Confusion over VF SS 0-100 times

[muso]

I think most people have seen the drag strip comparison between a VF SS A6 and an FG XR6 Turbo A6 and they were pretty much line ball in spite of the fact that VE SS was usually quite far behind the FG Turbo. I can't see how a 40 kg weight reduction and wider rear tyres could make so much difference with no extra engine power from VE to VF (still 260 kw) Technically the FG Turbo should have been quicker than the VF SS.

Then just today I read a motor magazine comparing Golf GTI, VF SSV and can't remember what the third car was but the VF SSV 0-100 km time was 6.1 secs 0-400 m time was 14.2 (about the same as an original stock BA/BF XR6 Turbo)

The SSV was a manual so maybe there were traction issues but it is still confusing. I was so impressed when I saw that a stock auto VF SS could now match a stock FG Turbo in a straight line that I was almost ready to jump ship and go for a VF SS instead of a G6ET :( Of course a tune and injector change for the FG Turbo would change the game considerably

[johnydep]

There are many more changes than just weight reduction. The front & rear suspension has been modified, the trans has been recalibrate and so has the ESC. Take off feel between the VE and VF are very different.

I also read on this forum that the mags do 0-100 km/h runs in D, half tank etc. Maybe they're not pushing them hard enough. Go on You tube, there are a couple of videos with times.

Here is a list of factory changes http://www.gminsidenews.com/forums/f...etails-118655/

[Bossxr8]

40 kg lighter and what not, a VF SS will still not come close to a FG XRT.

[chris0]

^^^ This
You should be lineballing (I was going to say hosing) e series hsv's with a g6et

[flooded one]

Plenty of FG XR6 turbos getting a round with no modifications and beatting bog stock VF SS. Seen two idiots in those to cars a few hours ago drag race along a major road here with the XR6 turbo ahead after 200 odd metres

[muso]

Originally Posted by johnydep

There are many more changes than just weight reduction. The front & rear suspension has been modified, the trans has been recalibrate and so has the ESC. Take off feel between the VE and VF are very different.

I also read on this forum that the mags do 0-100 km/h runs in D, half tank etc. Maybe they're not pushing them hard enough. Go on You tube, there are a couple of videos with times.

Here is a list of factory changes http://www.gminsidenews.com/forums/f...etails-118655/

Cheers johnydep They certainly have made a lot of changes in several areas which would assist launch and acceleration.
If they did a best out of three runs I'd still put my money on the FG Turbo and as I said before with even minimal mods to the FG it would be curtains for the SS, but there is some impressive 0-100 acceleration times for the VF SS on youtube which looks close.......ish to the Ford Turbo.

[muso]

Originally Posted by chris0

^^^ This
You should be lineballing (I was going to say hosing) e series hsv's with a g6et

That's pretty much what I was thinking, it is pretty well fact that there are stock G6ET's which are more than a match for even the HSV stuff (non supercharged that is)

[johnydep]

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

40 kg lighter and what not, a VF SS will still not come close to a FG XRT.

Why not? Power & torque are not the same but are similar. There are other factors to take into account - gear ratio, tyres, engine revs, turbo lag, etc.

Your not suggesting a conspiracy, are you? http://www.drive.com.au/motor-news/a...701-2p79b.html

[johnydep]

Originally Posted by muso

Cheers johnydep They certainly have made a lot of changes in several areas which would assist launch and acceleration.
If they did a best out of three runs I'd still put my money on the FG Turbo and as I said before with even minimal mods to the FG it would be curtains for the SS, but there is some impressive 0-100 acceleration times for the VF SS on youtube which looks close.......ish to the Ford Turbo.

Forgot to mention the electric power steering; big difference between the VE & VF, lessening the load on the engine and allowing the engine to rev quicker off the line.

The FG turbo is an amazing power house, but what is "minimal mods" and how much?

Found this last night http://www.drive.com.au/motor-news/a...701-2p79b.html I had only seen their previous run where they had traction issues and running on standard ULP.

[AndyXR6T]

There are a few VF SS owners here now, maybe they can shed some light on this (Adrenaline, duaned). In saying that I'm sure they are very content with the overall package the VF offers over the FG let alone the straight line numbers

[Rodge]

Test drove a VF SSV Redline. Loved the package but not enough grunt.

[XtRmn8]

0-100 time mean very little when comparing cars. Yes the FG XR6T is may be quicker in a straight line, but there is a lot more to it then just that.

Not many folk hand over $40k+ purely just based on 0-100 times. Sales figures speak for this.

[steve.zissou]

could some one check the tune in that SS

[muso]

Yes the Vf SS is impressive, what about fuel consumption compared to the FG XR6T? (I know it's a V8 and fuel economy shouldn't really matter)

[johnydep]

Originally Posted by muso

Yes the Vf SS is impressive, what about fuel consumption compared to the FG XR6T? (I know it's a V8 and fuel economy shouldn't really matter)

Drove from Adelaide to Melbourne and back, one tank each way with fuel to spare. And I didn't spare the horses when overtaking.

In the city my average is 14.8 l/100 at the moment, while enjoying the sound of 8 cylinders. When I force myself to ignore that sweet noise I can get city driving down to 11.6 l/100

The Territory's best city is 15.8, worst for me 17 l/100. Highway 12. Great car, very thirsty. Wish Ford had the 6 speed when I purchased it.

[muso]

[QUOTE=johnydep;5067820

The FG turbo is an amazing power house, but what is "minimal mods" and how much?

Injectors and tune.

[muso]

Originally Posted by johnydep

Drove from Adelaide to Melbourne and back, one tank each way with fuel to spare. And I didn't spare the horses when overtaking.

In the city my average is 14.8 l/100 at the moment, while enjoying the sound of 8 cylinders. When I force myself to ignore that sweet noise I can get city driving down to 11.6 l/100

The Territory's best city is 15.8, worst for me 17 l/100. Highway 12. Great car, very thirsty. Wish Ford had the 6 speed when I purchased it.

Impressive economy for a V8

[johnydep]

Originally Posted by muso

Impressive economy for a V8

Gotta love technology - cylinder deactivation. Can't even feel when it happens.

[johnydep]

[QUOTE=muso;5068123][QUOTE=johnydep;5067820

The FG turbo is an amazing power house, but what is "minimal mods" and how much?

Injectors and tune.[/QUOTE]

This? - http://www.realdyno.com.au/upgrades-...xr6-turbo.html

[PepeLePew]

Ford own 8's have issues with the inline 6 turbo's. As the F6 vs SC 5.0 debate proves numbers on paper aren't everything. Similar numbers don't mean squat. The F6 is a animal. Stock for stock it wouldn't be surprising if the XR6T has the edge.

But yes, those stats aren't everything. No matter your affiliation the SS is a pretty damn refined package now.

[flooded one]

Originally Posted by PepeLePew

Ford own 8's have issues with the inline 6 turbo's. As the F6 vs SC 5.0 debate proves numbers on paper aren't everything. Similar numbers don't mean squat. The F6 is a animal. Stock for stock it wouldn't be surprising if the XR6T has the edge.

But yes, those stats aren't everything. No matter your affiliation the SS is a pretty damn refined package now.

In a straight line I think the GT would have the edge by the quarter mile times posted on here, however I believe the F6 would be better on the race track. I would love to drive a SC 5L so I could see for myself. I do agree, those F6's have brutal acceleration. That's what I love about them

[Dr Smith]

Originally Posted by johnydep

Drove from Adelaide to Melbourne and back, one tank each way with fuel to spare. And I didn't spare the horses when overtaking.

In the city my average is 14.8 l/100 at the moment, while enjoying the sound of 8 cylinders. When I force myself to ignore that sweet noise I can get city driving down to 11.6 l/100

The Territory's best city is 15.8, worst for me 17 l/100. Highway 12. Great car, very thirsty. Wish Ford had the 6 speed when I purchased it.

Would your Terry be at least 200kg heavier then your SS apart from greater frontal area and as you said 2 less gears?

To be honest without also stating your average speed, economy numbers are impossible to compare. Eg when we had our G6ET my wife averaged 14.5L/100km @ 20km/hr, home to school drop off, to cbd crawl, when we drove it on longer and faster trips, yet still in suburban environs, say 25km/hr average speed the economy could get down to 10.4L/100km.

[muso]

[QUOTE=johnydep;5068132]

Originally Posted by muso

This? - http://www.realdyno.com.au/upgrades-...xr6-turbo.html

Yes Just stage 1 would be pretty good.

[DanielXR8]

Originally Posted by johnydep

Why not? Power & torque are not the same but are similar. There are other factors to take into account - gear ratio, tyres, engine revs, turbo lag, etc.

Your not suggesting a conspiracy, are you? http://www.drive.com.au/motor-news/a...701-2p79b.html

On the JustCommodore forum there was a tuner who said Holden have done some retuning too. Apparently they breathe better down low in the rev range now and aren't as restrictive from a software/tuning perspective.

[johnydep]

Originally Posted by Dr Smith

Would your Terry be at least 200kg heavier then your SS apart from greater frontal area and as you said 2 less gears?

To be honest without also stating your average speed, economy numbers are impossible to compare. Eg when we had our G6ET my wife averaged 14.5L/100km @ 20km/hr, home to school drop off, to cbd crawl, when we drove it on longer and faster trips, yet still in suburban environs, say 25km/hr average speed the economy could get down to 10.4L/100km.

I'm comparing both vehicles with the same drives by the same driver; both vehicles did a Melbourne run, both driven to same work place.

I tried everything to get the fuel numbers down on the Terri; used 0W20 engine oil, full synthetics in everything - trans, diff's, transfer case, power steering. Replaced plugs and filters. Just could not drop it far enough.

Saying that, I do have a heavy foot and the Terri is a heavy piece of machinery with the wrong gearing. The 6 speed territory's with the upgraded engines are much better.

So far the SS-V is giving me better numbers, and I drive it harder. It could be the weight difference, but I think it's more cylinder deactivation and gears.

[Dr Smith]

Originally Posted by johnydep

I'm comparing both vehicles with the same drives by the same driver; both vehicles did a Melbourne run, both driven to same work place.

I tried everything to get the fuel numbers down on the Terri; used 0W20 engine oil, full synthetics in everything - trans, diff's, transfer case, power steering. Replaced plugs and filters. Just could not drop it far enough.

Saying that, I do have a heavy foot and the Terri is a heavy piece of machinery with the wrong gearing. The 6 speed territory's with the upgraded engines are much better.

So far the SS-V is giving me better numbers, and I drive it harder. It could be the weight difference, but I think it's more cylinder deactivation and gears.

Sorry, what I meant and didn't clarify was if anyone else started giving their economy in comparison. As to weight I'd think having to move 200kg more would have a big effect, but then again you only need to throw a couple of hundred KG's in the SS to match the Terry's tare weight, say some of SA's finest drops and head to my place.

[chris0]

Originally Posted by johnydep

Forgot to mention the electric power steering; big difference between the VE & VF, lessening the load on the engine and allowing the engine to rev quicker off the line.

The FG turbo is an amazing power house, but what is "minimal mods" and how much?

Found this last night http://www.drive.com.au/motor-news/a...701-2p79b.html I had only seen their previous run where they had traction issues and running on standard ULP.

No mods. The turbo has the comode covered from a standstill to every posted road limit and beyond. And a rolling start...you wouldn't even try it on.
I'm not waging into the holden bashing because I have no doubts the VF is a refined, well balanced package and 0-100 isn't everything, but when referring to performance cars such as these two, performance is the key word is it not?

If your into reading 0-100 times from motoring magazines and the likes on the net, and are suprised with the VF times..the early FG XR6T/F6 times are worth a look

[duaned]

Originally Posted by AndyXR6T

There are a few VF SS owners here now, maybe they can shed some light on this (Adrenaline, duaned). In saying that I'm sure they are very content with the overall package the VF offers over the FG let alone the straight line numbers

There is no question that the XR6T is the quicker vehicle but not by the number many think. And they do respond well to a Catback, CAI and tune. Many are achieving 260+kw at the rears with this mod. But seriously in factory form they are more than quick enough. But apart from the small deficit in acceleration to the XR6T, the VF blows the falcon out of the water in every other way. That amounts more to me than sheer acceleration. Acceleration that goes to waste on the street.

[muso]

The VF is all new and the FG is now old, but to give credit where it is due GMH have done a fine job on the VF....I'd have the SS in a heart beat.......it will be interesting to see how the 2014 Falcon compares bearing in mind the new ford has a much tighter development budget.

[Professor Farnsworth]

Originally Posted by duaned

But apart from the small deficit in acceleration to the XR6T, the VF blows the falcon out of the water in every other way.

Very bold statement. One I disagree with.