Supercharged HSV? - Part 3

Interesting re; the tyres ... my C63 came with Continental from the factory, first change I stuck with Conti, 2nd change I switched to Bridgestone (yes ... all that in less than 20,000 kms :lmao:)

IMO the Bridgestones grip better, feel better in the wet and so far seem to be lasting better ... I know another C63 owner using the same Bridgestones and finding the same thing.

Also ... every HSV I have owned since the E1 in 2006 has been switched to 285's on the rear at first change with no issues what so ever!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by team illucid

The other thing is that German cars tend to be highly strung and already close to their peak - there is no easy extraction of another 100KW without a massive investment.

---

Tell that to the Euro boys all over the world who know that not all Euros are highly strung and far from being close to their limit when with the same basic mods as usually done to a Commodore i.e. exhaust, CAI and tune they can achieve fantastic improvements.

The C63 is the same basic engine as the upper spec NA AMGs and all some owners do is just have the E63 factory tune thrown in to replace the C63 tune. Any easy 50kw.

Then from there it’s like modding all cars and becomes a matter of how deep is your pockets.
Supercharging C63 is becoming much more common now the kits are readily available.
Upgrading supercharger pulleys and turbos CAI and exhausts has been common on Mercs for years.
That’s why the supercharged E55 is one very fast car with minor mods.
And now AMG has gone turbo across the board, mods will be even easier.

People who can afford high end Euros and are interested in modding them can also afford the mods.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vulture

That dyno run was of a CTS-V with a much more restrictive exhaust system than the bimodal on the GTS AFAIK.
With the CTS-V running flat 12s, the GTS on a sticky drag strip can't be too much slower and almost certainly would be quicker around the 'ring with much more substantial brakes.
Remember on drag strip timing lights there is an 0.1s advantage from 'roll out' too compared with other ways of measurement.
I'm excited to see some results from an auto GTS at Willowbank or similar.

Would be good to see the GTS do around 4.4-4.5s 0-100 but really, a tenth here or there doesn't bother me and I am sure most GTS buyers will be the same.
That said, there should be no excuses if it doesn't perform in what is an important standard measure of acceleration.
Personally I am surprised they only put 275s on the rear, possible that is a limiting factor along with tyre compound. I would have thought 285-295 with this horsepower.
I don't think we will see any RWD large sedan going much below the 0-100 in less than 4.0 or thereabouts without purpose made tyres and track prep.

---

0/100 less than 4 secs....ya'd be pretty right there.
The AWD E63 does it in 3.9 (in ideal conditions)...the E63 RWD is around half a second slower.
Cheers, Pickles.

i just think its under-tyred. 275 rears are too small for tiny 0-100 times.

example is a 2005 C6 corvette - LS2 Engine, quarter mile in 12.7 seconds does 0-60mph ( not quite 100 kays ) in 4.3 seconds. lets call it 4.4 seconds over 62MPH ( 100 kays ). So its as quick as a GTS from 0 to 100, but loses half a second over the quarter? suggests it launches harder on its 295 series tyres.

the 7 litre Z06 and 6.2 supercharged C6 use 325 tryres, that would be more appropriate for the GTS

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brett240

the 7 litre Z06 and 6.2 supercharged C6 use 325 tryres, that would be more appropriate for the GTS

---

Not only that, they are much lighter than the GTS.

Whilst I agree about wider tyres, you've gotta remember that the GTS isn't being positioned as a no compromises sports car like the Corvette either. It's more of a Cadillac type vehicle.

Good point Bozodos, it's not an out and out sports car in the same way as those others you mentioned.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NickS

Interesting re; the tyres ... my C63 came with Continental from the factory, first change I stuck with Conti, 2nd change I switched to Bridgestone (yes ... all that in less than 20,000 kms :lmao:)

IMO the Bridgestones grip better, feel better in the wet and so far seem to be lasting better ... I know another C63 owner using the same Bridgestones and finding the same thing.

Also ... every HSV I have owned since the E1 in 2006 has been switched to 285's on the rear at first change with no issues what so ever!

---

Interesting. Different type of car I know but I have always had Bridgestones on my last two Holden's until a few years back I got a set of Toyo RA-1s, love these to bits and they make the Re001s on the front seem so very average, alas they no longer make these Toyo RA-1s so I was looking at getting Continentals because they are spoken about so highly!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vulture

Has anyone seen this yet LINK


I was trying to post the pic as they provide the URL.

---

this one?
http://www.motoring.com.au/carconten...nfographic.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Red CV8 R

Interesting. Different type of car I know but I have always had Bridgestones on my last two Holden's until a few years back I got a set of Toyo RA-1s, love these to bits and they make the Re001s on the front seem so very average, alas they no longer make these Toyo RA-1s so I was looking at getting Continentals because they are spoken about so highly!

---

Sorry ... I should point out that I'm using the Potenza S001.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by team illucid

The Conti tyres grip really well - the 275 should be more than sufficient for grip.

---

but at over $750.00 a tyre , I think we'll soon see a " recommend me a good (cheap) priced 275/35-20 tyre " thread very soon .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by XUV

but at over $750.00 a tyre , I think we'll soon see a " recommend me a good (cheap) priced 275/35-20 tyre " thread very soon .

---

Already cheaper than the Bridgestones :)

Not really sure what to make of the various reports. HSV have been guilty of overstating the performance with the E series. I don’t think anyone got near the supposed 5.0 seconds for the 0 – 100kph sprint. And yet with this model there are some suggestions that both the R8 and the SSV will get there or thereabouts under the right conditions. On that basis the GTS should be easily sub 4.5 seconds and maybe it will be again under the right conditions.

So as far as I can tell there has been one quoted time and that was for a manual GTS. Last time I looked there were still only two GTSs. The white automatic is a ‘production ready’ car for testing while the red manual was more of a mule with the GTS bits fitted up. Is there another manual doing the rounds? Again I would have thought that HSV would be concentrating on getting cars out to customers rather than make a few cars for thrashing by journalists, but then I could be wrong.

Like most who have a GTS on order and are waiting less and less patiently day by day I am not so concerned about the 0 – 100 time or even the standing 400m time because believe it or not I don’t do that every day. I try to give my R8 WOT for several seconds at some point every day just because I can but even that isn’t a given either.

Where does that leave us? Well I don’t think anyone can say for certain until there have been a few GTSs delivered and put on dynos and the track that we will see what is really going on. I dare say that even if the independent test said 4.2 seconds there would be plenty who would then say that HSV tweaked the car to get better than stated results. HSV cannot win.

As for the package being more important than outright performance I am one of those but it does sound like a cop out even to me when the GTS has 430kW and bulk torque, yes the GT is way understated but the others in that list above aren't. However Bouka is stepping from a GT to an R8 SV for more money there must be something in that. All I know is that each time I have bought an R8 I have tried the blue oval and apart from the raw power and silky smooth box that is the F6 and the superb engine /box that the GT has there is nothing else I am interested in living with. And with regards to the Euros the ones I could afford (scratch the M5, E63 or my favourite the CLS AMG) were too small and too harsh on the road.

So I will wait until mine arrives and I can see whether or not I have got value for my $103,032.61...

I remember reading an article about the GT 335 and it mentioned that for about 8 seconds or so it actually makes about 375kw, but due to it not making that power for sustained time (or at its peak or something) they didn't have to make it the official power rating.

This would certainly explain why it goes so well, and why they consistently dyno at ~320rwkw stock.

Regardless, i think HSV have done a fantastic job with the GTS. Imagine the insane pulling power when stomping on the gas from 70km/h or so...

I'm eagerly awaiting the R-Spec vs GTS reviews. Same day, same conditions. That should give us a good indicator how quick this thing really is.