged 5.0, then I would have thought current models were more applicable to the discussion.

    V8 Shootout – Ford Falcon XR8 vs Holden Commodore SS | Car Advice | Reviews

    From the video:

    SS - 204.5rwkw (252.4fwkw)
    XR8 - 235.0rwkw (288.8fwkw)

    From those results it still looks like the Ford is in front with less loss from quoted power.
    Last edited by naddis01; 13-10-2010 at 10:18 AM.

  17. #77
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    9,459

    Default

    it was the motor all aussie shoot out from memory...
    it has all the performance models from ford/holden/fpv/hsv, think it was BA vs VZ tho...

  18. #78
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Bathurst
    Age
    42
    Posts
    1,930

    Default

    We are both right and both wrong. Talking about two different reviews.
    So we'll leave it at that I think.

    Doesn't matter anyway, in the majority of tests (track and road) the HSV's come out on top (gt vs gts)
    And what's the big deal about peak power?
    It's rarely used
    There is much more to a car than that. And I don't think you can argue that ford isn't behind Holden most other factors.
    The 1 thing that has always bugged me with falcons is the driving position. I absolutely hate it. So much so, I wouldn't buy one because of it.

  19. #79
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Perth, WA
    Posts
    4,540

    Default

    Just to annoy and break things up a bit...


  20. #80

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bd581 View Post
    We are both right and both wrong. Talking about two different reviews.
    So we'll leave it at that I think.

    Doesn't matter anyway, in the majority of tests (track and road) the HSV's come out on top (gt vs gts)
    And what's the big deal about peak power?
    It's rarely used
    There is much more to a car than that. And I don't think you can argue that ford isn't behind Holden most other factors.
    The 1 thing that has always bugged me with falcons is the driving position. I absolutely hate it. So much so, I wouldn't buy one because of it.
    Yes that is fine but I was simply replying to you saying that it was FACT (your exclaimation) that Ford overstate their power figures when it was clearly not fact but opinion. It had nothing to do with the shortcomings, factual or otherwise, of either brand.

    I do agree with you however that there is more to a car than peak power and one of those things is power/torque spread which is where forced induction has it all over NA.

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •