Confusion over VF SS 0-100 times

[2242100]

Originally Posted by muso

I often wonder if some of these Holden 'press cars' are 'prepared' before the road test and perhaps have a more aggressive tune in them. The SS models do seem to have a lot of variation in their 0-100 and 0-400m times when compared with the FG Turbo test cars that seem to produce consistent numbers usually 5.1 or lower 0-100 and low 13 0-400m.

When comparing atmo engines to Turbo ones I would have always thought the atmo would be more consistent than the Turbo.

Perhaps some manufacturers pick their best cars at a new model launch, but some of the other cars in the press test fleet may not be as good.

I've got to say though, that I find the situation particularly confusing with FG Turbo's, because I use the same very accurate timing gear that MOTOR Magazine uses and my test data confirms that my standard (untuned) car is quite a bit faster than the Press test cars. I don't believe that I've got a special car, I've driven a couple of others and they felt the same and my test gear was used on the last car which had virtually identical pace. Also a dealer service manager told me that they all perform just like mine.
I'm thinking that magazine road testers may have been giving the test cars a very hard time immediately before clocking the acceleration runs. That could likely prevent the Overboost function from working and would explain the discrepancies.
As I mentioned in an earlier post, it seems that a standard Turbo (in Overboost mode) is pretty equal to an F6. Below is an example. On the left is data from the fastest zero to 110 kph Auto F6 time that I've seen (a MOTOR Magazine test on a very high grip Western Sydnery Dragway surface) and on the right is a run that my car managed with the Auto locked in 2nd gear. Both zero to 60 times are fairly close in spite of my car being in 2nd but you can't read too much into that, because I stalled the trans up about 500 rpm higher than MOTOR. What is interesting though, is the times from 60 on because the F6 would also have to be in 2nd soon after 60.

F6...........2.35sec from 60 to 100 ( up to approx 5500 rpm).
My car.....2.26sec from 60 to 100.

F6...........0.66sec from 100 to 110 (approx 5500 to 6000 rpm)
My car.....0.68sec from 100 to 110kph.

FG F6 Turbo Auto Ute...............My standard untuned FG Turbo locked in 2nd.
0-10kph..0.45sec.....................0.45sec
0-20.......0.92sec.....................0.88sec
0-30.......1.38sec.....................1.28sec
0-40.......1.81sec.....................1.68sec
0-50.......2.17sec.....................2.14sec
0-60.......2.57sec.....................2.64sec
0-70.......3.11sec.....................3.18sec
0-80.......3.72sec.....................3.74sec
0-90.......4.32sec.....................4.31sec
0-100.....4.92sec......................4.90sec...... .........distance 72.97 metres
0-110.....5.58sec......................5.58sec
When it comes to every day real world driving conditions, I think that most Standard FG Turbo owners have cars that are way further up in the performance pecking order than they realise.

[2242100]

Originally Posted by muso

Sorry it was 4.97 secs 2 People on board, 3/4 tank or fuel 2009 caradvice.com.au

https://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&r...2BaaYZSpNwUmUg

Thanks for that I had no idea that anyone other than Wheels were testing 2 up and that car did better than the others considering the load. Unfortunately they apparently didn't give a 0 to 60 time. With that we would be able to compare rolling times where wheelspin isn't a problem.
My own car managed 2.32 to 60 and a 4.66 to 100 with an equal load but as I indicated in my post of a few minutes ago, I think they all have similar pace to mine as long as the Overboost feature is working.

[Dave R]

Originally Posted by shaness8

Why

Cos it's the same 260kw motor.

I suggest you go to your local drag meeting and see for yourself what they can do.

Misinformed comment.

Same motor, different car. New PCM tune, improved front aero, less body weight, no hydraulic power steering pump, it's a faster car full stop. That was my video a couple of pages back that you have called into question. Car was on flat road (slightly up hill if anything) and running E85. No tricks.

When it comes to the difference in test times between SS Commodores, I'd say it's something to do with the fuel used, they go noticeably better on the 105 octane ethanol. As I said a few months back, I suspect Drive's test SS that ran 13.1 was drinking E85.

[Bossxr8]

The VF may be one or 2 tenths quicker than the VE, but it will still not get close to an XRT.

The VE was a flat 6? car while the XRT is a low to flat 5.

[muso]

The midrange torque and boost comes on like a fighter jet making the Turbo Fords difficult to match

[40RDT]

Here are a few more 0-100 times. The manual SS seems on par with 6T but the auto is much slower

http://youtu.be/zUQK58XyGZU

http://youtu.be/imN5UFLwJuU

http://youtu.be/dcUf2Abtjk8

http://youtu.be/DeIlQC3b4c4

[muso]

The manual VF SS are pretty impressive and pretty much neck to neck with the Auto FG Turbo, to give credit where it is due....good work Holden

[BHDOGS]

To give credit where is dues there newer and slower good work ford.

[shaness8]

[QUOTE=johnydep;5073042]I suggest you get all the facts before diving in.

Read all the posts, you might learn a thing or two.

I've done the run, and I enjoy reading the posts [/QUO


Take your car to the drag strip if you want a accurate time.

[muso]

With the electric power steer and new tune it still has me confused how the engine still has the same power....perhaps it has more but it is quoted as having the same 260 kw as the VE.....GMH want to keep an appreciable gap in power outputs between SS and HSV......maybe?
It would be interesting to see a dyno run comparison between stock VE SS and VF SS both auto's.

My car is 270 rwkw's....if I converted it to electric power steering with less drag on the engine I'd expect that figure to rise somewhat, people who install under drive pulley set ups usually note some gain in power at the dyno.

[Bossxr8]

EPAS just conserves power the engine makes, not add to it. And it's only good for a saving of 3 or 4 kw. So in theory the VF may have maybe a couple more kw's at the wheels and 40kg less weight, so that can not be worth anymore than a tenth or 2 over VE. Anyone who suddenly thinks that's going to make the VF a rocket is kidding themselves.

[lucas2]

Originally Posted by muso

With the electric power steer and new tune it still has me confused how the engine still has the same power....perhaps it has more but it is quoted as having the same 260 kw as the VE.....GMH want to keep an appreciable gap in power outputs between SS and HSV......maybe?
It would be interesting to see a dyno run comparison between stock VE SS and VF SS both auto's.

My car is 270 rwkw's....if I converted it to electric power steering with less drag on the engine I'd expect that figure to rise somewhat, people who install under drive pulley set ups usually note some gain in power at the dyno.

Engine itself probably produces the same power, but there is less loss going from the engine to the wheels now, and with the slightly reduced weight, it can only help. Like how people would turn their A/C off before a race, to "conserve power".

[Professor Farnsworth]

you can be thankful the Falcon doesn't have EPAS - it's horrible. You can get good and bad EPAS but even the best of it is absolute rubbish compared with the feel of a hydraulic setup in my opinion. Our Rio has it, Dad's Focus has it, pretty much everything does now and i can't stand it.

[Franco Cozzo]

^ I like it, my Fiesta has it and its great, you can turn the wheel with your little finger easily.

[Professor Farnsworth]

Yeh but there is no feel or proper communication with the road surface in comparison

[muso]

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

EPAS just conserves power the engine makes, not add to it. And it's only good for a saving of 3 or 4 kw. So in theory the VF may have maybe a couple more kw's at the wheels and 40kg less weight, so that can not be worth anymore than a tenth or 2 over VE. Anyone who suddenly thinks that's going to make the VF a rocket is kidding themselves.

I'm referring to power increase at the rear wheels by taking load off the engine with EPAS

[vztrt]

Originally Posted by Professor Farnsworth

you can be thankful the Falcon doesn't have EPAS - it's horrible. You can get good and bad EPAS but even the best of it is absolute rubbish compared with the feel of a hydraulic setup in my opinion. Our Rio has it, Dad's Focus has it, pretty much everything does now and i can't stand it.

EPAS is there to mainly save fuel, beside low speed parking there isn't really a benefit. Like you I prefer the hydraulic system.

[duaned]

Originally Posted by Professor Farnsworth

Yeh but there is no feel or proper communication with the road surface in comparison

Have you driven a VF sports model Commodore to come to that conclusion? You may be a little surprised.

[Professor Farnsworth]

Originally Posted by duaned

Have you driven a VF sports model Commodore to come to that conclusion? You may be a little surprised.

i've driven the VF SS, Rio, Focus (several variants), Fiesta, Cruze SRi 1.6T, Veloster Turbo, Suzuki Swift, Suzuki SX4 etc etc - as far as steering feel goes i dislike them all. The best ones would probably be either the Focus or the Swift in my opinion. The Cruze at least was very light across the board but that's not exactly a benefit when it comes to feel of the road.

Also drove the Polo GTi which has a hybrid electro-hydraulic system and while the feel was better, it was too heavily weighted for its size - heavier than the FG by quite a bit at low speed.

[muso]

Could it be that the gap has narrowed between SS and atmo HSV's?

There is very little between FG F6 and XR6T/G6ET in acceleration........it is a known fact that some stock G6ET's have recorded 12.8 secs at the strip....as far as I know a stock FG F6 isn't any quicker than that.

[Professor Farnsworth]

the answer is: we're all very lucky

[40RDT]

Originally Posted by muso

Could it be that the gap has narrowed between SS and atmo HSV's?

There is very little between FG F6 and XR6T/G6ET in acceleration........it is a known fact that some stock G6ET's have recorded 12.8 secs at the strip....as far as I know a stock FG F6 isn't any quicker than that.

Im pretty sure there is a stock FG F6 on here that has run a 12.3 at the strip

[muso]

Originally Posted by 40RDT

Im pretty sure there is a stock FG F6 on here that has run a 12.3 at the strip

Fair enough

12.3 from a big heavy family sedan
as the Professor said....we are indeed very lucky and entirely Australian made

[muso]

I still think that the G6ET is the bargain of the 21st century in the used car market anyway

[BHDOGS]

if it had an lsd as standard id agree with u

[muso]

Originally Posted by BHDOGS

if it had an lsd as standard id agree with u

I agree, if it had standard LSD it would be even better but the reverse camera, premium sound with full size colour screen and upmarket trim out weighs the lack of LSD set back over an XR6T in my opinion.

While it is a bummer LSD can be installed after market, I'd love an FG XR6T with the G6ET interior in cashmere but that's not possible and I don't like the dark interior colours of the XR50th anniversary model.

[Professor Farnsworth]

XR6T has standard reverse camera since the mk2.5 update, LSD, 8" touch screen. My system sounds better than premo with JL upgrade, and I have leather. Not all that much difference in kit now.

[muso]

Getting a bit off topic but If the XR50th anniversary had come out with a choice of a lighter leather interior or at least not all black it would have been the best car out of all of them. Why Ford Australia keep shooting themselves in the foot has me confused....not everybody likes...dark interiors!
Blueprint and Dash Green the most popular colours.....what's Ford do....discontinue them :(

I hope the 2014 Falcon has all the tech the VF has, and a completely new interior like the VF has.

[Professor Farnsworth]

Blueprint? That went 10 years ago!

[muso]

Originally Posted by Professor Farnsworth

Blueprint? That went 10 years ago!

Yes it was a BA colour and still the nicest blue in my opinion