Any VF performance figures out there yet?

[Chopped]

http://media.drive.com.au/cars/car-n...e-4682590.html

"Both cars returned impressive times, although our drivers felt that under better conditions, each would go even faster."

[Rob 351]

No offence, but conditions looked perfect to me! On a dragstrip, fine weather....unless it was 30 + degrees in august, what more could you want?
Is that the fastest we have seen from a new GTS now?

[stazza]

I'm sick of all these claims of the GTS being "one of the world's most powerful" sedans. Unless it is dynoed and proven then it's just another one of Holden's bull **** claims.

If holden put a 1000kw badge on a car everyone would believe it.

And he has no doubt that in better conditions they would run faster times. He's only saying that because they still can't replicate holden's bull **** claims.

[Sorted]

Originally Posted by Rob 18

No offence, but conditions looked perfect to me! On a dragstrip, fine weather....unless it was 30 + degrees in august, what more could you want?
?

This is True

[stazza]

I think it's a case of 'any excuse will do'.

[99AUXR]

Originally Posted by Tough Ford

People lets not forget its 5.0 v 6.2, if we had something similar (ie 5.8) it would be goodnight GTS. The Gts is certainly a great machine with all the gadgets and so on,and if I was in the red corner it would be the only car for me. Although a core SRT8 @ 58k Drive Away would be the only thing to sway me purely on value.

Would love to see FPV bring in a limited run of 5.8L Shelby engines just to post the fastest 1/4 time. Game over and close doors on 2016 .

..... But no going to happen.

[SantoAU]

Originally Posted by isthisabutton?

The VF has been seriously beat up by the ugly stick.

This. Have the displeasure of walking past a VF Calais in the carpark most days. I'd rather put my hard earned on a FGII G6E Turbo, and I'm no fan of the whale mouth grill on the MkII

[I6DOHC]

Interesting.

Considering DRIVE also got a 4.9s out of the XR6 Turbo down the drag strip (against the VF)...and with them going out the door for $39480 atm....my hard earned would be on the XR6 turbo every time.

Horses for courses though, if you want a lairy-hairy v8, then good for you. If I was that way inclined it'd be GT RSpec for sure.

[flooded one]

Interestingly this link I posted was for the manual and they also the GT-R spec could go faster with a auto. further more there was wheel spin whilst changing from 1st to 2nd, again when changing into 3rd and a slight chirp whilst changing into 4th. that means it can go faster too!!! http://motoring.ninemsn.com.au/cars/...-fpv-gt-r-spec

[Bossxr8]

Originally Posted by stazza

I'm sick of all these claims of the GTS being "one of the world's most powerful" sedans. Unless it is dynoed and proven then it's just another one of Holden's bull **** claims.

If holden put a 1000kw badge on a car everyone would believe it.

And he has no doubt that in better conditions they would run faster times. He's only saying that because they still can't replicate holden's bull **** claims.

Over the past 10 years I have never, ever seen anyone run a time as quick as HSV's claims, on any model they have produced.

I remember when the GTS300 was out and HSV offered any journo who could match or beat their claimed acceleration figures a bottle of Grange. I'll bet it's still sitting at HSV headquarters cause no one could get near it.

HSV must test downhill and with a tailwind, cause their claimed times are an absolute joke.

[flooded one]

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

Over the past 10 years I have never, ever seen anyone run a time as quick as HSV's claims, on any model they have produced.

I remember when the GTS300 was out and HSV offered any journo who could match or beat their claimed acceleration figures a bottle of Grange. I'll bet it's still sitting at HSV headquarters cause no one could get near it.

HSV must test downhill and with a tailwind, cause their claimed times are an absolute joke.

very true. I remember when all the talk about the GTS when it was first revelled it would have the LSA motor. all the ******** about it being able to do 0-100km/h "comfortably" in less then 4.5 seconds. HSV's claim of 4.4sec isn't exactly comfortably. HSV and Holden have a history of claiming better then what it actually is

[Rob 351]

Originally Posted by wildrider

Interestingly this link I posted was for the manual and they also the GT-R spec could go faster with a auto. further more there was wheel spin whilst changing from 1st to 2nd, again when changing into 3rd and a slight chirp whilst changing into 4th. that means it can go faster too!!! http://motoring.ninemsn.com.au/cars/...-fpv-gt-r-spec

That is a brilliant read. 4.52 with a manual gearbox in the FPV. I love my manual boxs but it would have been great if they tested the ZF in the FPV on the same day & in the same conditions. Would have easily done a 4.4 to 100 & even maybe a high 4.3.
What a great engine the 5.0 sc is eh!!

[flooded one]

Originally Posted by Rob 18

That is a brilliant read. 4.52 with a manual gearbox in the FPV. I love my manual boxs but it would have been great if they tested the ZF in the FPV on the same day & in the same conditions. Would have easily done a 4.4 to 100 & even maybe a high 4.3.
What a great engine the 5.0 sc is eh!!

I want one!! lol

[Bossxr8]

No journo actually ran an auto R spec down the strip, so we don't have any figures to go by, but FPV reckoned it would potentially run a quicker time than the manual would. They claimed 4.5 0-100 for the manual.

[Sorted]

So there we have it

FPV GT Rspec 335kw IS faster than a HSV GTS 430kw

[Bossxr8]

Until it's proven otherwise. Facts are facts, unsubstantiated claims mean nothing.

[Blue Roo]

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

Until it's proven otherwise. Facts are facts, unsubstantiated claims mean nothing.

Agreed!

[stazza]

Cue the Holden whingers saying the R-Spec doesn't have park assist or an electronic hand brake so the GTS is a far superior car.

But not everyone cares about that kind of materialistic nonsense. Some of us just want to go fast. And thats what the R-Spec does. Why else would someone buy an SC V8?

[1TUFFUTE]

Well you guys have made my day....im sick of standing up for a superior ford or Fpv product based on facts and figures.......and just getting swamped with negative attitudes(with no facts).
To add to this amazing drama....I flicked through the latest GTS test in wheels mag(i think)......and guess what......over 800 Kim's or something they said they had this amazing blistering mind blowing fastest euro flogging Sedan for.......including Phillip island......and guess what........Still NO TIMES. I swear hsv is paying them all off till its in customers hands because they know its not a FPV killer(read into that what you will) but thats how ill word it.
Sounds ridiculous hey.

And to santoau......I have a series 1 g6et and my first encounter with an Ssv vf ended with him in my rear view mirror......well a car length at least

[Chopped]

These days it is very easy to record decent footage and upload videos, anyone can do it.
HSV should post a vid of the GTS ACTUALLY doing their claimed 4.4 0-100 time & 12.3 1/4 mile. Otherwise it looking hard to believe.

[stazza]

You don't believe their blatantly inaccurate power and performance claims, but you'd believe a video they released?

Why would they bother when the journo's do it for them anyway?

I wouldn't trust a 1/4, 0-100 video they released.

[Chopped]

^ good point. It would need to be unedited showing the full run from start to finish.

[Wretched]

PCOTY will be interesting. A range of performance cars tested in the same conditions and on the same tracks.
Circuit one will be interesting

[smoo]

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

Over the past 10 years I have never, ever seen anyone run a time as quick as HSV's claims, on any model they have produced.

I think Motor ran a GTO or GTS auto coupe 0-100 in 4.9 seconds. Don't know how many attempts that took, but you'd think with all the advances the VF GTS has it would shave .5 secs off.

[Bent8]

HSV will need to look at improving rear grip before their halo car will get under 4.5sec.

The Camaro ZL1 has 305 section tyres vs the 275's on the GTS.

The car has more than enough power to run low 12's........ these days, it's grip that wins the race.

[Cuyper]

I saw a VF in the flesh for the first time today. A white SS-V, I thought it looked pretty good from the front, better than a VE, pretty good from the side.... but oh man it's butt ugly from behind. I thought it looked pretty good in the official pics too but it's just a design failure if I ever saw one from behind. Almost worse than the AU was on release (got to Admit the AU looks better than a VT now.. (oddly))

[Cuyper]

Originally Posted by smoo

I think Motor ran a GTO or GTS auto coupe 0-100 in 4.9 seconds. Don't know how many attempts that took, but you'd think with all the advances the VF GTS has it would shave .5 secs off.

Almost anything can run a 5.5, there's a really large amount of diminishing returns trying to get a car to go any faster than 5.0 on real roads. It's all about traction and weight, very little to do with power when you are only going to 100km/h. One of the most effective street cars I ever saw was a mild 355 in a VN wagon, which would consistently run high 4's on the street. Only because everything was just right, not too much power, good torque, good traction not so much weight etc. Because that car would do the same time over and over again on average roads, not many cars on the road are as "real world quick"

[1TUFFUTE]

Originally Posted by Cuyper

Almost anything can run a 5.5, there's a really large amount of diminishing returns trying to get a car to go any faster than 5.0 on real roads. It's all about traction and weight, very little to do with power when you are only going to 100km/h. One of the most effective street cars I ever saw was a mild 355 in a VN wagon, which would consistently run high 4's on the street. Only because everything was just right, not too much power, good torque, good traction not so much weight etc. Because that car would do the same time over and over again on average roads, not many cars on the road are as "real world quick"

Yeah but it's not the "complete" package

[jimmyxr6t04]

Geez you guys are a funny bunch... GTS hasn't even been delivered yet. Once it's delivered, and proper tests have been done, then we'll all see.

It's more than just auto parking and blind spot etc, it has a heap of strengthened parts, extra cooling, massive brakes, fantastic suspension, lots of R&D went into this car.

There's a doco on Speed (foxtel) tonight at 7:30 about the GTS build, i'll be watching it with interest.

I'm 99% sure my next car is going to be a GT (i've always wanted one, well before this new GTS was mentioned), but i'm not so biased and worried about 0-100 times that i won't consider the GTS. The main reason i'm opting for the GT is price. If the GTS was closer to 80k, i'd have some more serious decisions to make!

How will all you guys react if the GTS does manage a 4.4, or even faster? Let alone if it flogs our beloved GT around a track? I'm sure as hell not going to get as defensive as some of you lot, and hell i'll probably own one in the next few months!

At the end of the day, who cares if it does exactly the same time as the R-Spec, or a tad slower, it's still a fantastic package.

And, as for facts... It is currently the most powerful. FPV being understated or not, that's FPV's fault. Even if FPV didn't understate, the GT still isn't 430kw but probably 375kw. I'm tipping the GTS to nudge 340-350rwkw on the dyno, but time will tell.

[40RDT]

Originally Posted by stazza

Cue the Holden whingers saying the R-Spec doesn't have park assist or an electronic hand brake so the GTS is a far superior car.

But not everyone cares about that kind of materialistic nonsense. Some of us just want to go fast. And thats what the R-Spec does. Why else would someone buy an SC V8?

No the GTS is a superior car due to strenghtened torque vectoring diff, massive brakes, better suspension, better seats etc not its park assist or electronic handbrake.

Not saying the R Spec is a bad car but all you have to do is look at the spec sheet to know which car is superior