FPV's 351kw GT-F more powerful than HSV's 430kw GTS, How did this happen?

[Mr Frit]

www.carsales.com.au article writes: "that on the dyno the GT-F has 348kw and the GTS 339kw.

[Wonky]

Everybody knows that FPV have been understating their outputs for years.

[duke5700]

Doesn't surprise me in the slightest. Should of done 5 pulls back to back and seen who was making the most power.

[cashie]

Doesn't surprise me in the slightest. Should of done 5 pulls back to back and seen who was making the most power.

They did 9 with the FPV and 4 with the HSV, they tried to heatsoak it.

[HSV Listy]

Awesome power from stock cars. Lucky world we live in.
So fpv should 450-460kw badged power.

[jaykay]

They did 9 with the FPV and 4 with the HSV, they tried to heatsoak it.

That is very impressive.......what do the VF GTS owners think ?.

[adr8]

Wheels also put them on the dyno GTS 330 rwkw vs GT-F 311 rwkw

http://www.wheelsmag.com.au/news/1407/ford%E2%80%99s-final-fpv-sparks-kilowatt-controversy/

Have a look at the comments on Wheels facebook page :lmao:

https://www.facebook.com/WheelsAustralia

[white lie]

What's the driveline like in the FPV? Surely the beefy GTS stuff would sap a little?

[macca_779]

Wheels also put them on the dyno GTS 330 rwkw vs GT-F 311 rwkw

http://www.wheelsmag.com.au/news/1407/ford%E2%80%99s-final-fpv-sparks-kilowatt-controversy/

Have a look at the comments on Wheels facebook page :lmao:

https://www.facebook.com/WheelsAustralia

Ford has disputed the Wheels test and rightly.

We've all seen stock GT's pull ~330rwkw for years now. So to have a new more powerful model make less. Yeah don't think so, must have been heatsoaked or out of the overboost mode Ford are calling it.

[adr8]

Ford has disputed the Wheels test and rightly.

We've all seen stock GT's pull ~330rwkw for years now. So to have a new more powerful model make less. Yeah don't think so, must have been heatsoaked or out of the overboost mode Ford are calling it.

They are going to run them again with engineers from both camps present, so will have to wait see what happens :popcorn:

[Toddler78]

great generalised article. What transmissions were used? if the ford was a manual, well there is your difference. Id like to see the dyno sheets

[Plenty]

Who gives a toss really, so pathetic the way the Ford fan boys are carrying on about dyno figures on Facebook. It's all they have and they can't handle the fact the GTS out classes it in every area bar the rollers. Ford are having a sook about the Wheels test even though it was conducted on a mainline dyno at VCM a very reputable performance centre.

So the GT-F has more power, where does it all go then? It sure as hell don't make it to the ground like the GTS!

[jc_sv8]

and then a lap of a test track. The GTS is more than a dyno dolly.

[macca_779]

Don't think anyone has drag raced a GT-F auto yet. Considering an auto GT will do 12.5 consistently it's not a stretch to realise one with more rubber and power will match the gts 12.1 or better it

[Vulture]

That is very impressive.......what do the VF GTS owners think ?.

I think it's great that the FPV guys have something to be excited about but I won't be trading in the GTS just yet.

From the MRC, to the torque vectoring, an interior not from the stone-age, massive brakes, big diff and much more visual presence - the GTS has nothing to worry about.

All respect to the FPV's 5.0L, but it's a great engine looking for an up-to-date car.

[Plenty]

I think it's great that the FPV guys have something to be excited about but I won't be trading in the GTS just yet.

From the MRC, to the torque vectoring, interior not from the stone age, massive brakes and much more visual presence - the GTS has nothing to worry about.

All respect to the FPV's 5.0L, but a great engine looking for a decent car.

Totally agree mate, although i only have an R8 i would rather that then the GT-F, purely based on the whole car. Dyno numbers mean stuff all especially when the car with the lower dyno figure is actually quicker. Stepping out of my pursuit into the GenF is like night and day.

[macca_779]

Whoa no one has raced a GT-F auto yet. Bit hard to claim the GTS is quicker just yet. Even though GTS is a better car. Bragging rights are bragging rights

[Plenty]

Whoa no one has raced a GT-F auto yet. Bit hard to claim the GTS is quicker just yet. Even though GTS is a better car. Bragging rights are bragging rights

Yeah agreed Macca but they have lined up manual vs manual and the GTS was a half second faster. I love my ute and the engine is a cracker but for me it's HSV.

[Vulture]

I'll be disappointed if the GT-F turns out to be quicker but I'm sure HSV still have a special edition up their sleeves for a "GTS-F" in 2017.

[lmoengnr]

I'll be disappointed if the GT-F turns out to be quicker but I'm sure HSV still have a special edition up their sleeves for a "GTS-F" in 2017.

Who knows... Maybe an LT4!!!

[offshore]

Wouldnt matter what times they get stock. The fact is the GTS is way easy and way more potential with mods. Thats the good thing about GM they built the LSA knowing the potential would be good for the guys that modify cars they have a really good relationship in that respect.

Is the ford still without intercooler?

[Wonky]

Chev has done upgrades to an R Spec GT that easily ended up with getting on towards a lazy 450rwkw! See http://www.chevsperformance.com.au/ford-v8-upgradetuning :thumbsup:

[adr8]

Found some more background info on Street Machines facebook page they along with Wheels organised the shootout. https://www.facebook.com/streetmachinemagazine?hc_location=timeline

Comments from SM employee

So last week one of the Wheels guys popped his head over the partition and asked me to recommend a place where they could dyno a new HSV GTS and an FPV GT-F. After just doing a blower install story at VCM Performance, and being impressed with their facilities, I recommended them. Then I asked if they were going to film them.
"We weren't but I guess we should", was the answer.

So I decided to go along and video the whole thing with a view that Wheels would do "their" video and Street Machine do something different.

We drove both cars (both autos) to VCM last Thursday and put them on them on the dyno. The GTS went first and made 330rwkw, which gave the GT-F the best chance to cool down. Then the GT-F ran 311rwkw and we were impressed. The HSV made about what we expected and the Ford made more than we expected. It was about as honest and simple of a dyno test I've ever seen, and the idea was that we would both edit our vids and post them at the same time on Monday.

Then Ford got wind of the result and they weren't happy. So Wheels delayed, and we were told to hold off as well. The phone calls continued all through today as well - I can't reveal the contents of those calls, I'd probably get fired. Let's just say Ford were VERY unhappy. Ford reckons the GT-F should have made more.

Then mysteriously a rival publication went to print with very different figures today (hmm, wonder how that happened) and the decision was made to pull the trigger on our results. Then everyone lost their minds!

We know our results are real, so what does that make the other results? Consider also that Ford got tipped off about the results and for the last couple days they have done everything they can to stop these videos being shown. Then mysteriously these results pop up from a rival publication before the videos could be posted. We call shenanigans! Apparently everyone believes that an unintercooled 5-litre should make more power than an intercooled 6.2-litre.

[sjhugh]

Wouldnt matter what times they get stock. The fact is the GTS is way easy and way more potential with mods. Thats the good thing about GM they built the LSA knowing the potential would be good for the guys that modify cars they have a really good relationship in that respect.

Is the ford still without intercooler?

No doubt the GTS is quick and the better all round package but don’t underestimate the potential of that GT-F, add an intercooler and a few basic mods with a fresh tune and it’s definitely soiled undies time.

[SUZUKI MALISHA]

No doubt the GTS is quick and the better all round package but don’t underestimate the potential of that GT-F, add an intercooler and a few basic mods with a fresh tune and it’s definitely soiled undies time.

Doesn't even need that.....all it'll need is the same wide sticky tyres as the GTS. The stock tyres are not great....
And I can't believe these dudes think anyone would believe a GT335 would dyno as low as 311rwkws legit....let alone a GT 351!!! Every GT under the sun has dynoed easily in the 300s. Let alone the Rspecs and now the 351GT with even more power!

I love all the comments.....'Oh but it'll smash it on the track....or with a tune'. This is all about who's the most powerfull.....which all have been thinking the GTS had that crown......espescially with a 430 badge on it!

And it's called 'transient over boost' I think. Ford claims a max power of 404 kws.

[SUZUKI MALISHA]

Found some more background info on Street Machines facebook page they along with Wheels organised the shootout. https://www.facebook.com/streetmachinemagazine?hc_location=timeline

Comments from SM employee

So last week one of the Wheels guys popped his head over the partition and asked me to recommend a place where they could dyno a new HSV GTS and an FPV GT-F. After just doing a blower install story at VCM Performance, and being impressed with their facilities, I recommended them. Then I asked if they were going to film them.
"We weren't but I guess we should", was the answer.

So I decided to go along and video the whole thing with a view that Wheels would do "their" video and Street Machine do something different.

We drove both cars (both autos) to VCM last Thursday and put them on them on the dyno. The GTS went first and made 330rwkw, which gave the GT-F the best chance to cool down. Then the GT-F ran 311rwkw and we were impressed. The HSV made about what we expected and the Ford made more than we expected. It was about as honest and simple of a dyno test I've ever seen, and the idea was that we would both edit our vids and post them at the same time on Monday.

Then Ford got wind of the result and they weren't happy. So Wheels delayed, and we were told to hold off as well. The phone calls continued all through today as well - I can't reveal the contents of those calls, I'd probably get fired. Let's just say Ford were VERY unhappy. Ford reckons the GT-F should have made more.

Then mysteriously a rival publication went to print with very different figures today (hmm, wonder how that happened) and the decision was made to pull the trigger on our results. Then everyone lost their minds!

We know our results are real, so what does that make the other results? Consider also that Ford got tipped off about the results and for the last couple days they have done everything they can to stop these videos being shown. Then mysteriously these results pop up from a rival publication before the videos could be posted. We call shenanigans! Apparently everyone believes that an unintercooled 5-litre should make more power than an intercooled 6.2-litre.

I noticed they didn't mention the reeming they're coping about the posted videos of the first test, that show the GTS isn't tied onto the rollers tightly! Maybe that GTS.330rwkw number is not accurate either haha

[mjrandom]

I am not sure why people are getting so worked up about the rwkW figures. You would have to be living under a rock not to know that stock 335 GTs have been punching out 300+rwkW since day one. That 5L engine is sweet. The car has nothing else though. That is just my opinion of course. Ignoring the abomination that is the interior accommodation the chassis has no chance of handling 300 or 400kW so the actual number generated sitting on a dynamometer is pretty much irrelevant unless you are looking for some small solace as a Ford fan. Same goes for throwing sticky rubber on the back and blasting down the quarter mile in a nice straight ish line. If that floats your boat then great, does little for me.
Before I took delivery of my GTS 9+ months ago I tested the market and chose the GTS over an M3, a C63 and a GT. I had owned an F6 previously so I pretty much knew what to expect and the test drive did nothing to disabuse me of my expectations.
As a daily driver that does go on back roads and do some long hauls the GTS is almost everything I want from a car. Twist the dial and invoke the torque vectoring and the chassis comes alive, if you haven’t tried it you need to, this is how a big car should handle. And the brakes, well I have moved all my braking points because the GTS stops like nothing else I have driven, the brakes are magnificent.
Those few who have tweaked the engine report that the extra kW are transmitted to the road just as well as the stock amount. I am still tossing up what to do with mine and whether to go full Monty or just a tune and air intake. But either way I am confident that the GTS will remain a stable platform able to use its power and not turn into a nasty beast.
Give the GT-F credit where it is due but don’t for a second think that Ford has performed a miracle to overcome the basic shortcomings that are inherent in the car. It is a pity that FPV/Ford weren’t given the money to make it work as it should and make the interior set up work because it would have been a superb car. Whether that would have made me stray from the GTS who knows but for now I am loving my car 15,000km and counting.

[Plenty]

I noticed they didn't mention the reeming they're coping about the posted videos of the first test, that show the GTS isn't tied onto the rollers tightly! Maybe that GTS.330rwkw number is not accurate either haha

If you watch the full video it is obvious that the clip was a set up run, the full clip clearly shows it strapped down correctly. It was VE doing the test, pretty sure they know what they are doing.
It's only about the dyno result to the Ford fan club cos that is all they have to hold onto.

[SUZUKI MALISHA]

If you watch the full video it is obvious that the clip was a set up run, the full clip clearly shows it strapped down correctly. It was VE doing the test, pretty sure they know what they are doing.
It's only about the dyno result to the Ford fan club cos that is all they have to hold onto.

Give me a break......they are a Holden tune house. They've done over 30 GTS dynos and many GT335s aswell......and their honest opinion was that 311 was about right....if not great. REALLY. They just lost all credibility as EVERYONE knows even 335s will dyno above that all day.....let alone a tuned 351 GTF. But that's beside the point......ford challenged this low reading......they redid the test with a hsv and fpv engineer on hand and guess what.......349rwkws just as ford said. So mud on your face wheels.....

I'm a Holden man but if the ford fans want to hold onto having the title of most powerfull car then good on them. It's only people in denial who disclaim these things or start waffling on about taking it to a track and see who's boss. Of course the GTS is by FAR the better car......were not STUPID, but it's power is overstated compared with the 351. But who didn't see that coming.....

[macca_779]

The GTS isn't overstated (well maybe by 10kw). The GT is understated

[adr8]

.they redid the test with a hsv and fpv engineer on hand and guess what.......349rwkws just as ford said. So mud on your face wheels.....


Wheels haven't re-tested the cars yet, this is when the engineers will be present, the 349 rwkw was posted by a rival publication.

[offshore]

http://www.wheelsmag.com.au/news/1407/ford%E2%80%99s-final-fpv-sparks-kilowatt-controversy/

For the record, the HSV GTS – also fitted with a six-speed auto – recorded 330kW at the rear wheels. The FPV GT-F topped out at 311kW.

[JimmyXR6T04]

I don't believe the GT-F figure... Unless they purposely heat soaked it to get rid of the overboost feature to see what the actual rated 351kw made on the dyno... That would sound about right in those circumstances...

My 335 made 312rwkw standard (on Gentech's dyno, my old xr6t made 289 on it, and 305 on other dynos), so it arguably reads a touch lower.

Not sure what planet people are on when they suggest 311rwkw is normal for the GT-F....

[FFAMan]

I don't believe the GT-F figure... Unless they purposely heat soaked it to get rid of the overboost feature to see what the actual rated 351kw made on the dyno... That would sound about right in those circumstances...

My 335 made 312rwkw standard (on Gentech's dyno, my old xr6t made 289 on it, and 305 on other dynos), so it arguably reads a touch lower.

Not sure what planet people are on when they suggest 311rwkw is normal for the GT-F....

Yep, think you'll find that's pretty much the state of it, Ford have all but proved that.

Take nothing away from the GTS, but the GT-F has been treated very badly and previous results on that dyno show it has a strange problem with Ford products.

If 335 GT's are getting 325-330rwkw everywhere else (except here, 250rwkw?? WTF) then its only logical you'd be expecting to atleast mach those numbers if not better, why weren't questions asked??

Either way Wheels and Street Machine now look quite foolish as a result.

[macca_779]

Should have taken it to APS. At least then bias and accuracy can be ruled out

[CALDIR]

Hi

Great thread. I now have my hands on a 430kw GTS and just trying to see if a neighbour wants to throw his new Falcon GTF on a dyno to compare the two in the same conditions/weather/dyno and with "NO BULL". Might have to call up Chev's who will be able to do a TRUE dyno comparison.

Regards,

Richard
HRTSEN

[JimmyXR6T04]

Off topic for two seconds to put something into perspective... how awesome is it to have two aussie weapons, at such affordable prices (relative to other performance cars), and all people can argue about is which one has a few more kws or is slightly quicker down the strip blah blah... I love my GT, and as much as i want a GTS, it will never see the track, so the added advantages it has will basically go to waste for me... In terms of raw power, my GT with exhaust and tune is bloody awesome. Scares the heck out of the mrs, makes the kids giggle with delight, and makes rear seat adult passengers feel queasy in the guts! It could do with an interior upgrade, but for 60k brand new, it was a performance bargain!

Good to finally see the GT variants getting the press they deserve about the power outputs, many people were unaware just how understated the GT is. Will be interesting to see the new 'wheels' dyno test though...

[korrupt]

Off topic for two seconds to put something into perspective... how awesome is it to have two aussie weapons, at such affordable prices (relative to other performance cars)

This. I picked up my GTS 2 weeks ago and it's brilliant. The fact these cars are even being produced and we aren't having to drive hybrids or 4 cyl buzz boxes is amazing.

[HSVManboy]

I don't believe the GT-F figure... Unless they purposely heat soaked it to get rid of the overboost feature to see what the actual rated 351kw made on the dyno... That would sound about right in those circumstances...

My 335 made 312rwkw standard (on Gentech's dyno, my old xr6t made 289 on it, and 305 on other dynos), so it arguably reads a touch lower.

Not sure what planet people are on when they suggest 311rwkw is normal for the GT-F....


They did attempt to heat soak it, they dyno'ed it 9 times compared to the HSV's 4 times, also from my understanding, the is overboost is only in 1st, 2nd and 3rd gears. Both tests were done with the auto's in 4th gear not just because of the overboost but because its the closest they can get to a 1-1 ratio. Although, I agree they should be done with the manuals! Over both tests I believe this one to be the most accurate for 2 reasons;

1 - Ford have been under-stating their figures for years
2 - Both HSV and Ford had engineers present to make sure their cars made maximum power.
and 3rd (although probably not a real reason); both tests were done in the same environment, exact same temperature and in the video you can see both cars are handled exactly the same.

At the end of the day though, we have the better car overall, let them have their figures, its all they have left!

[JimmyXR6T04]

They did attempt to heat soak it, they dyno'ed it 9 times compared to the HSV's 4 times, also from my understanding, the is overboost is only in 1st, 2nd and 3rd gears. Both tests were done with the auto's in 4th gear not just because of the overboost but because its the closest they can get to a 1-1 ratio. Although, I agree they should be done with the manuals! Over both tests I believe this one to be the most accurate for 2 reasons;

1 - Ford have been under-stating their figures for years
2 - Both HSV and Ford had engineers present to make sure their cars made maximum power.
and 3rd (although probably not a real reason); both tests were done in the same environment, exact same temperature and in the video you can see both cars are handled exactly the same.

At the end of the day though, we have the better car overall, let them have their figures, its all they have left!

I think you're confusing the 'wheels' test with the other test. The other test did the 9 runs to make sure that the 348rwkw wasn't a once off freak thing, and they replicated it consistently. And i don't think the engineers have been involved in any dyno test as of yet. I feel that wheels did something a bit sneaky. Considering most 335's dyno anywhere from 310-330rwkw, then the 351 should be more than 311rwkw.

The problem with dyno testing is that it can be manipulated depending on what you want. Something not quite right when the new more powerful FPV can't even match the 335...

[SSer]

I'm not weighing into the pissing content, but I have a question about the transient overboost. How long can/does the blower provide the extra boost in the real world? Can it be maintained for lasting periods of time, or is it a quick spray of extra boost for a short period of time and then that's it? ie. the bugger all time a car spends at high RPM on a dyno suits the transient nature, and really real world how long do most people spend at sustained high RPM?

I'm sure I will get flamed with "I spend all my time at 6,000rpm!", but I'm talking day driver types and those drivers with mechanical sympathy.

[JimmyXR6T04]

I'm not weighing into the pissing content, but I have a question about the transient overboost. How long can/does the blower provide the extra boost in the real world? Can it be maintained for lasting periods of time, or is it a quick spray of extra boost for a short period of time and then that's it? ie. the bugger all time a car spends at high RPM on a dyno suits the transient nature, and really real world how long do most people spend at sustained high RPM?

I'm sure I will get flamed with "I spend all my time at 6,000rpm!", but I'm talking day driver types and those drivers with mechanical sympathy.

I believe it's about 20 seconds, or until the intake temps decide it's enough. Essentially, it's a feature that's always there. I'm guessing that if the car was intercooled, there'd be no 'overboost' as it would simply make that power all the time. The reason it backs off is to protect the engine due to lack of intercooler... that's my understanding anyway, happy to be corrected though.

I think the reason ford were so annoyed, and it ignited so much debate was the extremely low FPV reading. If the GTS banged out 339rwkw, and the GT 330ish then it wouldn't be so out of character. The fact that normal GT's pump out 320rwkw is what has caused the eyebrows to be raised and questions asked.

[HSVManboy]

I think you're confusing the 'wheels' test with the other test. The other test did the 9 runs to make sure that the 348rwkw wasn't a once off freak thing, and they replicated it consistently. And i don't think the engineers have been involved in any dyno test as of yet. I feel that wheels did something a bit sneaky. Considering most 335's dyno anywhere from 310-330rwkw, then the 351 should be more than 311rwkw.

The problem with dyno testing is that it can be manipulated depending on what you want. Something not quite right when the new more powerful FPV can't even match the 335...

Apologies, your right I did get confused. And just to clarify, this current test where the GT-F made 348rwkw is the one I personally believe to be more accurate.

[JimmyXR6T04]

Apologies, your right I did get confused. And just to clarify, this current test where the GT-F made 348rwkw is the one I personally believe to be more accurate.

I agree with you mate. 311 doesn't make sense... 330-350rwkw seems accurate considering the normal GT. The GTS seems about right at 340rwkw, as i'd assume it suffers more losses through the drivetrain due to how beefed up it is.

End of the day, peak power isn't everything. It's nice to brag about, but one look at the fat torque curve of the GTS, and the tech to help launch it and get the power down is enough to know which manufacturer were the more serious when releasing the car. I just wish FPV had the money and one last chance to have a crack at matching the GTS.

Regardless of which car is faster, would be nice for the ford fans if in fact the GT-F turns out to be undisputed most powerful Aussie car... at least until the next GTS!

[planetdavo]

The pre-pubescent bullsh!t stops when the quarter and lap times start talking...
Otherwise, I couldn't really give a toss. Dyno the two of them on different dyno's and on different days, and you'll get all sorts of differences to spank off over if that's your thing.
End of the day, BOTH of them are performance bargains. One just costs more and performs a bit better for your extra money.

[FFAMan]

I'm not weighing into the pissing content, but I have a question about the transient overboost. How long can/does the blower provide the extra boost in the real world? Can it be maintained for lasting periods of time, or is it a quick spray of extra boost for a short period of time and then that's it? ie. the bugger all time a car spends at high RPM on a dyno suits the transient nature, and really real world how long do most people spend at sustained high RPM?

I'm sure I will get flamed with "I spend all my time at 6,000rpm!", but I'm talking day driver types and those drivers with mechanical sympathy.
The term "Overboost" is probably a bit misleading, its more like full boost. THe ECU will allow the Miami engine to use full boost until it see's conditions unfavorable, i.e inlet temperatures, it will then bleed off boost. The Miami 351 engine will keep making 408+fwkw until something is detected, it will then pull boost out of the equation.

Also Full boost is not available in first gear and below 4000 rpm.

Effectively an I/Cooler would allow Ford to quote the max number all the time, but under testing requirements they can only quote the worst case scenario number, i.e 351kw.

Hope this explains it.

[SUZUKI MALISHA]

The term "Overboost" is probably a bit misleading, its more like full boost. THe ECU will allow the Miami engine to use full boost until it see's conditions unfavorable, i.e inlet temperatures, it will then bleed off boost. The Miami 351 engine will keep making 408+fwkw until something is detected, it will then pull boost out of the equation.

Also Full boost is not available in first gear and below 4000 rpm.

Effectively an I/Cooler would allow Ford to quote the max number all the time, but under testing requirements they can only quote the worst case scenario number, i.e 351kw.

Hope this explains it.

And then you add in the ecu restrictions built in cutting power in the lower gears to prevent drivetrain stress. No doubt having better driveline like the GTS would allow the GTF to use all of that power sooner!
It shows tho that with a "full boost" feature allowed to stay on as long as temps stay low enough.... that it's not the driveline their protecting as much as the engine, seeing as it has no inter cooler!

[SV805]

So has something changed recently that I have missed. Are most cars slightly different in power and you get better ones than others. Where these two tests done on the same GTS and GTF. If not would you not expect to have potential differences.

Everyone is saying how could the GTF come in so low as it is more powerful than the 335.....Given that it is obvious that the 335 is a more than that standard, Ford may not have actually done much at all and wouldn't surprise me at all if the standard 335 and the 351 come up at the same level.

[FFAMan]

And then you add in the ecu restrictions built in cutting power in the lower gears to prevent drivetrain stress. No doubt having better driveline like the GTS would allow the GTF to use all of that power sooner!
It shows tho that with a "full boost" feature allowed to stay on as long as temps stay low enough.... that it's not the driveline their protecting as much as the engine, seeing as it has no inter cooler!
Pretty much, it explains a number of things, with an intercooler and stronger rear end the GT-F would comfortably used all that power, sooner and put the numbers down that its capable off. Just look at tuned 335's with the restrictions removed...

[SV805]

Also of note is the latest Motor issue (Not Wheels ) that compare the GTF against the more Level playing field of HSV R8. Although the GTF had more power and quicker numbers , Writer still rates the R8 as a better car and at a cheaper price. " Choosing a winner was easier than expected. It is the way the Clubsport feels a whole generation younger than the GTF"

So Motor feels the R8 is a better car. Fo those who want better again you can have the GTS.

[JimmyXR6T04]

Also of note is the latest Motor issue (Not Wheels ) that compare the GTF against the more Level playing field of HSV R8. Although the GTF had more power and quicker numbers , Writer still rates the R8 as a better car and at a cheaper price. " Choosing a winner was easier than expected. It is the way the Clubsport feels a whole generation younger than the GTF"

So Motor feels the R8 is a better car. Fo those who want better again you can have the GTS.

Of course it feels a generation ahead, it is! The GT-F is still based off the 2008 FG. Having said that, it really depends on what the buyer wants. I could never be happy with an R8, knowing for about the same price, maybe cheaper i could have a factory S/C GT. Interior, tech, functions etc never even entered my thought process when buying. It was down to 2 cars, the GT and GTS. Unfortunately (perhaps fortunately), i managed to get a new GT for 60k, and that sealed the deal. If i had to spend 70-75k on a GT, i would have gone the GTS. But for 40k less, the GT is more than enough, and i've actually really grown to like the rawness of it all.

Some people will be the opposite to me, and no matter the engine, they'd go the R8 because of the tech etc... horses for courses. For me to get an R8 to nearly 370rwkw, would have cost me a lot more to do than it has in the GT, and by god i love driving the GT with that much power... Sure, it's not all about power, but to me, this time around, it was and especially because it's not a daily driver... so the GT made sense. Again, not everyone mods either... but i'm in the minority who decide to roll the dice on warranty!

With my next round of mods, i'll be aiming for approx 440rwkw, and it'll still owe me under 75-80k... not bad going i reckon! Having said all that, if i was the sort of person to take it to the track often, i'd have outlayed the extra for the GTS, it's more purposely designed for that sort of thing, and would hold up to the task better i believe.

Either way, the real clincher is, how many can actually afford a GT, let alone a GTS... A lot of the arguments are from people who will never own, let alone drive either, so at the end of the day, i don't really give a hoot what car goes quicker, more powerful etc, at least i get to own one of them, and perhaps one of each in the not too distant future!

Anyway, back on topic - I'm guessing the revised dyno test will show more than 311rwkw, unless the GT-F has an issue, or is one of those freak cars that is underpowered from the factory, just like you get some freaks that make more.

[Jag530G]

So has something changed recently that I have missed. Are most cars slightly different in power and you get better ones than others. Where these two tests done on the same GTS and GTF. If not would you not expect to have potential differences.

Everyone is saying how could the GTF come in so low as it is more powerful than the 335.....Given that it is obvious that the 335 is a more than that standard, Ford may not have actually done much at all and wouldn't surprise me at all if the standard 335 and the 351 come up at the same level.

^^^This. Why does anyone expect the 351 engine to produce more rear wheel power running at full boost in versus the 335 engine? Perhaps the only difference between the engines is how much boost is bled off when the engine inlet temps get hot. What I am saying as that in ideal circumstances (cold inlet temps etc) both the 335 and 351 both produce around 400kw at the flywheel and consequently the rear wheel power on the dyno is also going to be similar. The only difference is when the inlet temps rise, the 351 engine doesn't lose as much power. Perhaps the peak "ideal conditions" pwer for the 335 and 351 engines is the same, at around 400KW flywheel, consequently this might be why the 311RWKW figure on the dyno is fair enough and no more than what would be expected of the 335 engine's RWKW figure in ideal conditions.

Just my $0.02 worth.

Cheers, Matthew

[adr8]

I just checked the Wheels facebook page and noticed a comment made by Matt Jackson from HP-F, “An auto VF GTS makes 310rwkw on the Horsepower Factory Dyno. If anybody thinks the GT-F will make 'near' 351rwkw on a reputable dyno he has rocks in his head” :lmao:

I then had a look at the HP-F website and they have a dyno sheet of a stock GT with 282rwkw. The difference between the GTS (310rwkw) and GT (282rwkw) that HP-F got is very similar to the difference VCM has for the GTS (330rwkw) and GT-F (311rwkw), so it just goes to show that both VCM & HP-F show a 20-30rwkw difference between the GTS and GT-F which contradicts what the other publication posted.

Have posted dyno sheets from Bullet Performance Racing a Ford tuner to balance the ledger, stock GT 284rwkw and stock GS 262rwkw.

I also remember reading a post on AFF a couple of years ago and Rob Herrod himself even said that the GS makes about 270rwkw and the GT 280rwkw.

http://www.hp-f.com.au/catalog/ford/ford-fg-sc-5-0lt-v8/fg-sc-5-0lt-performance/fg-fpv-supercharged-boss-5-0lt-stage-1/

http://i1078.photobucket.com/albums/w491/advr8/gt-graph.jpg

http://bulletperformanceracing.com.au/wordpress/customer-dyno-graphs/ford-dyno-graphs/fpv-fg-gs-gt-falcon-coyote

http://i1078.photobucket.com/albums/w491/advr8/FGFPVGSUte335TuneTorq284kwSmall.jpg

[offshore]

I think the other publication was a scam helped setup by Ford if you read what Street Machine magazine said on the HSV forum thread Ford wasnt happy at all about the VCM dyno results and rushed out the other higher results at the same time.

[Vulture]

They really need to drain the fuel and replace in both cars if it is to be a true comparison. Recommended tyre pressures etc.
It's sad how the FPV cheer squad are hanging onto this like grim death.
The GTS is still the overwhelmingly better car, a few rwkw here or there notwithstanding.

[csv rulz]

Who really cares whose dipstick is bigger. Both are great cars and we are lucky to have them, end of story

[TuffR8]

Funnily enough most 1/4 mile and 0-100 runs I've seen show the gt getting the better launch, with the gts struggling to get traction only to see it pull the ford in (quickly) and pull car lengths on it... That's weird, if it was all in the wider rubber and gearing wouldn't the roll on acceleration show that up? The gts dominates the gt in every arena.. Doesn't make sense does it?

[white lie]

The Ford won't have full boost, off the line, making it easier to launch but explains why the GTS reels it in quickly.

[dogsballs]

I think the other publication was a scam helped setup by Ford if you read what Street Machine magazine said on the HSV forum thread Ford wasnt happy at all about the VCM dyno results and rushed out the other higher results at the same time.
The ford in the sm is a factory car from showroom, it has been mentioned in a few places that ford asked sm to not publish the data from the factory car for a few days. The car provided to wheels was a provided by ford.

The tie down argument is a joke, pic was prior to full pull.

Arguments are nine and void seeing all the fpv are sold.

More interesting question is what the last xr8s going to do

[JimmyXR6T04]

The last XR8 will essentially be what the GS was IMO. Either the 335 or 315 tuned motor, small brakes, skinny tyres... that's what i'm guessing anyway. Will still be an awesome package and should be priced accordingly to the SS. Fantastic bang for buck i reckon.

I suppose time will tell though.

[cashie]

The last XR8 will essentially be what the GS was IMO. Either the 335 or 315 tuned motor, small brakes, skinny tyres... that's what i'm guessing anyway. Will still be an awesome package and should be priced accordingly to the SS. Fantastic bang for buck i reckon.

I suppose time will tell though.

I think there will be a model with Brembos etc too to compete with the SS-V Redline.

[blackvussii]

yeah im looking forward to seeing to seeing what they do with the xr8.
id take gts over a gt
but id take the xr8 over a ss if they are priced the same. id put up with the interior to get in a new car with that engine new for $50k!

[JimmyXR6T04]

I think there will be a model with Brembos etc too to compete with the SS-V Redline.

Maybe... But i reckon the factory supercharged 335 motor alone would be enough to sway many that are sitting on the fence. The brembo's are nice, but realistically in every day driving they're over kill, and i haven't yet needed them (but grateful i have them if i do!). Either the 315 or 335 tune, with leather, and updated interior for about 50k would be nice package.


yeah im looking forward to seeing to seeing what they do with the xr8.
id take gts over a gt
but id take the xr8 over a ss if they are priced the same. id put up with the interior to get in a new car with that engine new for $50k!

Keep in mind the interior will be new, and fresh. So you might actually like the new interior of the new falcon!

[planetdavo]

Keep in mind the interior will be new, and fresh. So you might actually like the new interior of the new falcon!

Ford's seriously short development dollars might not make the interior anywhere as new as you think...

[FFAMan]

Maybe... But i reckon the factory supercharged 335 motor alone would be enough to sway many that are sitting on the fence. The brembo's are nice, but realistically in every day driving they're over kill, and i haven't yet needed them (but grateful i have them if i do!). Either the 315 or 335 tune, with leather, and updated interior for about 50k would be nice package.



Keep in mind the interior will be new, and fresh. So you might actually like the new interior of the new falcon!
There's no way the new XR8 with 335, staggered 8/9" rims brembo's etc will be $50, id see it lineball with Redline, high 50's DA.

[offshore]

The XR8 would want to come out with 275 rear as well its not right that a supercharged V8 has to try and get traction through 245 tyres.

[JimmyXR6T04]

Ford's seriously short development dollars might not make the interior anywhere as new as you think...

True, but surely they'll adapt some of the stuff out of the mondeo etc... i guess time will tell, but you're right, it may not be as much as some people are expecting


There's no way the new XR8 with 335, staggered 8/9" rims brembo's etc will be $50, id see it lineball with Redline, high 50's DA.

I agree, i don't even think they'll offer the XR8 with staggered wheels or brembos. I'm tipping it will be 50-55k without staggered wheels and brembos.


The XR8 would want to come out with 275 rear as well its not right that a supercharged V8 has to try and get traction through 245 tyres.

I don't think it will, but who knows? They put up with the 245s on the GT since 2010, and even then only the R-Spec and GTF got 9" rears. I agree though, the 245s were not up to the task.

[macca_779]

The new xr8 will be a brilliant base car for mods as is the xr6-t. Sure it won't be as capable as a gts, but it shouldn't be at around half the price. Bang for buck though and after a few mods it will be brilliant and better than any lsx based commodore.

[adr8]

Just seen this posted on AFF from a member who is an employee of Street Machine.

I guess it's time for me to weigh in. I've read most of the comments and had a good laugh at some, especially at the conspiracy theory people who think that this is some kind of attack on Ford Australia.

Here's how all this came about. As most know I work for Street Machine and I've been a member here for years. I play with Fords, Holden and Chryslers, if it was said that I favoured any brand it would be Chrysler but I'll play with anything.

At Street Machine we share office space with Wheels, Motor and Unique cars, and I sit on the other side of the cubicle wall from the Wheels guys and the subject of the dynoing the GTS and GT-F came up. The Wheels guys asked me to recommend a workshop and I said VCM Performance.

Why? Because's it's a roomy and tidy workshop with an easy to access dyno and they're friendly guys. I've filmed there before and it looks good on video. No other reason.

Wheels were only going to get dyno figures for print but I suggested we film the whole thing and my boss Simon suggested I film it and we share the footage for a simultaneous release across Wheels and Street Machine because we have two different audiences.

So the guys rang Mario at VCM on my advice and he was happy to do the test there. We drove the cars there and because the Ford has no intercooler we decided to put it on the rollers second to give it some cool down time.

There was no fanfare, no conspiracy, just roll the cars on, test, and roll them off and film the results. Here's the Street Machine video in case you haven't seen it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tME5so6VbqU

As you see the GTS made 330rwkw on it's first run and it made 327rwkw on it's second run. Now I've filmed ALOT of dyno runs in the past and I saw nothing funky at all, and generally, in my experience, we'll see that the HP at the rear wheels will roughly equal the KW at the flywheel +/-5%. So when the GTS made 442.5rwhp on a claimed 430kw I didn't think that was unusual.

Then we ran the GT-F on the rollers. No one expected the GT-F to beat the GTS but we felt that if it got within 20kw that would be a respectable result given the claimed 351kw. Now we all know about the "transient overboost" (stupid name) which provides up to 404kw. I was at the GT-F launch at You Yangs and I asked the engineers flat out if the car made any more boost under that condition and they admitted that it didn't. It's all in the timing based on intake heat - basically if the intake temps are too high you don't get the full output. It's as simple as that.

Anyway we thought that if it made over 310rwkw or 415rwhp that would be a respectable result. First run was 308.8rwkw and the second run went 304.5rwkw and we knew it was only going to get worse if we kept going, so we let the GT-F cool down in the dyno room for 10mins or so with the dyno fan on full blast. In the true spirit on the dyno test we probably shouldn't have but we wanted to see if the FPV could get over 310rwkw.

After the cool down we ran the car up again at it made the 311.3rwkw figure that everyone seems to have a problem with. So we went with the best figures of both. Maybe we should have averaged the figures, but that wouldn't help the FPV either. But we felt the Ford had performed quite well in the circumstances and having a separation of just 19kw or 25hp at the wheels showed the cars were going to be close in performance.

At this point we decided to wait until Monday the 7th to release the results, which was our first mistake. We should have just gone straight back to the office, edited the footage to suit our respective audiences and let fly.

Then someone gave Ford a heads up on the results and the phone lines between Ford and the Bauer media office basically caught fire. Ford were not happy and to be honest I don't really understand their problem. Yes they didn't make as much as the HSV GTS, but it was a lot closer than anyone who knew dynos thought it would be.

Look at the facts:

1) Both cars were auto
2) Both cars were driven straight to VCM and run as is
3) You can't compare different brand dynos. Every business has their dyno set up differently and there's variation across brands. The only way to make a fair comparison is same day, same dyno
5) Ford has underclaimed the supercharged Miami V8 from Day 1 and this just confuses people
6) The FPV has quad cams, but is only 5-litres and has no intercooler
7) The HSV might be a pushrod V8, but it has 6.2-litres and an intercooler

If Ford/FPV wanted the GT-F to be the big dog of Australian performance they should have put an intercooler in the bloody thing. We all know what a difference that makes to them.

At the launch I asked why with the GT-F being the last GT Falcon and everything that went with that was it only 351kw? They said that 351 was an iconic number and they wanted to honour that, which is fine, but I said 427 is an iconic number for Ford guys as well and it would have put it more in line with the HSV GTS. There was a lot of heming and hawing and foot shuffling because they knew their car didn't have the power of the HSV GTS.

But now they're claiming it makes as much as 351rwkw? Give me a break.

So anyway, as we prepared to release our videos Ford threatened and pleaded with Wheels for the results to not be published (we didn't field any calls form Ford at Street Machine, maybe because Simon was in QLD). This went right to the top of the food chain at Ford. I can't say too much about all that, but there were at least a dozen calls back and forth by my reckoning.

Ford claimed there must have been something wrong with GT-F-014 to make such a "low figure" and they claimed they tested it themselves and claimed they made somewhere close to 351rwkw. We at Street Machine were happy they we had given both cars a fair go and wanted to go ahead with the video Monday night, but Wheels wanted to hold back because there was more talks planned with Ford. So we decided to sit on it.

Talks between Wheels and Ford continued on Tuesday morning and then about midday Motoring.com.au went to print with "their results" (suspiciously convenient) which we've all seen. So we hit the go button with both our videos. Wheels went first, and we were a couple hours later with ours because no-one was in the SM office to click go.

Naturally the results differ because different dyno and different cars, but both results used the same GT-F-014 and somehow they managed 348rwkw where we managed 311rwkw, which is a huge difference in anyone's language.

Why the difference? Well look at the torque figures that Motoring.com.au are claiming. They claim 721Nm for the GT-F when we all know that Ford have torque limited the GT-F (and all the previous Miami powered cars) to 570Nm. Did Ford turn the torque protection off in the software before handing the car to Motoring.com.au for their "independent test"? Who knows?

It makes you wonder.

At the end of the day I have no dog in this fight, we only test Fords and Holdens occasionally at SM, but what started a simple, "Hey, what do you reckon they make on the dyno?" turned into a massive **** fight.

At the end of the day you have to ask yourself, without bringing brand loyalty into it, will an unintercooled 5-litre make as much power as an intercooled 6.2-litre? If Ford wanted to win this battle they just had to build the right car (ie: intercooled with 400kw+), we all wanted to see it.

[Plenty]

The new xr8 will be a brilliant base car for mods as is the xr6-t. Sure it won't be as capable as a gts, but it shouldn't be at around half the price. Bang for buck though and after a few mods it will be brilliant and better than any lsx based commodore.

The VF redline will still do it for outright driving. The XR8 will be quicker that's for sure, put em both on a track and I reckon the XR8 will be the one doing the drive of shame. You just can't hide the that chassis, it'll be a good car for the money and a modders dream but again it'll only have that one thing. Power!

[macca_779]

And I think that will be enough. Handling can be fixed cheaply. Fitting a forged supercharged engine into a commodore. Not so much

[Plenty]

And I think that will be enough. Handling can be fixed cheaply. Fitting a forged supercharged engine into a commodore. Not so much

Yep true, but it wouldn't be as easy as you think to get the same level of handling with the same amount of compliance etc. As a molded track car though I reckon she'll be a bit of a weapon for the price.

[Pickles]

adr8, thank you for the FACTS......with NO bias.
Pickles.

[Jamolad]

What I find interesting is what the SM guy points out re the GT-F making 721Nm in that run where it pulled 348rwkw - given those in the GT-F corner only want to trust motoring.com.au it is interesting that in June motoring.com.au posted Ford engineers said the changes to the GT-F tune allowed it to go "beyond 569Nm and up to 650!".

This one made 721Nm.

So there is no torque limiting on GT-Fs - or just this GT-F - or just this GT-F at that point in time?

Starting to think it made 721Hmmm

[whitels1ss]

How about a Dodge?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iYol7m3WjGQ

[VBhero]

How about a Dodge?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iYol7m3WjGQ

I cannot get enough of that video!

[IJ.]

Do want :)

[Mr Frit]

With The Commodore nearing the end of production (2016-17). History needs to be set straight with the LS3 placed in the Holden SS, and with a blown LT1 in the HSV.

[jc_sv8]

With The Commodore nearing the end of production (2016-17). History needs to be set straight with the LS3 placed in the Holden SS, and with a blown LT1 in the HSV.

Yep, I'm waiting for the LS3 flappy paddled Redline then my hard earned readies can go into a Holden salesman's skyrocket.

[Plenty]

Yep, I'm waiting for the LS3 flappy paddled Redline then my hard earned readies can go into a Holden salesman's skyrocket.

Aint gonna happen in my opinion! Since the GenIII we have not seen an LS motor in a Holden badged product...... It has been the sole domain and a point of differentiation between the HSV and the Holden. Even if the HSV do get the LT1 i still doubt they would bring the LS3 into the Holden product, it just doesn't meet they're quest for fuel economy. Maybe the L99 will but even that is a stretch.

[Plenty]

How about a Dodge?

What a beast! How does it go on a track? I imagine it is aimed at the Mustang more than say the Corvette in terms of handling. I have never driven either so it's only a guess.

[offshore]

What a beast! How does it go on a track? I imagine it is aimed at the Mustang more than say the Corvette in terms of handling. I have never driven either so it's only a guess.

I hope that 700hp dodge comes to Australia would be really amusing

[JimmyXR6T04]

The VF redline will still do it for outright driving. The XR8 will be quicker that's for sure, put em both on a track and I reckon the XR8 will be the one doing the drive of shame. You just can't hide the that chassis, it'll be a good car for the money and a modders dream but again it'll only have that one thing. Power!

And for some people power is all they want... i pretty much fall into that category at the moment. Would i get the same enjoyment driving a redline, i doubt it. The joy i get from the looks on people's faces when they are a passenger and i stomp the go pedal is priceless. The redline would not have the same impact, no where near it i don't think.

As for the track, not too many head to track, so i know what i'd get more use out of. As for handling, a set of shockworks coilovers for 2k and some wider rear tyres absolutely transformed the car, it really does sit on rails in comparison, and the twisty stuff is plenty of fun. I haven't even played with firmer settings yet, it's still on soft. Horses for courses though i reckon, i don't often get to drive on the twisty stuff (and when i do, i have to go alone or with a mate, and my kids can't enjoy it due to car sickness lol), so most of my or my kids 'fun' comes from a hard 1st or 2nd gear roll on, up a ramp or from the lights.

At the end of the day it's all a 'mine's bigger than yours' thing.

People choose cars for many different reasons, i love the VF, and if the redline had the LSA or a factory supercharged motor, i may not have ended up with the GT.

Can't go wrong with either car IMO though, both fun, both plenty powerful enough!

Edit - that Dodge is bloody insane!! Can't imagine what it would feel like with that much power and torque from the factory!!

[planetdavo]

And for some people power is all they want... i pretty much fall into that category at the moment. Would i get the same enjoyment driving a redline, i doubt it. The joy i get from the looks on people's faces when they are a passenger and i stomp the go pedal is priceless. The redline would not have the same impact, no where near it i don't think.

As for the track, not too many head to track, so i know what i'd get more use out of. As for handling, a set of shockworks coilovers for 2k and some wider rear tyres absolutely transformed the car, it really does sit on rails in comparison, and the twisty stuff is plenty of fun. I haven't even played with firmer settings yet, it's still on soft. Horses for courses though i reckon, i don't often get to drive on the twisty stuff (and when i do, i have to go alone or with a mate, and my kids can't enjoy it due to car sickness lol), so most of my or my kids 'fun' comes from a hard 1st or 2nd gear roll on, up a ramp or from the lights.

At the end of the day it's all a 'mine's bigger than yours' thing.

People choose cars for many different reasons, i love the VF, and if the redline had the LSA or a factory supercharged motor, i may not have ended up with the GT.

Can't go wrong with either car IMO though, both fun, both plenty powerful enough!



Whether it's suspension mods or engine porformance mods, it's no longer a "showroom spec" new car, so saying "if I do coilovers" or whatever is really no different to someone on the other side of the fence saying "if I add a blower" or whatever.
It's all extra money spent to change the car.

[offshore]

People choose cars for many different reasons, i love the VF, and if the redline had the LSA or a factory supercharged motor,


My redline has the LSA! Must have been a factory mistake im going to ask them about it next time I go for service.

[jc_sv8]

How about a Dodge?

10.85 off the showroom floor. 1 Hellcat please sir.

[planetdavo]

Yep true, but it wouldn't be as easy as you think to get the same level of handling with the same amount of compliance etc. As a molded track car though I reckon she'll be a bit of a weapon for the price.

Exactly.
You can fairly easily make a so-so handling car a track weapon if you make it a harsh dog of a daily driver...
Depends what you want in a car. If traffic light drags and dyno graphs are your thing then they are your main priority. Whereas others will sacrifice outright performance to gain a big dose of comfort, style and tech- but still have "pretty good" performance and economy.

[JimmyXR6T04]

Whether it's suspension mods or engine porformance mods, it's no longer a "showroom spec" new car, so saying "if I do coilovers" or whatever is really no different to someone on the other side of the fence saying "if I add a blower" or whatever.
It's all extra money spent to change the car.

Yep, well aware of that mate. My point was though, for me, it was about the outright power and that relentless feeling of forced induction. I don't keep my cars standard, regardless, but it would have cost me a lot more to get the redline to make the same power as the GT, but to get the GT to handle better was relative peanuts in comparison.

The thing is, with the coilovers added the car isn't anymore uncomfortable than standard, and it's still set on the softest setting, so dialing it up some more will see even more gains in the handling department, but at some cost of comfort. I haven't felt the need to sacrifice my comfort though.

Sure the redline has more tech, but i've been there before when i bought my WM caprice, all the tech in the world didn't make up for the lack of sheer FI grunt i craved. As i said, people are different. I'm not about being a dyno queen, or traffic light warrior, quite often i simply meander around. But damn it's a hell of a lot of fun when i do decide to put the foot down and release some of those ponies to the blacktop.

For me, the drive and the grunt far outweigh the other 'luxuries'... I have outright performance, on road comfort and something capable of handling very well due to a cheap suspension upgrade, just missing the tech of the VF. I can live with that though, especially as now i've just made the GT a weekender. Anyway, it's all well off topic! I'm just glad that i live in a time that i can actually afford to pick any car i want from either offering.


My redline has the LSA! Must have been a factory mistake im going to ask them about it next time I go for service.

haha, would be an awesome car you have mate! do you have a thread on it?? i'll have to check it out, i'll do a search!

[BLACKVE]

Exactly.
You can fairly easily make a so-so handling car a track weapon if you make it a harsh dog of a daily driver...
Depends what you want in a car. If traffic light drags and dyno graphs are your thing then they are your main priority. Whereas others will sacrifice outright performance to gain a big dose of comfort, style and tech- but still have "pretty good" performance and economy.

Most on here get exhaust headers cats and tune straight up on there VE' and VF and still won't be up to a ford 5Litre

Holden had 270kws in 2006 and now in 2014 we have 260(auto or 270 in M6), holden need to move to 290 or so atleast.

[planetdavo]

Most on here get exhaust headers cats and tune straight up on there VE' and VF and still won't be up to a ford 5Litre

Holden had 270kws in 2006 and now in 2014 we have 260(auto or 270 in M6), holden need to move to 290 or so atleast.

Like I said, different people have different priorities. Quite obviously, internet forum members expectations are regularly quite different to mainstream buyers expectations.
The world has changed. More people prioritise economy now- even with V8's- and it's an area that noticeable improvements have been made (without actually losing on-road "performance"). For those that want more performance and a bit less economy, that would be why HSV exist. More expensive, but you get more. ;)
If people are happy to have the supercharged Miami and coilovers, and will put up with the taxi spec interior and poor "tall boy" seating position, well, that again is up to them to decide what are their most important priorities in a new car are...

[mjrandom]

If I wanted a car with good fuel economy I would have bought a Clubsport......................................

[JimmyXR6T04]

It's funny, but i was quite critical of the FG 'taxi spec' interior, and a big fan of the VF. Having spent time in the cabin though, i can quite honestly say it's a comfortable place to be, and when the right foot is pushed to the floor, not even a Mercedes interior would matter to me. Driving from Canberra to Melbourne, and several other longs trips, i can honestly say that i've never caught myself wishing for a nicer interior, or more tech. One push of the loud pedal and realise why i opted for it.

I don't get time to worry about the tech inside the car when i am actually out enjoying the car for how it was meant to be driven. The only tech i actually miss is auto dip passenger mirror when reversing.

Completely understand where others are coming from though, and the interior and lack of modern features would be a real clincher in swaying away from the miami. Perhaps the XR8 will fill that void, and people can have the updated interior, more tech and that awesome motor.

edit: and yep, more and more buyers consider fuel economy in their purchase criteria. But those who want outright performance know that the two don't really go hand in hand (unless you're buying a very expensive euro, and never belt it). I average about 13-14L/100km most times, and the best my caprice ever did in similar circumstances was about 12-12.5L/100km...

[planetdavo]

It's funny, but i was quite critical of the FG 'taxi spec' interior, and a big fan of the VF. Having spent time in the cabin though, i can quite honestly say it's a comfortable place to be, and when the right foot is pushed to the floor, not even a Mercedes interior would matter to me. Driving from Canberra to Melbourne, and several other longs trips, i can honestly say that i've never caught myself wishing for a nicer interior, or more tech. One push of the loud pedal and realise why i opted for it.

I don't get time to worry about the tech inside the car when i am actually out enjoying the car for how it was meant to be driven. The only tech i actually miss is auto dip passenger mirror when reversing.

Completely understand where others are coming from though, and the interior and lack of modern features would be a real clincher in swaying away from the miami. Perhaps the XR8 will fill that void, and people can have the updated interior, more tech and that awesome motor.

edit: and yep, more and more buyers consider fuel economy in their purchase criteria. But those who want outright performance know that the two don't really go hand in hand (unless you're buying a very expensive euro, and never belt it). I average about 13-14L/100km most times, and the best my caprice ever did in similar circumstances was about 12-12.5L/100km...

End of the day, as long as you are happy with what you got for the money, that is all that matters.

My next door neighbour used to have a G6E Turbo. Loved it.
Then he traded it in on a VF SSV Redline wagon.
And he loves that. Even more so, because it's more practical than the sedan he had, and with an exhaust change it sounds meaty compared to the whooshy turbo.
He misses the "rush" of the turbo, but he doesn't miss the laggy low rev performance.
Same buyer, but different priorities at different times.
It's good to have choice. :)

[sjhugh]

If people are happy to have the supercharged Miami and coilovers, and will put up with the taxi spec interior and poor "tall boy" seating position, well, that again is up to them to decide what are their most important priorities in a new car are...

That’s my priorities right there. I’d have one of those Ford thingies like that for a weekender when I drive for fun and use a VF SS Redline for going to the shops. Creature comforts are good for a daily.

The straight line performance of that Ford is fantastic value for the money and I’m not racing around the track so I won’t miss the so called superior chassis of the Holden.

I’m not overly interested in the GTS or GT F but a supercharged XR8 if it eventuates will end up in my garage for use on the weekend.

[Toa]

Have posted dyno sheets from Bullet Performance Racing a Ford tuner to balance the ledger, stock GT 284rwkw and stock GS 262rwkw.

I also remember reading a post on AFF a couple of years ago and Rob Herrod himself even said that the GS makes about 270rwkw and the GT 280rwkw.

http://www.hp-f.com.au/catalog/ford/ford-fg-sc-5-0lt-v8/fg-sc-5-0lt-performance/fg-fpv-supercharged-boss-5-0lt-stage-1/

http://i1078.photobucket.com/albums/w491/advr8/gt-graph.jpg

http://bulletperformanceracing.com.au/wordpress/customer-dyno-graphs/ford-dyno-graphs/fpv-fg-gs-gt-falcon-coyote

http://i1078.photobucket.com/albums/w491/advr8/FGFPVGSUte335TuneTorq284kwSmall.jpg

Hi adr8, I take it that Rod Herrod is using a well dialled in dyno?

[FFAMan]

Rob himself told me a few days ago the average number he's seen for 335's is about 320rwkw... This is based on hundreds of runs since the 335 hit the market.

[adr8]

Rob himself told me a few days ago the average number he's seen for 335's is about 320rwkw... This is based on hundreds of runs since the 335 hit the market.

I tried to do a search under Herrod's username on AFF for the thread I am talking about but the search history only goes back to 2013, I will keep searching and if I can find it I will post it.
I do remember it was a thread about dyno results and one member got 270 rwkw from his GS and was complaining as to why it was so low compared to others in the thread and Rob Herrod said that's how much they make std and the GT's about 280 rwkw.

[adr8]

I tried to do a search under Herrod's username on AFF for the thread I am talking about but the search history only goes back to 2013, I will keep searching and if I can find it I will post it.
I do remember it was a thread about dyno results and one member got 270 rwkw from his GS and was complaining as to why it was so low compared to others in the thread and Rob Herrod said that's how much they make std and the GT's about 280 rwkw.

Edit: I found the thread, I am not allowed to post a link to another forum so I will mention the title "Power output of Miami Engines" these are the posts

Bad Max writes:

GS ute
All stock motor
K&N filter at the time no other changes.
270rwkw.

Now either I have a dud motor or there are some extremely happy dyno's out there

Herrod Motorsport writes:

no you dont max , that is what they make. the others must be tuned as the figures that they are quoting are what i get tuned.


Obviously no mention of GT dyno figures in that post so I got that wrong, but I did read it when it was posted in 2012 so memory of it was a bit hazy lol

[Toa]

that's cool adr8, I have heard the same from him back in 2012 when my brothers gt got some mods from them

I just don't trust many dyno numbers, especially shootout mode, I believe most to be a marketing tool

[Toa]

I found the dyno sheet of my brothers black edition GT, this was a little unusual though

http://i1274.photobucket.com/albums/y426/xagtho/2012-07-26181251_zpsca12309e.jpg

The guys at herrod put the gt on the rollers and she pulled 338kw at the wheels on the first run, then backed it up with a second and a third. They then concluded that the dyno was out of whack, so they supposedly spent 2 hours recalibrating the unit before putting the GT black back on the rollers only to find it pulled 338rwkw again...
This left them scratching their heads.
They then realised they had another standard 335 GT in the shop, so they put it on the rollers and found it put out the normalish 277rwkw...

At this point they called up my brother and asked him what sort of modifications he had done to the car? he replied honestly "none, you are the first guys to play with her"
This left them scratching their heads some more, before asking him how he has been driving it? again he honestly replied "like I stole it..."
This made the herrod guys audibly chuckle over the phone.

The above results are quite self explanatory, and very impressive for a drop off in the morning, pick up in the afternoon, standard intake, standard exhaust, no internals scenario, and an absolute animal to drive

[Plenty]

I found the dyno sheet of my brothers black edition GT, this was a little unusual though

http://i1274.photobucket.com/albums/y426/xagtho/2012-07-26181251_zpsca12309e.jpg

The guys at herrod put the gt on the rollers and she pulled 338kw at the wheels on the first run, then backed it up with a second and a third. They then concluded that the dyno was out of whack, so they supposedly spent 2 hours recalibrating the unit before putting the GT black back on the rollers only to find it pulled 338rwkw again...
This left them scratching their heads.
They then realised they had another standard 335 GT in the shop, so they put it on the rollers and found it put out the normalish 277rwkw...

At this point they called up my brother and asked him what sort of modifications he had done to the car? he replied honestly "none, you are the first guys to play with her"
This left them scratching their heads some more, before asking him how he has been driving it? again he honestly replied "like I stole it..."
This made the herrod guys audibly chuckle over the phone.

The above results are quite self explanatory, and very impressive for a drop off in the morning, pick up in the afternoon, standard intake, standard exhaust, no internals scenario, and an absolute animal to drive

And an intercooler!

[Vulture]

10.85 off the showroom floor. 1 Hellcat please sir.

To be annoyingly accurate, it does 11.2 of the showroom floor, 10.8 with drag radials.

[macca_779]

Surprised no one has posted yet. Wheels did the test again with engineers from both camps, an independent and at two different dynos. GT-F can now be officially called the most powerful Aussie production car ever made.

http://www.wheelsmag.com.au/features/1408/fpv-beats-hsv-in-definitive-power-test/

While this is all well and good. The GTS is still the better car for the money IMO compared to the GT-F. But with the pending XR8 soon to be released with the same drivetrain; all be it in detuned form. I reckon its going to be one hell of a good value car being it should be ~$40k less than a GTS but with more power.

[offshore]

Transient over boost what a pathetic excuse for the lack of intercooler. In Australian heat it means it will hardly every get into over boost. Next bring on the Mustang instead of this underwhelming Ford.

[macca_779]

Transient over boost what a pathetic excuse for the lack of intercooler. In Australian heat it means it will hardly every get into over boost. Next bring on the Mustang instead of this underwhelming Ford.

Yet even without the cooler and a 1.2L deficit it makes more power than the GTS. If a car can do 6 pulls on a dyno and remain below 60ºC in the manifold, its doing bloody well. Its common to see supercharged LS engines that "are" intercooled get hotter than that and won't get 6 pulls in before they start loosing power, let alone make more like the GT-F does.

[offshore]

Yet even without the cooler and a 1.2L deficit it makes more power than the GTS. If a car can do 6 pulls on a dyno and remain below 60ºC in the manifold, its doing bloody well. Its common to see supercharged LS engines that "are" intercooled get hotter than that and won't get 6 pulls in before they start loosing power, let alone make more like the GT-F does.

Yea its a good engine. Its just not complete plus the the heads and cams are bloody hard to get more power out of it compared to chevs. Thats only from an after market perspective my mate is a full on Ford guy but even he wants to do up an LS engine because the Ford is just to hard and lack of support.

[macca_779]

Yea its a good engine. Its just not complete plus the the heads and cams are bloody hard to get more power out of it compared to chevs. Thats only from an after market perspective my mate is a full on Ford guy but even he wants to do up an LS engine because the Ford is just to hard and lack of support.

Yeah absolutely they are expensive to Mod things like cams. But they're pretty bloody good out of the box so few people bother. LSA is a better value engine to modify. But thats not for everyone.. Including the record books in this instance

[Woodchukka]

It is good to see the competition between the 2 is still there even though it seems more like the last ha rah. There is no doubt it is a great engine however the transient over boost thing is a bit of a wank really as far as I am concerned. A mine is bigger than yours but only if I tie a weight to the end and stand with slightly more weight on my left foot. The HSV knocked out full power near straight up whereas the FPV got there in the end.

[offshore]

The LSA can easily be 500kw safely no worries at all. But HSV was a bit scared of the publicity and also the 3 year warranty but even then I reckon it would be ok.

[Xjas]

. GT-F can now be officially called the most powerful Aussie production car ever made.

Not really because regardless of any magazine article the offical power output of the GT-F is 351kws and the VF GTS is 430kws.

[offshore]

Its a great car that there is no doubt but we have to not set our goals low. We can build them good in Australia. So HSV lets build the best in the next couple of years and stick it to every one else. Like you have with the GTS but better.

[macca_779]

Ls9 would be great. Or LT4. But I fear it's to late to justify the development dollars on

[offshore]

Ls9 would be great. Or LT4. But I fear it's to late to justify the development dollars on

LS9 would be harder cause of dry sump etc. LTA would be interesting for a start out of the C7 Z06 because there is a modded version coming out after that with ZR1 so that would be the last upgrade in 2017 maybe.

[offshore]

The LT4 GTS would have say 650hp up from 580hp a useful upgrade. And the final version would be 700+hp sounds ok.

[sjhugh]

The XR8 will be killer value if good power is your thing and you don’t want to risk going down the modded route.

Reminds me of the old days when you could go into the Holden dealer and order just the engine and a manual trans thanks and drive out with a bare boned V8 version of the old Kingswood or Belmont.

Nothing too fancy but it gets the job done.

[offshore]

That reminds me one of the next HSV cars could be a striped down car. Like the Camaro in the US

http://www.chevrolet.com/performance/custom-camaro-upgrades.html

[sjhugh]

That reminds me one of the next HSV cars could be a striped down car. Like the Camaro in the US

http://www.chevrolet.com/performance/custom-camaro-upgrades.html


I very much doubt that will ever be on sale here but the XR8 definitely will be.

[macca_779]

I very much doubt that will ever be on sale here but the XR8 definitely will be.

Yeah that's it. We can procrastinate about what HSV may, may not and probably won't do. But what Ford is doing is at least being advertised and confirmed. We know XR8 is coming. We know Mustang is coming. Holden by all accounts has only confirmed gutless shitters post 2017 thus far. Everything else re camaro or engine upgrades for VF is still speculation, regardless how much we want it

[jc_sv8]

I don't get it.

One is 351KW and the other is 430KW.
One pulls a max of 343.3KW on a happier dyno yet they says it it always has 351KW + up to 15% of fairy dust transient overboost.
One pulls a max of 322.1KW and has a 430KW badge.

So one only looses 3% power through the drivetrain yet the other one looses around 25%.

Sounds to me like they should put the LSA in the Falcon and have around 420KW on the dyno... :(

I'd like to see the graphs to see where the power is made, and can't wait for a track test to see how each perform down the 1/4 and around 1 lap of Phillip Island.

[offshore]

I very much doubt that will ever be on sale here but the XR8 definitely will be.

No I meant a Commodore striped down. Why not? Plenty of racing fans here and probably a surplus of parts at the end of the run. So give is us a striped down race car for drags etc.

[macca_779]

I don't get it.

One is 351KW and the other is 430KW.
One pulls a max of 343.3KW on a happier dyno yet they says it it always has 351KW + up to 15% of fairy dust transient overboost.
One pulls a max of 322.1KW and has a 430KW badge.

So one only looses 3% power through the drivetrain yet the other one looses around 25%.

Sounds to me like they should put the LSA in the Falcon and have around 420KW on the dyno... :(

I'd like to see the graphs to see where the power is made, and can't wait for a track test to see how each perform down the 1/4 and around 1 lap of Phillip Island.

Ford quotes 404kw at the fly with max over boost. But yeah HSV still talks shit re 430kw

[offshore]

Ford quotes 404kw at the fly with max over boost. But yeah HSV still talks shit re 430kw

The main problem with the LSA is reducing the HP its so easy to make huge grunt. Wait for my dyno graphs coming up next week

[SUZUKI MALISHA]

No I meant a Commodore striped down. Why not? Plenty of racing fans here and probably a surplus of parts at the end of the run. So give is us a striped down race car for drags etc.

That's what the GTF is.....a stripped out.........lol

[SUZUKI MALISHA]

And I really notice people don't understand what fords transient overboost is. It's simply always ON. The engine will garuntee 351kws and depending on temps transient boost adjust that figure up and down. It'll stay at max all day every day if it's at a good temperature. Hence why they did 9 runs in all the above mentioned dyno tests for the ford and still had minimal heat soak.(tho it's winter). For a non inter cooled high output engine that very impressive. Espescially when it's averaging aproxx 20more rwkws then the inter cooled cough430cough GTS.

[VYR8HSV]

The LSA crate engine puts out a claimed 556hp or 408kw.
HSV claim it to be 430kw, a gain of 22kw. Does anyone know how they get the extra 22 from?
Also W427's with 375kw get around 280-290rwkw
While the GTS gets 20-30 more rwkw while claiming 55kw more!
It's either lost more kws through the drivetrain or the claimed 430 is a bit high??

[offshore]

The LSA crate engine puts out a claimed 556hp or 408kw.
HSV claim it to be 430kw, a gain of 22kw. Does anyone know how they get the extra 22 from?
Also W427's with 375kw get around 280-290rwkw
While the GTS gets 20-30 more rwkw while claiming 55kw more!
It's either lost more kws through the drivetrain or the claimed 430 is a bit high??

That 556hp is the Cadillac CTS-V version of the motor that doesnt have the larger supercharger cover of the Camaro ZL1 version. The ZL1 version is the same as HSV and its 430kw

[sjhugh]

No I meant a Commodore striped down. Why not? Plenty of racing fans here and probably a surplus of parts at the end of the run. So give is us a striped down race car for drags etc.


I was voicing here a few years back HSV given their supposed racing heritage should offer a stripped down lighter ballsy street racer for a different yet admittedly limited cliental and it never happened for a reason.

It definitely won’t now.

Still that Camaro is a good idea, just wouldn’t have the sales numbers to make it viable here.

The difference with the XR8 is it will have a reasonable kit just not the all out everything that is good that HSV has tried to incorporate into the GTS.

The XR8 will be a good valued stripped down (or should I say not as fancy) performance car in my books.

[TuffR8]

And I really notice people don't understand what fords transient overboost is. It's simply always ON. The engine will garuntee 351kws and depending on temps transient boost adjust that figure up and down. It'll stay at max all day every day if it's at a good temperature. Hence why they did 9 runs in all the above mentioned dyno tests for the ford and still had minimal heat soak.(tho it's winter). For a non inter cooled high output engine that very impressive. Espescially when it's averaging aproxx 20more rwkws then the inter cooled cough430cough GTS.

So at some stage between 5000-6000 rpm the Ford makes a peak of 20 more kW than a gts. The gts makes 30 + kW more anywhere else not to mention the big torque difference across the rev range. This is evidenced by the fact the hsv outperforms the ford at every point...

Just putting it into perspective...

[Uwish]

The GTS is also losing more through the driveline. FFS It was a bigger clutch / bigger Gearbox / and a 9.9" diff.
So the GTS will last all day long without breaking shit.
The New XR8 will be the bargin performance V8 of the 2000s.

[Plenty]

And I really notice people don't understand what fords transient overboost is. It's simply always ON. The engine will garuntee 351kws and depending on temps transient boost adjust that figure up and down. It'll stay at max all day every day if it's at a good temperature. Hence why they did 9 runs in all the above mentioned dyno tests for the ford and still had minimal heat soak.(tho it's winter). For a non inter cooled high output engine that very impressive. Espescially when it's averaging aproxx 20more rwkws then the inter cooled cough430cough GTS.

Hold onto that dyno result mate cos it's the last victory FPV will ever have over HSV. One of very few might i add! So meanwhile while you wait for the tenth set of lights for the temps to be spot on to beat the GTS next you..............

[Plenty]

Anyway, everyone seen the new VX clubsport?

https://scontent-b-lax.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xpf1/t31.0-8/10548316_935497293142596_3482902891550562510_o.jpg

[whitels1ss]

https://scontent-b-lax.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xpf1/t31.0-8/10548316_935497293142596_3482902891550562510_o.jpg

To me it looks like an FG Falcon that someone has stitched some Mondeo rear lamps into.

No like.

[sjhugh]

Hold onto that dyno result mate cos it's the last victory FPV will ever have over HSV. One of very few might i add! So meanwhile while you wait for the tenth set of lights for the temps to be spot on to beat the GTS next you..............

True the GTS has so far shown to be the quicker but by the time you get to the next set of lights neither will have the time to get away from the other.

Anyway the GT F is now finished and the short term future will be the Ford XR8’s tangling with the HSV R8’s for the bulk of owners.

[seldo]

....
HSV claim it to be 430kw, a gain of 22kw. Does anyone know how they get the extra 22 from?......
A stroke of the pen.....

[GTS LSA]

If anyone cares

My Auto GTS just ran 336.7 RWKW, it's 10 Months old & has nearly 9000km on the clock and its definitely not a happy dyno

By my calculations that's a 21.7% drive train loss on the claimed 430kw, I was actually assuming there would be a bigger loss than that, so at least in this case I would suggest that the 430 quoted figure is pretty spot on

Just my 2 bobs :hide:

And that XR8 looks horrible :sleep::sleep:

[sjhugh]

My Auto GTS just ran 336.7 RWKW, it's 10 Months old & has nearly 9000km on the clock and its definitely not a happy dyno



That’s a better result than Wheel’s though the naysayers will see a dyno figure in isolation as not meaning much.

Whose dyno was it?

[jaykay]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fJSiRDCR62w[

[macca_779]

Manual GT vs Auto GTS.. It means nothing when Auto 335 GT's have done 12.5's consistently.

[whitels1ss]

Manual GT vs Auto GTS.. It means nothing when Auto 335 GT's have done 12.5's consistently.

Very true and the guy did say that an auto GT F would have been quicker (than a manual GT F)

but the 12.1 out of the GTS was pretty good:yup:

[GTS LSA]

Real world test for the win!

But yes, cant understand why they did it auto vs manual...

[BLACKVE]

If anyone cares

My Auto GTS just ran 336.7 RWKW, it's 10 Months old & has nearly 9000km on the clock and its definitely not a happy dyno

By my calculations that's a 21.7% drive train loss on the claimed 430kw, I was actually assuming there would be a bigger loss than that, so at least in this case I would suggest that the 430 quoted figure is pretty spot on

Just my 2 bobs :hide:

And that XR8 looks horrible :sleep::sleep:

post the dyno sheet

[macca_779]

If anyone cares

My Auto GTS just ran 336.7 RWKW, it's 10 Months old & has nearly 9000km on the clock and its definitely not a happy dyno

By my calculations that's a 21.7% drive train loss on the claimed 430kw, I was actually assuming there would be a bigger loss than that, so at least in this case I would suggest that the 430 quoted figure is pretty spot on

Just my 2 bobs :hide:

And that XR8 looks horrible :sleep::sleep:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OZpgnYhzdkI

[GTS LSA]

^^Why??

I just made a point that stock the GTS makes about what is stated... Give or take .... What is the big drama

I had a pre run done pre Harrop stage 2 being done, and it just happened to make about what HSV say, I wasnt doing it to prove or disprove anything to anyone, and I certainly didnt run it side by side with a GT F under similar conditions

If you want and i can work out how i can put em up, but Who gives a crap about 5 or 10 kw on a dyno..

[GTS LSA]

That’s a better result than Wheel’s though the naysayers will see a dyno figure in isolation as not meaning much.

Whose dyno was it?

Yeah agree, means sweet FA... Cool winters day in Canberra, vs every other variable means jack sh#t.. Does drive good at Wakefield though:D

[shaness8]

Crap drag race the guy driving the GTF can't drive manual very well, looks as if the car bogs down off the line and he's in no hurry to change gear's put a decent driver in there should see low 12's.

[SUZUKI MALISHA]

Hold onto that dyno result mate cos it's the last victory FPV will ever have over HSV. One of very few might i add! So meanwhile while you wait for the tenth set of lights for the temps to be spot on to beat the GTS next you..............

Mate the tests with nine runs were done simply because they didn't believe the initial runs so they kept trying after checking the dyno and also seeing if heat soak would affect things. It didn't. So your another one of these guys who just don't GET transient overboost!
And I'll be the guy in the GTS......difference is I'll understand what's beside me and respect it....unlike you.

[Plenty]

Mate the tests with nine runs were done simply because they didn't believe the initial runs so they kept trying after checking the dyno and also seeing if heat soak would affect things. It didn't. So your another one of these guys who just don't GET transient overboost!
And I'll be the guy in the GTS......difference is I'll understand what's beside me and respect it....unlike you.

Ummm I don't understand transient over boost? Why? I just said it's the last thing FPV will win. I don't respect the GT? That's funny cos I have one of their utes sitting in my garage next to my GenF R8, you see I speak from experience in both camps not just some guess work or what I can copy from the Internet like others. If I go to the motorplex I take the ute, if I want to DRIVE I take the HSV every single time.

[mattnsw]

Ummm I don't understand transient over boost?
Why? I just said it's the last thing FPV will win.
I don't respect the GT?
That's funny cos I have one of their utes sitting in my garage next to my GenF R8, you see I speak from experience in both camps not just some guess work or what I can copy from the Internet like others.

You have a FPV FG GS Supercharged Ute in your garage next to the R8 with your history of dissing the Ford product?
I recall you saying not long ago when commenting about the new GTF “you can only polish a turd so much”.
You might be speaking from experience but being so insulting about a brand you have in your garage is beyond belief in my books. :weirdo:

[BLACKVE]

^^Why??

I just made a point that stock the GTS makes about what is stated... Give or take .... What is the big drama

I had a pre run done pre Harrop stage 2 being done, and it just happened to make about what HSV say, I wasnt doing it to prove or disprove anything to anyone, and I certainly didnt run it side by side with a GT F under similar conditions

If you want and i can work out how i can put em up, but Who gives a crap about 5 or 10 kw on a dyno..

just wanted to see a independent dyno graph, nothing sinister

[Spooner8]

Correct me if I am wrong, but out of the 10 odd dyno runs that were done by the GT F, it's power number was only bettered by the GTS on one occasion and that was while they were trying to get the GT F up to normal operating temperature.
Fact remains, HSV has been claiming they make the most powerful car ever built in Australia, and that has just been proven factually incorrect. It doesn't matter if it is quicker down the strip, has a better interior, has a stronger diff, or goes around a corner faster. That has nothing to do with the statement of The most powerful car ever built in Australia

I find it hilarious that people don't tip their hat in respect to the GTF and say well played Ford, cause they have really pulled HSV's pants down on this one. And before anyone jumps down my throat, I would take the GTS in a heartbeat over the GTF cause it is just a better all round car, however, when it come to the numbers (and let's face it, we hold that in high regard in Australia) then I say round one goes to you FPV.

[Woodchukka]

Correct me if I am wrong but didn't HSV's figures come out first? I mean how had is it to beat a power figure when the other has already laid the cards on the table? HSV could simply make a few tweaks and go for more kw's. Ford had a figure to beat and it did and I reckon it is great that they still feel a need to compete as we will ultimately be the winners.

[Spooner8]

Yes, but one claims 430fwkw and the other claims 351fwkw....
For someone who knows nothing about these cars, HSV would have you believe that their product slaughters the FPV in outright power, yet in actual fact it does it less than 10% of the time. That's were the humour is this story comes in. And once again I reiterate, the GTS is still a far better car IMO.....

[BLACKVE]

remember its 5 litres vs 6.2

Someone is doing it better.............if its close

[whitels1ss]

I like the torque figures on the GTS:popcorn:

[Spooner8]

Me to....

If only the badge put on the back represented torque figures and not kw figures, order would be restored......

[macca_779]

Me to....

If only the badge put on the back represented torque figures and not kw figures, order would be restored......

You do realise power is just torque and rpm

[Spooner8]

Your point?

[Drizt]

The Ford incorrectly states it's power figures. Wonder if they could be sued in the event of an accident for the deception?

[Spooner8]

The Ford incorrectly states it's power figures. Wonder if they could be sued in the event of an accident for the deception?

Surely your joking? FPV are taking honesty to the extreme saying that regardless of the conditions, you will always make a minimum of 351fwkw and the potential of up to 15% extra (404fwkw.) That's honesty at it best.

Deception is promising something and then not delivering to that promised level. It's a contentious point that would spark a lot of debate on whether HSV has done that or not.....

[SV805]

Correct me if I am wrong, but out of the 10 odd dyno runs that were done by the GT F, it's power number was only bettered by the GTS on one occasion and that was while they were trying to get the GT F up to normal operating temperature.
Fact remains, HSV has been claiming they make the most powerful car ever built in Australia, and that has just been proven factually incorrect. It doesn't matter if it is quicker down the strip, has a better interior, has a stronger diff, or goes around a corner faster. That has nothing to do with the statement of The most powerful car ever built in Australia

I find it hilarious that people don't tip their hat in respect to the GTF and say well played Ford, cause they have really pulled HSV's pants down on this one. And before anyone jumps down my throat, I would take the GTS in a heartbeat over the GTF cause it is just a better all round car, however, when it come to the numbers (and let's face it, we hold that in high regard in Australia) then I say round one goes to you FPV.

At the end of the day if Ford advertise as 351KW then YES GTS is still most powerful car in Australia. Unless of course you wish to dyno everycar that comes off the assembly line. There can be significant variances on every car and have had all sorts of stories over the years about having a good one or a bad one. If Ford had any sense or confidence they would have advertised it as more power than the GTS.

[Spooner8]

At the end of the day if Ford advertise as 351KW then YES GTS is still most powerful car in Australia. Unless of course you wish to dyno everycar that comes off the assembly line. There can be significant variances on every car and have had all sorts of stories over the years about having a good one or a bad one. If Ford had any sense or confidence they would have advertised it as more power than the GTS.

Next off Toyota will be sticking 440kw badges on the back of there camry's and telling everyone they have Australia's most powerful car.
No need for a dyno test guys, trust us, the 4cyl n/a engine really performs with this new k&n filter we put in...... Lol

[Plenty]

You have a FPV FG GS Supercharged Ute in your garage next to the R8 with your history of dissing the Ford product?
I recall you saying not long ago when commenting about the new GTF “you can only polish a turd so much”.
You might be speaking from experience but being so insulting about a brand you have in your garage is beyond belief in my books. :weirdo:

The FPV was cheaper, had a better tie down system and fits the job for what I want. It is a fantastic engine and a brilliant ZF auto. The fact remain that anything more than 8/10th's driving the HSV/Holden is the better drive. It's no insult I'm merely stating facts. I love the sheer power of the ute but like I said earlier when it comes to true driving pleasure I pick the HSV every time.

[SUZUKI MALISHA]

Correct me if I am wrong, but out of the 10 odd dyno runs that were done by the GT F, it's power number was only bettered by the GTS on one occasion and that was while they were trying to get the GT F up to normal operating temperature.
Fact remains, HSV has been claiming they make the most powerful car ever built in Australia, and that has just been proven factually incorrect. It doesn't matter if it is quicker down the strip, has a better interior, has a stronger diff, or goes around a corner faster. That has nothing to do with the statement of The most powerful car ever built in Australia

I find it hilarious that people don't tip their hat in respect to the GTF and say well played Ford, cause they have really pulled HSV's pants down on this one. And before anyone jumps down my throat, I would take the GTS in a heartbeat over the GTF cause it is just a better all round car, however, when it come to the numbers (and let's face it, we hold that in high regard in Australia) then I say round one goes to you FPV.

About time someone else around here tipped their hat to the GT. And I 100% agree with everything you've said here and in your next few posts. Well said.

[SUZUKI MALISHA]

The FPV was cheaper, had a better tie down system and fits the job for what I want. It is a fantastic engine and a brilliant ZF auto. The fact remain that anything more than 8/10th's driving the HSV/Holden is the better drive. It's no insult I'm merely stating facts. I love the sheer power of the ute but like I said earlier when it comes to true driving pleasure I pick the HSV every time.

You really are the ultimate hack mate. One second your trying to get credit for simply owning a GT and a r8 saying you take the ford when you want to go racing.....then you state the holdens the better product for anything more then 8tenths driving!!!wow so you drive your drag cars at only 8/10ths and your road cars at 9 or 10/10ths. Well done for showing you just waffle along paying zero respect to the enemy ever. As mentioned all you ever do is bag the opposition. You probably only have the ford so you don't get reemed on resale....or you stole it :|

[Drizt]

minimum of 351fwkw

where does it say minimum?

Take the old GT for instance...

http://www.fpv.com.au/gt_showroom/gt

"Maximum power (DIN) – 335kW @ 5750rpm Maximum torque (DIN) – 570Nm @ 2200-5500rpm"

Clearly a lie.

[701let]

You really are the ultimate hack mate. One second your trying to get credit for simply owning a GT and a r8 saying you take the ford when you want to go racing.....then you state the holdens the better product for anything more then 8tenths driving!!!wow so you drive your drag cars at only 8/10ths and your road cars at 9 or 10/10ths. Well done for showing you just waffle along paying zero respect to the enemy ever. As mentioned all you ever do is bag the opposition. You probably only have the ford so you don't get reemed on resale....or you stole it :|

Having a quick look through your history of telling everyone how great every ford falcon is (while throwing in the disclaimer of having 'had an r8' or 'I'll be in a gts') it would seem that you are the only real hack mate...

[Plenty]

You really are the ultimate hack mate. One second your trying to get credit for simply owning a GT and a r8 saying you take the ford when you want to go racing.....then you state the holdens the better product for anything more then 8tenths driving!!!wow so you drive your drag cars at only 8/10ths and your road cars at 9 or 10/10ths. Well done for showing you just waffle along paying zero respect to the enemy ever. As mentioned all you ever do is bag the opposition. You probably only have the ford so you don't get reemed on resale....or you stole it :|

Mate the insults are really not required, I purchased a ute for work purposes and the FPV was not only cheaper but I reckon it's a better ute in terms of cabin space and tie down. I don't need to justify my purchase one way or the other to you I was just stating my opinion from someone that has both albeit sedan vs ute. FPV are not the enemy mate I am privileged to have the opportunity to own a genuine muscle car from both camps and along the way do my bit for both "Aussie" companies.
But by actually experiencing both cars my conclusion remains the same the HSV IMO is the better car.

[Spooner8]

where does it say minimum?

Take the old GT for instance...

http://www.fpv.com.au/gt_showroom/gt

"Maximum power (DIN) – 335kW @ 5750rpm Maximum torque (DIN) – 570Nm @ 2200-5500rpm"

Clearly a lie.

Whatch the wheels dyno video mate and you can see and hear the "lie" straight from the horses (read - engineer who designed it) mouth!!

[VYR8HSV]

Anyone wanna put both motors & put them on a climate controlled Engine Dyno.
To see ahs they really make at the flywheel? ?

[Micks]

Anyone wanna put both motors & put them on a climate controlled Engine Dyno.
To see ahs they really make at the flywheel? ?
@ the end of the day we all know some motors perform extremely well/better even with same specs or from the same batch.
I'm glad Fraud are lifting their game cause there generally behind or backward in my book & always need to prove themselves anyhow!! :yup:

[Xjas]

Next off Toyota will be sticking 440kw badges on the back of there camry's and telling everyone they have Australia's most powerful car.
No need for a dyno test guys, trust us, the 4cyl n/a engine really performs with this new k&n filter we put in...... Lol

Are you claiming that's what HSV have done here?
Rule of thumb I've always used is horsepower at the ground is roughly kilowatts at the flywheel and the HSV seems to fit in this case.


HSV have built a car that will make 430kws regardless of conditions, FPV have one that will make 351kw all day but if the stars align will produce more than the HSV, claiming the FPV is the most powerful Australian built car based on a one dyno comparison where it does is folly, especially when the HSV was better a few weeks before in a different comparison.

[Jamolad]

Doesn't the GT-F only make more power for a very brief period right up top, whereas through the bulk of the rev-range the GTS is putting out more in comparison?

I thought that is the reason that Australia's most powerful car is not Australia's fastest car. :hide:

When it comes down to what is currently and has been previously offered by the local manufacturers I reckon it would break down as follows:

- GTS has Australia's most powerful engine
- GT-F is Australia's most powerful car at the rear wheels
- GTS is Australia's fastest car in a straight line, but not by a massive amount
- GTS is Australia's fastest car by a fair margin when corners are involved, and with it's driveline, coolers and brakes that margin would likely get bigger with every lap.

It would be an injustice to say the GT-F is nothing more than a dyno-queen, because there is no doubt it is far more than that in isolation - but when compared to the GTS, the dyno is the only battle it would win.

[Spooner8]

Are you claiming that's what HSV have done here?
Rule of thumb I've always used is horsepower at the ground is roughly kilowatts at the flywheel and the HSV seems to fit in this case.


HSV have built a car that will make 430kws regardless of conditions, FPV have one that will make 351kw all day but if the stars align will produce more than the HSV, claiming the FPV is the most powerful Australian built car based on a one dyno comparison where it does is folly, especially when the HSV was better a few weeks before in a different comparison.

Seriously, do you know anything about this topic, or have you just read the last page and decided to have your say? Ok then, here we go again....

1. Depending on which dyno you go off will affect your HP at ground statement. Use Herrods result, and the GTS badge should probably read 410fwkw.
2. Out of the 10 dyno runs that were completed, the GTS was higher on 1 (while the Ford warmed up on the first run) so your statement should read, the GTS will have more power if you catch the GTF owner as he is pulling out of his garage first thing in the morning and ask him for a run on the spot. The other 90% of the time! the GTF will ge making more power at the wheels (hardly a stars aligning proposition)
3. Exactly the same cars were used on this test as the previous test you referred to. If you bother to read the article (and watch the video) you will see this was in much more controlled conditions than last time to ensure the results were 100% fair and accurate.
4. Another test was completed by another magazine and the GTF won that shoutout as well (they dyno ed the GTF 11 times to make sure it wasn't a fluke)
5. HSV and FPV engineers were both present at the wheels dyno test and were happy with there respective results.
6. In my opinion, I think the GTS is a better car and would most likely be faster and better in almost all conditions, however this test is the closest we will ever get to a fair test, and the fact no HSV rep is challenging the result means its hats off to the GTF..... For the moment......

[Spooner8]

Doesn't the GT-F only make more power for a very brief period right up top, whereas through the bulk of the rev-range the GTS is putting out more in comparison?

I thought that is the reason that Australia's most powerful car is not Australia's fastest car. :hide:

When it comes down to what is currently and has been previously offered by the local manufacturers I reckon it would break down as follows:

- GTS has Australia's most powerful engine
- GT-F is Australia's most powerful car at the rear wheels
- GTS is Australia's fastest car in a straight line, but not by a massive amount
- GTS is Australia's fastest car by a fair margin when corners are involved, and with it's driveline, coolers and brakes that margin would likely get bigger with every lap.

It would be an injustice to say the GT-F is nothing more than a dyno-queen, because there is no doubt it is far more than that in isolation - but when compared to the GTS, the dyno is the only battle it would win.

Agreed with most of what you say there. Torque and getting power to the ground plays a massive part in good quarter mile times. Also, I think the following on your points...

- questionable, the only way to know for sure would be to pull the engine out and bench test them to see what the driveline losses are...
- Agreed
- Agreed, however I think the GTS would win 9 out of 10 times by a comfortable margin
- Agreed

Agreed, however a tantalising prospect is the same engine will soon be available in the xr8 for approx half the GTS outlay. Imagine if you could get the GTS gear in the SSV. Something for the ford boys to be pretty excited about I reckon.....

[Jamolad]

Dyno win to the GT-F, but answer me this - would you prefer your car to be slightly more powerful than the car next to you or would you prefer your car to be slightly faster than the car next to you?

In this scenario it is one or the other - you can't have both - so which would you prefer?

[Spooner8]

I would much prefer a car that is slightly faster. I couldn't care less if it has 50rwkw less power, it's just a number (albeit when you going to make a claim of "Australia's most powerful production car" an important one...)
I massively rate Torque and the GTS would feel much nicer to drive (I rate diesels for that aspect big Torque for low rpms)
Most people (myself included) drive there cars at 7/10ths and below 90% of the time and that's where torque feels at its best.... Power generally only comes into it if you are going to flog it everyday or take it to the track.....

[offshore]

I would much prefer a car that is slightly faster. I couldn't care less if it has 50rwkw less power, it's just a number (albeit when you going to make a claim of "Australia's most powerful production car" an important one...)
I massively rate Torque and the GTS would feel much nicer to drive (I rate diesels for that aspect big Torque for low rpms)
Most people (myself included) drive there cars at 7/10ths and below 90% of the time and that's where torque feels at its best.... Power generally only comes into it if you are going to flog it everyday or take it to the track.....

Mate its similar with my car all be it modified but the amount torque is truck like I rarely need to go over 3k or quick blasts to 5k even though it can go to 7k. The LSA is awesome and the smaller blower has some thing to do with it its why im sticking with it for now as the throttle response is instant.

[Xjas]

Seriously, do you know anything about this topic, or have you just read the last page and decided to have your say? Ok then, here we go again....

1. Depending on which dyno you go off will affect your HP at ground statement. Use Herrods result, and the GTS badge should probably read 410fwkw.
2. Out of the 10 dyno runs that were completed, the GTS was higher on 1 (while the Ford warmed up on the first run) so your statement should read, the GTS will have more power if you catch the GTF owner as he is pulling out of his garage first thing in the morning and ask him for a run on the spot. The other 90% of the time! the GTF will ge making more power at the wheels (hardly a stars aligning proposition)
3. Exactly the same cars were used on this test as the previous test you referred to. If you bother to read the article (and watch the video) you will see this was in much more controlled conditions than last time to ensure the results were 100% fair and accurate.
4. Another test was completed by another magazine and the GTF won that shoutout as well (they dyno ed the GTF 11 times to make sure it wasn't a fluke)
5. HSV and FPV engineers were both present at the wheels dyno test and were happy with there respective results.
6. In my opinion, I think the GTS is a better car and would most likely be faster and better in almost all conditions, however this test is the closest we will ever get to a fair test, and the fact no HSV rep is challenging the result means its hats off to the GTF..... For the moment......

No need to take a personal stab mate, I just was asking a valid question since you seemed to be infering that HSV were over quote their figures.

The GTF out performed the GTS on 9 out of 10 runs under the controlled conditions, I'm not saying it didn't, but then why didn't it do the same in the previous street machine test?

[mattnsw]

The FPV was cheaper, had a better tie down system and fits the job for what I want. It is a fantastic engine and a brilliant ZF auto. The fact remain that anything more than 8/10th's driving the HSV/Holden is the better drive. It's no insult I'm merely stating facts. I love the sheer power of the ute but like I said earlier when it comes to true driving pleasure I pick the HSV every time.


Fair enough, I use to think you were over the top in your assessment of the ford and to be honest I still don’t necessarily agree with some of the things you’ve said in the past but at least I have a better perspective and more respect for your opinions.

[Spooner8]

Nothing personal mate, but perhaps you need to do some light reading....

Have you read the article on the first wheels test (including the doubters around its accuracy) the follow up wheels test (including the video) and the car sales test? (Not having a go, just asking?)
If not, have a read and I think it will answer a lot of your questions.... I don't believe street machine have done a test (that I am aware of) they were just quoting wheels first test.

There have been threads dedicated to these topics on this forum. One of them is below. This also has the link to the first wheels test.

http://www.ls1.com.au/forum/showthread.php?167427-FPV-s-351kw-GT-F-more-powerful-than-HSV-s-430kw-GTS-How-did-this-happen

This one is the car sales link

http://www.carsales.com.au/news/large-passenger/holden-special-vehicles/gts/dyno-daze-44809?R=44809&Cr=3&surl=aHR0cDovL2VkaXRvcmlhbHN5c3RlbS5jYXJzYWxlcy5jb 20uYXUvRGVza3RvcERlZmF1bHQuYXNweD9UYWJJRD0xNDA4NjE wJnZlcnRpY2FsPUNhciZOdHQ9RlBWJkR4PW1vZGUrbWF0Y2hhb nkmUXBiPTEma2V5d29yZD1GUFYmc2lsbz1FZGl0b3JpYWwmc2l kPTE0NjNBMTc3RjVBQyZOPTI5ODErNDI5NDk2NzI4MiUyMDQyO TQ5NjY0MjMlMjA0Mjk0OTY2MzY2JTIwNDI5NDk2MTEwNyUyMDQ yOTQ5NjcyNzklMjA0Mjk0OTY2NDI0JTIwNDI5NDk2NTE0MCZOd Gs9RGVmYXVsdCZObmU9MTUmTnR4PW1vZGUrbWF0Y2hhbGxwYXJ 0aWFsJk5zPXBfRGF0ZUF2YWlsYWJsZV9EYXRlVGltZSU3QzEmR D1GUFY.

This is the 2nd wheels test

http://www.wheelsmag.com.au/features/1408/fpv-beats-hsv-in-definitive-power-test/

[Xjas]

Nothing personal mate, but perhaps you need to do some light reading....

Have you read the article on the first wheels test (including the doubters around its accuracy) the follow up wheels test (including the video) and the car sales test? (Not having a go, just asking?)
If not, have a read and I think it will answer a lot of your questions.... I don't believe street machine have done a test (that I am aware of) they were just quoting wheels first test.

There have been threads dedicated to these topics on this forum. One of them is below. This also has the link to the first wheels test.

http://www.ls1.com.au/forum/showthread.php?167427-FPV-s-351kw-GT-F-more-powerful-than-HSV-s-430kw-GTS-How-did-this-happen

This one is the car sales link

http://www.carsales.com.au/news/large-passenger/holden-special-vehicles/gts/dyno-daze-44809?R=44809&Cr=3&surl=aHR0cDovL2VkaXRvcmlhbHN5c3RlbS5jYXJzYWxlcy5jb 20uYXUvRGVza3RvcERlZmF1bHQuYXNweD9UYWJJRD0xNDA4NjE wJnZlcnRpY2FsPUNhciZOdHQ9RlBWJkR4PW1vZGUrbWF0Y2hhb nkmUXBiPTEma2V5d29yZD1GUFYmc2lsbz1FZGl0b3JpYWwmc2l kPTE0NjNBMTc3RjVBQyZOPTI5ODErNDI5NDk2NzI4MiUyMDQyO TQ5NjY0MjMlMjA0Mjk0OTY2MzY2JTIwNDI5NDk2MTEwNyUyMDQ yOTQ5NjcyNzklMjA0Mjk0OTY2NDI0JTIwNDI5NDk2NTE0MCZOd Gs9RGVmYXVsdCZObmU9MTUmTnR4PW1vZGUrbWF0Y2hhbGxwYXJ 0aWFsJk5zPXBfRGF0ZUF2YWlsYWJsZV9EYXRlVGltZSU3QzEmR D1GUFY.

This is the 2nd wheels test

http://www.wheelsmag.com.au/features/1408/fpv-beats-hsv-in-definitive-power-test/

This is the link to the orginal test, I refered to it as the street machine test as I first read about it on another forum in a post from a street machine staffer.
http://www.wheelsmag.com.au/news/1407/ford%E2%80%99s-final-fpv-sparks-kilowatt-controversy/
The only doubters appear to be FPV themselves.

The 2nd wheels test you linked confirms what I said about the stars aligning before you get the maximum power
From the article;
"The reason for this is the GT-F’s temperamental transient overboost, which can provide an additional 15 percent of power, but only when the engine is in its optimal operating window.

“For transient overboost to be effective, it runs off manifold temperature, so we need consistent temps of about 50-60 degrees,” GT-F project manager Justin Capicchiano said.

“The GT-F is always between 351 and that additional 15 percent, but how much depends on the conditions."

So FPV had there own engineers at the dyno to make sure the engine was run in the exact conditions needed to produce the "transient overboost" but that doesn't help the punter who buys one and does track days, drags or even spirited driving as you cant really really control condtions at the track or on the street to make sure you get optimal conditons so it will go into transient overboost.

[Spooner8]

This is the link to the orginal test, I refered to it as the street machine test as I first read about it on another forum in a post from a street machine staffer.
http://www.wheelsmag.com.au/news/1407/ford%E2%80%99s-final-fpv-sparks-kilowatt-controversy/
The only doubters appear to be FPV themselves.

The 2nd wheels test you linked confirms what I said about the stars aligning before you get the maximum power
From the article;
"The reason for this is the GT-F’s temperamental transient overboost, which can provide an additional 15 percent of power, but only when the engine is in its optimal operating window.

“For transient overboost to be effective, it runs off manifold temperature, so we need consistent temps of about 50-60 degrees,” GT-F project manager Justin Capicchiano said.

“The GT-F is always between 351 and that additional 15 percent, but how much depends on the conditions."

So FPV had there own engineers at the dyno to make sure the engine was run in the exact conditions needed to produce the "transient overboost" but that doesn't help the punter who buys one and does track days, drags or even spirited driving as you cant really really control condtions at the track or on the street to make sure you get optimal conditons so it will go into transient overboost.

Mate, do you understand that even in its lowest form, it was only 10rwkw off the GTS figure (that was 1 run) then EVERY single other dyno was higher than the GTS!
You seem so hung up on this transient overboost las if the GTF always loses to the GTS and then on one freak run when it's a fully moon and the planets align, it manages to win one.

Look at it another way... Forget about the term "transient overboost" and understand there were 10 dyno runs. The GTF won 9 of then, the HSV 1. It wasn't like they have done 50 runs and just published the best 10. You could also look at it and say of the "extra 15% " that is available, it only needs an extra 5% of that to be available to match or better the GTS rwkw figure, the othe 10% is what it pulls away by.....

Once again, if the HSV engineers were unhappy about the test or thought they needed to put disclaimers around the result they would have said so by now. Not sure why you can't just accept the figure for what it is (like everyone else seems to be able to) and push on. I will waste no more time explaining it to you if you don't get it by now...

[Xjas]

Mate, do you understand that even in its lowest form, it was only 10rwkw off the GTS figure (that was 1 run) then EVERY single other dyno was higher than the GTS!
You seem so hung up on this transient overboost las if the GTF always loses to the GTS and then on one freak run when it's a fully moon and the planets align, it manages to win one.

Look at it another way... Forget about the term "transient overboost" and understand there were 10 dyno runs. The GTF won 9 of then, the HSV 1. It wasn't like they have done 50 runs and just published the best 10. You could also look at it and say of the "extra 15% " that is available, it only needs an extra 5% of that to be available to match or better the GTS rwkw figure, the othe 10% is what it pulls away by.....

Once again, if the HSV engineers were unhappy about the test or thought they needed to put disclaimers around the result they would have said so by now. Not sure why you can't just accept the figure for what it is (like everyone else seems to be able to) and push on. I will waste no more time explaining it to you if you don't get it by now...

Can you please re-read my posts, you are claim to be explaining somethome to me but you haven't answer any of the questions I posed to you, you are simple repeating the same thing each time you post.

Whether you like it or not in a previous dyno test at HPF also under controlled condition the GTF made less power than the GTS, this is a FACT.
Certain condition condition have be be met for GTF to produce its maximum power, this is also a FACT.

As per my original question to you- Are you claiming that HSV have overstated the power of the GTS as you infered? YES or NO.

[blackvussii]

So could "transient overboost" also be called self retarding? Doesn't quiet have the same ring to it... :hide:

[Jamolad]

So could "transient overboost" also be called self retarding? Doesn't quiet have the same ring to it... :hide:

http://www.quickmeme.com/img/c2/c28e23745cf846562616bb19bc248173fa45a5b765560bdbcf 385341141bfe2b.jpg

[blackvussii]

Haha, watched that on friday night. Pretty funny flick.
Maybe Ford are saving full retard for the series 2.

[Spooner8]

Can you please re-read my posts, you are claim to be explaining somethome to me but you haven't answer any of the questions I posed to you, you are simple repeating the same thing each time you post.

Whether you like it or not in a previous dyno test at HPF also under controlled condition the GTF made less power than the GTS, this is a FACT.
Certain condition condition have be be met for GTF to produce its maximum power, this is also a FACT.

As per my original question to you- Are you claiming that HSV have overstated the power of the GTS as you infered? YES or NO.

What question(s) have I not answered??

If you believe the Herrod dyno, then yes I do believe HSV are overstating their figures, and 410fwkw would be a more accurate number. However, the GTS also has a beefier driveline so who knows how much kW this is robbing (I has already said all this in previous posts)

What HPF test are your referring to? There have been 3 direct tests that I am aware of (all posted in the links above) 2 by wheels and 1 car car sales. Given the effort gone to by wheels on the second test and the fact engineers from both camps were on site to verify the results, surely you would agree they are most likely to be the most accurate?

You seem to be always referring to the fact that "special conditions" need to be met implying that rarely happens, so I will ask you 2 very direct questions.

1. If you took a typical Australian year for a person driving his car in typical fashion and we call that 100%, what % of that 100% do YOU think the GTF would have access to at least 5% of that additional power (the point at which it is making more rwkw than the GTS?

2. Secondly, if the GTS and GTF were each put on the dyno for another 1000 runs over the course of a month, under "normal" dyno conditions to not swing an advantage one way the other, who do you think would record the most wins?

[mjrandom]

Sorry guys, this whole debate is more than a bit silly. I drive my car on the road not the dyno... I don't give a stuff about which car has the higher peak at any given rpm. Area under the curve is what matters. My GenF GTS is just fine.

[offshore]

The HSV figure is not wrong. They have a hard time keeping it under 430kw. You can get more easily just from a tune alone no pulley upgrades or anything.

[Drizt]

Exactly mj. Common sense is unfortunately not so common.

[Spooner8]

Sorry guys, this whole debate is more than a bit silly. I drive my car on the road not the dyno... I don't give a stuff about which car has the higher peak at any given rpm. Area under the curve is what matters. My GenF GTS is just fine.

With respect mate, did you read the title of the the thread? You don't have to read the content, there are plenty of other threads discussing drivability, qtr mile times, build quality etc....

What is being discussed here is comparable dyno results and "Australia's most powerful production car" and all comments related to power output. If you don't want to read about that specific content, then push on......

P.s - no doubt the drivability of the GTS and it's overall pace is more superior than the GTF, and I look forward to reading about them and seeing the results in other threads. Here is not the place for them.

[BLAQSSHEV]

Interestingly enough a lot of chatter from ford engineer in that video, Holden engineer was very quite or not approached for comment or??

This thread is quite enjoyable keep it going, also would love to hear comments from HSV representative in relation to results and how it all translates to rubber on road and all that.

At the end if the day horses for courses, I don't need 1 extra KW above the 350fwk's And the way my Maloo puts it to the ground suits me, any quicker and my Mrs wouldn't drive it and she is half the reason it's in my garage.

My 4 cents

[ls2 cruiser]

Interesting to note that my GM computer that runs a blown engine has a table in the tune that can retard timing with respect to intake temps. So GM has the same thing and it would depend what is in the stock tune how it controls timing.

[jc_sv8]

I got no problem with FPV making a bigger number on the dyno. My problem would be sitting at the start of the qtr praying to the 'transient overboost gods' I've got optimum temperature before hitting the loud pedal to take care of the bloke in the other lane.

A side issue is those pesky veedub GTI's. Mate of mine bought the latest one a couple of weeks ago and has had it tuned for $1600.
Result 245kw and 515 torks. The thing lights up like a Christmas tree and he swears it would outperform his 911. It's scary quick and corners like it's on rails..

[ls2 cruiser]

But then I have a 2 bar operating system so I am not sure if the table is created by HPtuners or GM. The table is Grams per cyl VS Intake Air temp and it starts to retard timing at 60c and at this is only 1 degree. My intake temp sensor is in the intake pipe and not where it probably should be in the manifold by the head, so my intake temps are basicly ambient temps. Not so good if the intercooler pump fails and intake temps rise to 100C. Some late model gm Blown engines have 2 sensors . One in the intake and one in manifold (I believe). The ecm would have to be different to mine I think to have tables for the 2 sensors or to use the 2 sensors.
Anyhow my point is that ford are not the only ones that have this control of timing.

[macca_779]

But then I have a 2 bar operating system so I am not sure if the table is created by HPtuners or GM. The table is Grams per cyl VS Intake Air temp and it starts to retard timing at 60c and at this is only 1 degree. My intake temp sensor is in the intake pipe and not where it probably should be in the manifold by the head, so my intake temps are basicly ambient temps. Not so good if the intercooler pump fails and intake temps rise to 100C. Some late model gm Blown engines have 2 sensors . One in the intake and one in manifold (I believe). The ecm would have to be different to mine I think to have tables for the 2 sensors or to use the 2 sensors.
Anyhow my point is that ford are not the only ones that have this control of timing.

Mate that table is in every os. Nothing special really and even used in NA. What the ford ecu does is add boost. I'm not familiar with the controller but id say it would also tweak fuel, ignition and cam phasing around the "transient over boost" function temp window

E67 has a lot more input data as used in the GTS. Multiple MAP sensors, multiple IAT sensors and an os that can do a lot more than the E38. Whether or not it's as capable as the Ford controller I'm not sure as I haven't dug into it outside basic NA applications. But I know it's got lots of features

[macca_779]

I got no problem with FPV making a bigger number on the dyno. My problem would be sitting at the start of the qtr praying to the 'transient overboost gods' I've got optimum temperature before hitting the loud pedal to take care of the bloke in the other lane.

A side issue is those pesky veedub GTI's. Mate of mine bought the latest one a couple of weeks ago and has had it tuned for $1600.
Result 245kw and 515 torks. The thing lights up like a Christmas tree and he swears it would outperform his 911. It's scary quick and corners like it's on rails..

If it's that much of a problem to an owner they would have the car tuned and or fitted with a intercooler to mitigate the issue. Who races a stock car for anything other than shits and gigs

[ls2 cruiser]

Macca, so the ford ecu adds boost when the intake temps are down. Is this what is being said here with this "transient over boost " situation? I gather as you said the fuel, timing and cam timing would be adjusted as well, but I am wondering how the boost is increased or decreased? just intrigued. This tuning certainly does my head in. I am only familiar with my ecu which is an E40. lol.

[macca_779]

Macca, so the ford ecu adds boost when the intake temps are down. Is this what is being said here with this "transient over boost " situation? I gather as you said the fuel, timing and cam timing would be adjusted as well, but I am wondering how the boost is increased or decreased? just intrigued. This tuning certainly does my head in. I am only familiar with my ecu which is an E40. lol.

The bypass valve for the blower is controlled by the ecu

[ls2 cruiser]

Nothing like technology is there.

[IJ.]

So in reality it dumps less boost when the iats are cooler? ;)

[FFAMan]

So in reality it dumps less boost when the iats are cooler? ;)

That's correct. In reality "transient overboost" simply means "full boost".

The GT-F gets full access to its potential (400+KW) or "transient over boost" till IAT's get over the thresh hold, in reality 351kw is worst case scenario, it will dump boost to pull power back.

[IJ.]

That's correct. In reality "transient overboost" simply means "full boost".

The GT-F gets full access to its potential (400+KW) or "transient over boost" till IAT's get over the thresh hold, in reality 351kw is worst case scenario, it will dump boost to pull power back.

So the Ford runs at potential Max as long as the AIT is low enough then the Nanny steps in to save it, Conversely the LSA has overhead for the normal Hot up route of Pulley/Boost/Power.....

Not really seeing what all the fuss is about, in stock trim the Ford has a little more power but a very unrefined chassis that is right at the edge of coping, the Holden is a much better platform with room for improvement...

I can't help but look at things from a potential modification PoV.

[macca_779]

So the Ford runs at potential Max as long as the AIT is low enough then the Nanny steps in to save it, Conversely the LSA has overhead for the normal Hot up route of Pulley/Boost/Power.....

Not really seeing what all the fuss is about, in stock trim the Ford has a little more power but a very unrefined chassis that is right at the edge of coping, the Holden is a much better platform with room for improvement...

I can't help but look at things from a potential modification PoV.

It appears it holds the boost back when manifold temp is below 50c too. In the video its mentioned it operates at its best between 50-60c

[SUZUKI MALISHA]

Having a quick look through your history of telling everyone how great every ford falcon is (while throwing in the disclaimer of having 'had an r8' or 'I'll be in a gts') it would seem that you are the only real hack mate...

Yes and that R8 was while a great cruising car.....it was destroyed by my brothers new at the time GT335.(1year apart). So I too have claim to a descent amount of knowledge and the right to comment about both sides...as he lived with me. So don't be a tosser. There's more to every story and some of you guys are as blind as bats when it comes to respecting the GT. And yes I've brought this up many times....because it happens many times!

And I'm still not the clown(plenty) who one second says the Holden is better at flat out driving...then the next sentence he's saying it's the ford. THATS a HACK. Changing the story to suit ones opinion is lame!

[Jamolad]

Changing someone else's story to suit your own opinion is more lame in my books.

Way I read Plenty's response was his GS ute is good for straight line speed down a quarter mile, but his HSV is far more enjoyable and rewarding when he is looking to go for a spirited drive on his favourite roads.

Weird how we can both read the same thing but come up with different interpretations - and it is possible neither of us have the right take on things.

[Plenty]

Yes and that R8 was while a great cruising car.....it was destroyed by my brothers new at the time GT335.(1year apart). So I too have claim to a descent amount of knowledge and the right to comment about both sides...as he lived with me. So don't be a tosser. There's more to every story and some of you guys are as blind as bats when it comes to respecting the GT. And yes I've brought this up many times....because it happens many times!

And I'm still not the clown(plenty) who one second says the Holden is better at flat out driving...then the next sentence he's saying it's the ford. THATS a HACK. Changing the story to suit ones opinion is lame!

I have never once said the FPV was better, not once! The name calling is pathetic and hopefully gets you a stint on the sidelines. I'm entitled to my opinion as are you. You know what though? Really the only thing i have said is that when it comes to grabbing a car to go for a "drive" i grab the HSV. I have also pointed out things that i believe are pros and cons of the cars.

[Plenty]

Changing someone else's story to suit your own opinion is more lame in my books.

Way I read Plenty's response was his GS ute is good for straight line speed down a quarter mile, but his HSV is far more enjoyable and rewarding when he is looking to go for a spirited drive on his favourite roads.

Weird how we can both read the same thing but come up with different interpretations - and it is possible neither of us have the right take on things.

:cheers: Thank you. Your bang on, maybe instead of trying to be so descriptive i should have just said it like that!

[SUZUKI MALISHA]

the only thing i have said is that when it comes to grabbing a car to go for a "drive" i grab the HSV. I have also pointed out things that i believe are pros and cons of the cars.
Yeah says the guy well known for saying "you can only polish a turd so much"..........yet, if you want to go to the drags you'd rather the ford then your new vf r8. Must be a quick turd you got..........

And I'm not sure anyone would be so dumb as to compare a ute vs a sedan for pure driving pleasure.......so are we to assume all your previous comments preferring the vf as a better drive are unbalanced because of this? Of course not...they are both different beast for different things. That IS quite obvious.

[SUZUKI MALISHA]

And yes as explained above....fords transient overboost is always on.(not the mythed 8 secs of extra boost) The cars are badged at the minimum garunteed power the car should make in worst case scenarios.......BUT it will make full boost/power unless he car is either too hot or cold......then it just adjusts to suit.
Seems to be a relatively efficient setup if even 9 or more dyno runs doesn't heat soak any power at all......as seen in the resent dyno battles. But despite the GTF managing to make more rwkws then the GTS.......it is winter........and the GTS makes far more torque at all levels......and we all know what wins races.

[ls2 cruiser]

I have seen a video where the GTS wins the 1/4 mile race against the GTF. Is that all bull is it?

[macca_779]

I have seen a video where the GTS wins the 1/4 mile race against the GTF. Is that all bull is it?

Yeah actually as the GT-F was manual and ran about 6 tenths slower than what a normal auto GT does

[planetdavo]

They are BOTH good value for the performance. If straightline speed floats your boat, one has more power and is usually a bit faster. The other that is usually a little bit slower seems to have an element on here that is determined to push the story the other way...IF the planets all align on the day. The law of diminishing returns usually kicks in at some point, or traction becomes the issue, or (lack of?) driver talent does. Or 20 other variables. Whatever.
If you own either, be happy. :)

[TuffR8]

Yeah actually as the GT-F was manual and ran about 6 tenths slower than what a normal auto GT does

I've seen manual v auto, wet track and dry track auto v auto, you name it. I've not seen a GTS rolled by a GTF yet.. Even where the GT has gotten the jump off the line the GTS has pulled it in and gone past. End of the day technology or not 6.2L v 5L tells the story I suppose (torque wise).

That being said I actually like the Ford and they are decent value for the money. But with all the gear in the GTS they really are on different playing fields.

[Plenty]

Latest and the very last Wheels mag comparo.

FPV GT-F 6-speed auto, get's the jump on the sprint to between 40-60km/h
0-100km/h 4.7sec
1/4 12.7 @ 186.7km/h

HSV GTS 6-speed manual, from somewhere between 40-60km/h catches and pulls away and increases it's lead the longer it goes on.
0-100km/h 4.5
1/4 12.6 @ 190.6km/h

[macca_779]

Gee these guys really can't drive. Be interesting to see what the punters get out of them

[ls2 cruiser]

Looks like my landcruiser ute will give them a run at those times. lol I need traction control though

[Plenty]

Gee these guys really can't drive. Be interesting to see what the punters get out of them

Well it is done with a GPS i suppose, always seems to be a couple of tenths of the pace. It was also done at You Yangs so probably not somewhere conducive to quick sprint times.

[Plenty]

Looks like my landcruiser ute will give them a run at those times. lol I need traction control though

How does it go around a track though? :nutkick: lol

[adr8]

At least GTS owners won't have to worry about changing diff bushes, input shafts and tailshafts like GT owners have had to. Here are some pics of failed tailshafts I got from AFF, which GT owners now refer to as "tuna can tailshafts".

http://i1078.photobucket.com/albums/w491/advr8/fgtailshaft1.jpg

http://i1078.photobucket.com/albums/w491/advr8/IMG_3966.jpg

[ls2 cruiser]

Plenty, it goes straight ahead only especially when the rear diff is locked lol It also has a lot of trouble stopping lol

I also have a stock ford NA XR6 and when I rust proofed it I noticed the whole car is made from very thin metal. It is a very nice car to drive though and the ZF 6 speed is a good thing. It also handles very well for a ford lol



That tailshaft is nowhere near big enough. They should be running a 4" like the cruiser .

[jc_sv8]

When did they start using tailshafts from XW's? That rusty old piece of rubbish looks 40 years old.

[whitels1ss]

At least GTS owners won't have to worry about changing diff bushes, input shafts and tailshafts like GT owners have had to. Here are some pics of failed tailshafts I got from AFF, which GT owners now refer to as "tuna can tailshafts".

http://i1078.photobucket.com/albums/w491/advr8/fgtailshaft1.jpg

http://i1078.photobucket.com/albums/w491/advr8/IMG_3966.jpg

I think I have seen that picture before (or another very similar) & the owner

did in fact confirm that the rusty looking shaft came out of his 2011 GT-P.

In the case I am thinking about the photo was taken around 5 minutes after the shaft twisted, it looks like it had been out in the weather for years:lol:

[JimmyXR6T04]

LOL... can't believe this thread is still going, so i might as well keep adding... Realistically, in the REAL world, anyone who owns either of these cars is going to have enough power. Not me though, and probably not most on here. We like to mod. That said, either car modded will make either owner happy. I love my GT, apart from the handling (which i have now fixed), and the tuna can tailshaft (that i will fix), the thing goes like a rocket. Looking forward to the next stage of mods.

Either car is fast enough for the street, and there would be bugger all between them. When modded, it would be hard to pick which has a touch more power, both will require careful input from the right foot, anything enthusiastic will result in wheel spin, trust me! For those lucky enough to do track work? I'm tipping they'd have a dedicated car for that anyway. For the odd track day, the GTS is no doubt the better value, but then again, with some coilovers, intercooler and mods, the GT is bloody good fun.

Both are bloody brilliant for what they are, and what they cost. Who gives a toss which one is a touch more powerful, or a touch faster. It appears as though the majority of people who really seem to care/argue, are the people who don't own either! It all sounds so damn petty.

[Pickles]

I've ben following this thread for a while, and not being particularly mechanically minded, I have to say I don't know much/understand about stuff like transient overboost etc etc, & other terms used in the thread. All I know is that when I "put the pedal to the metal", I want that "power" to be there.
What I would say though, is that if I was a GTF owner, I'd be pretty happy with these results.
It's also been said that in view of the "figures" produced, then maybe HSV have "fudged"/ overstated the LSA's power. That would not be correct, as this is GM's FWKW power for this engine in the configuration installed by HSV. For a 5L engine to, on occasions, produce more power, just shows how good the Ford engine is.
I must admit too, that I was surprised at the results,..I thought the LSA would be well in front!
I still think that the GTS is the better engineered car, better interior too. But I don't think that is the focus of this particular thread?,.....I think it's about the power/dyno figures & accuracy of same?
I haven't driven either car, so can't say how different they are, but if this is about engines, there doesn't appear to be much in it, even though the Ford engine is giving away 1.2L.
Pickles.

[planetdavo]

Perhaps Ford spent way too much of their limited budget on supercharging the engine, leaving stuff all in the bank for everything else hey Pickles...

[planetdavo]

Both are bloody brilliant for what they are, and what they cost. Who gives a toss which one is a touch more powerful, or a touch faster. It appears as though the majority of people who really seem to care/argue, are the people who don't own either! It all sounds so damn petty.

Ego's are a rather delicate thing Jimmy...;)
Good on Ford for producing such a strong engine. Good on GM for producing such a strong engine. Good on them both for fitting them both into some local metal.
Both just had to go about it in different ways. HSV/Holden's was an "off the shelf" crate engine, whereas Ford/FPV had to develop a local version off a US naturally aspirated crate engine.
BOTH could improve further with tunes, different superchargers, intercoolers or injectors, blah blah blah...