Road V Race V8 Shootout

[snappy]

Originally Posted by 4Vman

The cars were (from what i can decipher) measured against 5.. YES 5 different performance disciplines... 1 of those 5 being 1/4 mile.. only 1 car got a 14, the rest were quicker, from what i can see those times were pretty close to what all the mags seem to get for those respective models.
Notably (and reservedly given the accuracy of the details posted) that car recovered on the circuit.
More importantly in my mind were the rolling performance times and to a lesser degree the lap times.. because these represent what most of us experience driving day to day in the real world, where roads have corners.. but ill reserve judgment and opinion on those now till i READ the article.


DISCLAIMER:

Opinions expressed are based solely on the details posted as representative of the magazine article and may vary if and when those details are verified!!!

You really do need to read the article i just went and got mine back. The is a shed load of info there to read.
Have not re-read the whole article but after skimming all i found was track was slippery .

[snappy]

4vman what is it you want me to verify

[flappist]

Originally Posted by snappy84

You really do need to read the article i just went and got mine back. The is a shed load of info there to read.
Have not re-read the whole article but after skimming all i found was track was slippery .

And did this skimming include perusing the conclusions drawn with regard to one of the vehicles tested, the only one that demonstrates a flat non-linear torque curve, and exiting slippery wet corners?

[snappy]

Originally Posted by flappist

And did this skimming include perusing the conclusions drawn with regard to one of the vehicles tested, the only one that demonstrates a flat non-linear torque curve, and exiting slippery wet corners?

no either did the re-read .

[snappy]

What do want i allready said the f6 is a different class of vechicle. After reading the article again confirms the gt is quicker around the track .
The F6's suspension,tyres cant handle the power its got.

[greenfoam]

I think it's more a case of the F6 has no power off boost, see Bathurst results ^ the turbo Falcons are a total failure around the mountain, almost 10 seconds off the pace of even a VY Commodore and 4 seconds slower than the XR8/GT that's a pretty serious amount slower

[snappy]

Originally Posted by greenfoam

I think it's more a case of the F6 has no power off boost, see Bathurst results ^ the turbo Falcons are a total failure around the mountain, almost 10 seconds off the pace of even a VY Commodore and 4 seconds slower than the XR8/GT that's a pretty serious amount slower

It's strang by allrights it sound be the other way around. Only thing i can think besides things i mentioned earlier . Does the manual lose boost on the gear change or has this changed since the fg.

[4Vman]

Read Steven Richards comments....

[snappy]

Originally Posted by 4Vman

Read Steven Richards comments....

I read them .

yeah the f6 is slowed down by its power delivery. it to aggressive

[4Vman]

Originally Posted by snappy84

I read them .

yeah the f6 is slowed down by its power delivery. it to aggressive

Yes and no, not so much slowed down... he felt less confident about the way it delivered its power: traditional turbo nothing then a "rush"...
The GT's engine inspired i guess more "throttle confidence", which translated into quicker lap times.. which is what others seem to be seeing in production racing categories too.

[snappy]

Originally Posted by 4Vman

Yes and no, not so much slowed down... he felt less confident about the way it delivered its power: traditional turbo nothing then a "rush"...
The GT's engine inspired i guess more "throttle confidence", which translated into quicker lap times.. which is what others seem to be seeing in production racing categories too.

Yeah you are right , I remember reading that the gt was quicker some area's and the f6 quicker in others but alot was riding on the drivers ability to expliot the others weakness .

[Torquen]

Originally Posted by 4Vman

Geez... I think i'll just buy the mag.. apparently the track wasn't really wet and they used a GT not a GT-P and a GTS not a R8... might be better to actually read it then rely on 3rd hand posts...
Is accuracy too much to ask?!!

GT and GTS both used, track wasnt 'wet' from rain. Just the main strait from excess rubber left from a drag race meet.

[Scott]

^^ The track was "wet" from rubber?

[flappist]

Originally Posted by greenfoam

I think it's more a case of the F6 has no power off boost, see Bathurst results ^ the turbo Falcons are a total failure around the mountain, almost 10 seconds off the pace of even a VY Commodore and 4 seconds slower than the XR8/GT that's a pretty serious amount slower

Are you talking about the Barhurst 12 Hour race page linked from your first post? The one that shows the first 6 places taken by turbo charged 4 or 6 cylinder vehicles and the first three FORDs home were XR6 Turbos?

Did you actually read the race results or just the qualifying?

That is the qualifying that shows Mazda 3 MPS (2.3l turbo FWD), DE model 350Z (old low pwered model), BMW 130i (N/A 3 litre 6) as well as the 335s, Lancers, Commies, Exige and Wrx all doing quicker times.

[greenfoam]

I read both qualifing and race results have a look at the fastest laps times. Obviously the fastest cars are going to be light cars the falcon and commodore aren't and they are never going to be any good around a track. But barge for barge the turbo 6 was very slow (in qualifying and race pace) I don't know what happened to the xr8 during the race but it had a much faster lap time. The first VE finished 7th with a best lap of 2:33 (on almost the last lap) the first Falcon (xr6-t) was 19th with a best lap of 2:44. You can read into it what you want I guess but it looks to me that the real pace of the cars is pretty one sided

[4Vman]

Originally Posted by greenfoam

I read both qualifing and race results have a look at the fastest laps times. Obviously the fastest cars are going to be light cars the falcon and commodore aren't and they are never going to be any good around a track. But barge for barge the turbo 6 was very slow (in qualifying and race pace) I don't know what happened to the xr8 during the race but it had a much faster lap time. The first VE finished 7th with a best lap of 2:33 (on almost the last lap) the first Falcon (xr6-t) was 19th with a best lap of 2:44. You can read into it what you want I guess but it looks to me that the real pace of the cars is pretty one sided

I believe the XR8 was leading its class till it ran off and hit a wall.

[mcnews]

I guess it also depends on whether you buy your car to race at bathurst in endurance.... Or you buy a car to drive on the road with a good squirt through your favourite set of bends and a track day every year, or perhaps two.

Conspiracy theory - Steven Richards, sponsored by Ford, told to talk up the V8 to help its poor image... :

[Windsor220]

Originally Posted by greenfoam

I read both qualifing and race results have a look at the fastest laps times. Obviously the fastest cars are going to be light cars the falcon and commodore aren't and they are never going to be any good around a track. But barge for barge the turbo 6 was very slow (in qualifying and race pace) I don't know what happened to the xr8 during the race but it had a much faster lap time. The first VE finished 7th with a best lap of 2:33 (on almost the last lap) the first Falcon (xr6-t) was 19th with a best lap of 2:44. You can read into it what you want I guess but it looks to me that the real pace of the cars is pretty one sided

That doesnt include the Fords that didnt finish though. The XR8 was running 10th and leading its class.

The 12 hour isnt really a good indication of lap times for stock cars as they're lightly modified.

[4Vman]

Originally Posted by mcnews

I guess it also depends on whether you buy your car to race at bathurst in endurance.... Or you buy a car to drive on the road with a good squirt through your favourite set of bends and a track day every year, or perhaps two.

Conspiracy theory - Steven Richards, sponsored by Ford, told to talk up the V8 to help its poor image... :

Ford sell 6 cyls too... looking at sales split for FPV i would have thought if there was any conspicacy then he'd be talking up the I6T powered F6 to help its poor sales....
The only place the V8 powered cars seem to have 'image" issues is amongst some here on FF..

[mcnews]

I don't believe so, any racer worth his salt is always out to help his brand image, he would be a moron not to do so. I have dealt with both Steven and Jim when preparing PR guff for the motorcycle brands they are sponsored by. They are not stupid.

[4Vman]

Originally Posted by mcnews

I don't believe so, any racer worth his salt is always out to help his brand image, he would be a moron not to do so. I have dealt with both Steven and Jim when preparing PR guff for the motorcycle brands they are sponsored by. They are not stupid.

you can deny it all you like but its pretty obvious to most people where the consumer "image" or "acceptance" issues are... sales figures dont lie.

[mcnews]

And as Steven was doing it for a magazine that routinely bags the Ford V8 then he would have had no interest in talking it up.....?

[mcnews]

Would love to talk more on the subject but I have a 911 GT3 calling me to take it for a lap of the mountains, and that's where I'm heading!

[JC]

Originally Posted by snappy84

I think the one that came out looking the worst is the w-427 can any justify the best part of 100k .

It's the fastest of the "Street" cars, and only marginally slower than the purpose built race cars; what a failure! :

[4Vman]

Originally Posted by JC

It's the fastest of the "Street" cars, and only marginally slower than the purpose built race cars; what a failure! :

Yes.. that one had me perplexed as well....

[Scott]

Originally Posted by JC

It's the fastest of the "Street" cars, and only marginally slower than the purpose built race cars; what a failure! :

Well, to be fair to snappy, the W427 was as far ahead of the F6 as the F6 was ahead of the GT. None of these times are close to the purpose built racecars.

GT to F6 0.5,
F6 to W427 0.45,
W427 to V8SC 1.54

Not a lot of mumbo for an extra $100k.

[4Vman]

Originally Posted by GTP006

Well, to be fair to snappy, the W427 was as far ahead of the F6 as the F6 was ahead of the GT. None of these times are close to the purpose built racecars.

GT to F6 0.5,
F6 to W427 0.45,
W427 to V8SC 1.54

Not a lot of mumbo for an extra $100k.

Huh? that's if all you're looking for in a car is 1/4 times... thankfully most of us look a bit deeper.. what about the lap times and acceleration times? ...

[Scott]

Originally Posted by 4Vman

Huh? that's if all you're looking for in a car is 1/4 times... thankfully most of us look a bit deeper.. what about the lap times and acceleration times? ...

Ok, dig deeper then. The rolling times are very comparable until well in excess of the speed limit. The 0-100km & qtr times, which bear some relevance to what could be felt on the street are also quite comparable.

So the difference must be on a circuit then? Well, I'd say 235's v 275's would be a good starting point, would we be having this chat if Ford had spent another $1k (or even $100k ) on a set of wider tyres? Probably not, the F6 would have pulled up perhaps a second or two and we would be agreeing that there is very little difference in real world performance between a W427 & an F6.

This is like an XR8 v GT discussion but snappy is right, for $100k, you get SFA out of the W427 over an F6 - apart from a nice rub to the ego.

I can understand why people would buy it - 99% of whom would be for personal collection. I chose to buy my GT when I knew it was slower than the F6 because I simply wanted one.

But in reality, the W427 does not offer $100k worth of value over an F6 for any reason other than emotion. edit - and that's just fine.

[Nikked]

Whilst the W427 has some good points about the package, it comes across as a misfire, or someting to that effect. That is, for something branded a "supercar" and having a price that puts it in league with things like the M3 sedan...

And I would take the M3...

M3
0-60 mph (97 km/h): 4.5 - 4.7
1/4 mile: 12.7 @ 184.8 km/h


W-427
0-100km/h: 5.17 seconds
1/4 mile: 13.34 @180km/h

They are close but, and having said that it does take the fight up to the Euros...

But so does/can an F6....

[Bad Bird]

It's crazy they are only getting 13s out of them, when the Corvettes with the same motor are getting into the 11s.