Printable View
http://www.goauto.com.au/mellor/mell...257A920018D550
So, whtat d'ya think?
Cheers, Pickles.
This is a continuation thread, the old thread is Here by Pickles Titled Supercharged HSV?
This is a continuation thread, the old thread is Here by Pickles Titled Supercharged HSV? - Part 2
This is a continuation thread, the old thread is Here
Exactly right. For about 100 k you will get a 2007 2008 M5, or if it doesn't have to be a 4 door how about a C6 Corvette, 2006 model v8 AM Vantage ( surprisingly quick around the Nurburgring) or a nice 2012 model Camaro. Some of these cars have very low Ks as well so for that amount of coin it opens up a very large range of vehicles, that have a real presence and credibility.Quote:
Originally Posted by Drasius
Obviously! One is $100,000 the other is $250,000. Honestly who the hell buys a $250,000 E63 AMG and gives a hoot how quick or not Gen F HSV GTS is? Who in their right mind test drives a HSV GTS then goes you know what, i'm gonna go try an E63 now.Quote:
Originally Posted by mattnsw
Quote:
Plenty
The R8 SV managed a 4.9sec sprint how is that any slower than the F6? It's pretty common knowledge that the Ford/FPV power figure is highly under-rated.
Maybe common knowledge to you and some other car enthusiasts but not to the general public.
It would be more common knowledge if the reviewers start mentioning the understated power output of the Ford whenever they compare it to the HSV.
Otherwise the average joe will have trouble understanding how a 335kw powered car can keep with a 430kw most powerful Australian car ever.
Yep good point, often wondered why it's not mentioned more often.Quote:
Originally Posted by mattnsw
The majority of HSV owners are only interested in the "package" ... I've owned 8 and can honestly say I've only ever taken one from zero - 100 km/h, it was far from stock and on a drag strip. The rest have been driven around Sydney or given a bit of a go on the open road ... I couldn't give a shit what they do zero - 100 in.
I own an AMG too, haven't taken that from zero - 100 either.
These times give the mags something to crap on about but if you're looking to spend $100K on a car you don't choose on standing acceleration times. If you have $100K to spend on a car you're generally smarter than that. As others have said, 4 second bracket is plenty quick and more than competitive (hell ... 5 / 6 second bracket is fast enough for a daily driver) beyond that I'm only interested in the whole package.
No doubt there is a big price difference but that doesn’t seem to matter these days when comparisons are done. Many mismatched cars are being compared on forums and in reviews.Quote:
Originally Posted by Plenty
For weeks while it was speculated the GTS may be almost as fast as the E63 there were a lot of people comparing them.
As I pointed out, the comparison is now over.
Germany – 1 HSV – 0
Bugger the E63, give me a C63 any day. It’s definitely worth the extra for the overall package.
Or if the overall package is not as important, a GT for its cost effective power output would be a lot of fun.
This/end threadQuote:
Originally Posted by NickS
Depends what you want....we own a C63....and whilst it is a weapon, it has its drawbacks.Quote:
Originally Posted by mattnsw
It is small, very restricted room in the rear, it has a harsh ride, & getting in & out, whilst not difficult, takes a bit of care if ya don't wanna risk damaging seat bolsters.
None of this particularly bothers us....but it will certainly bother some, who need a bigger, more practical car, and also something that is around half the price....if ya get a C63 with a bit of the stuff that's on the GTS, it's not hard to get close to $200K.....if ya don't believe me, check out the price of the new C63507, then add on LSD, & several of the electronic gizmos that the GTS already has, & ya'll see what I mean.
Cheers, Pickles.
That's fair enough nick, it's your criteria and your money and no one else can make that decision for you (stating the obvious, I know).Quote:
Originally Posted by NickS
BUT, the performance figures are what drive extensive r&d with ALL manufacturers who design and build performance oriented cars. Amg v m division, Ferrari v Lamborghini, mustang v corvette etc etc. all throughout history there have been great rivalries amongst performance car manufacturers who have each strived to make their cars faster and quicker than the opposition (and their own previous models).
It is what they use to attract the consumer.
Whilst I see your point, all of your purchases have been performance oriented (using you as an example as you have a long history of buying performance cars), and the competition amongst the brands has lead to better (and faster) cars. Whilst you may not have taken advantage of the full capabilities of the cars, knowing their potential would surely have been part of the buying criteria?
Either way, what a great debate to be having. Sub 5's to 100 and mid, low 12 second cars made locally. I would have been laughed out of town if I said this would be the case 10 years ago.
This.Quote:
Originally Posted by NickS
Cars are about emotions, no use jumping in technological rocketship if it doesn't tug at the heartstrings, make you smile when you take it out on the weekend or do the second look when you park it up for the night. For some that might be an Evo that does 0-100 in 2.5sec's or a 1969 Camaro with 400+ cubes of the generals finest. I remember when I worked for Motor magazine a few years back and was umming and arring between an SSV ute and a XR6T 50th Anniv ute and I couldn't decide, the editor at the time said "which one brings the biggest grin to your face when you jump in for the first time" and the deciscion was simple, might not be the fastest in a straight line or do the Nurburgring in 7 minutes flat but it was the car that made me grin like a 6 year old whenever I took it for a wrap.
/cool story hansel
One test it ran 4.7s...
Wait for more to come out, this car has better suspension, tyres and a more powerful engine then the W427, it will run faster.
Nicely said, :D I went from a 350 rwkw GTO to a 240 awkw EVO that could 0 to 100 in sub 4 and do wakefield in. 1.042 ( which is not a bad number for that power for those that havent been there) they both had me grinning like a 13 year who has just discovered girls..... Completely different both with positives and negatives... Each to their own whatever floats your boatQuote:
Originally Posted by brasher
Even though the simplest measurement is 0-100 it is not the be all and end all.
Important? Merrrr, may be.
Qtr mile times, probably more relevant as it shows more of the ability to get the power down.
To settle all arguments of whether it's a performance car or not get it to the ring.....
But remember this is a true family sedan, not a single seat no frills race car, something that will sit in Sydney traffic for hours on the way to Eastern Creek and then eat it up when it gets there!
So what car can you buy for RRP $92,990 that has the performance numbers to match or better the Gen F GTS ?? :idea:
GT gets pretty closeQuote:
Originally Posted by jkgmh
How close would it get around the N'Ring ???Quote:
Originally Posted by macca_779
The GT has half the fruit....
Very true and I'd rather a gts any day for the week. But it does also command an extra $20k+. Or $40k+ if all you cared about was going fast and got a GSQuote:
Originally Posted by Drizt
This would be pretty closeQuote:
Originally Posted by jkgmh
http://www.carsales.com.au/private/d.../?Cr=1&sdmvc=1
Am talking new for newQuote:
Originally Posted by Xjas
^^^ 20k well spent, even if, just because it isnt a ford:cool:
I apoligise in advance, but this is still a holden forum :hide:
^^^ Yeah, but if you have 90k, dont touch a jap import GTR, may as well go put it all on black
LINKQuote:
Originally Posted by jkgmh
0-100 and 0-400 it probably matches the GTS. But it is small.
Link keeps dropping out my end, but if thats the cla amg, not bad, i am thinking of exiting my wifes R36 wagon for the a45 AMG... Depending on election outcomes re FBT .. Either AMG looks very niceQuote:
Originally Posted by Vulture
Only problem is taking a couple of mates and their clubs to the course... As I said family sedan.
Fair enough, possibly a Lotus Elise then.Quote:
Originally Posted by jkgmh
^ $$ maybe dunno what an Elise is worth, but not the same market... I dont mind the new Exige, performance and $ wise, but the kids might struggle holding onto the spoiler on the way to school :shiner: maybe 10 years from now
EVO X. $60k and will pump a GTS to 100 dunno about to 400m though. Can even fit the family in much the same as a C63 space wise
yep, little rocket, I had an MR and loved the TC-SST gearbox and drives like go kart, Is small and got to put up with the harsh ride, but I loved itQuote:
Originally Posted by macca_779
I think it's a bit of a sweeping statement to compare the Evo X offhand - totally different car to the GTS.
They're both forced induction 4 door performance cars aren't they.Quote:
Originally Posted by bozodos
More just throwing a few more ideas into the mix I think, all have their + & -
But no you cant really compare an X to a GTS
Has anyone seen this yet LINK
I was trying to post the pic as they provide the URL. Maybe one of the mods could fix it? Says remote file too large.
If sheer grunt is what you're after, then the GT is a fantastic option, and at least 30k cheaper (plenty on carsales for sub 70k). I'm tossing up between the GT and GTS for next year, and part of me wants the overall package of the GTS, a car already intercooled, with big brakes and fantastic tech. The other part of me wants that basic muscle car that the GT offers. I also wouldn't mind picking up one of the last GT's, so i'm thinking a GT next year, then a few years later a nice low km GTS... The GT will be parked up for occasionally use. Best of both worlds!
Regardless of whether the GTS does 0-100 in 4.4 or 4.7, it's still a great bit of car for the price!
Although I agree that 0 -100 is not the be all, as Bouka has said it is the standard benchmark for measuring vehicles by all manufactures of performance vehicles, so is relevant and important. Most people would prefer an all round fast car rather than just a straight line performer, but surely if these early times are accurate there has to be questions asked.
Before any figures started to appear, given the KW , Torque, Weight, suspension and tyres would you have been guessing at 4.7 ? or a quicker time given compariable vehicles.
If it was less then what is the explaination. Obviously Gt is underrated, but I sure hope the GTS is not overrated. We did see an early dyno of this engine and it seemed to be well down on what you would expect, and then with slower than predicted times got to start asking why. Yep 4.7 is still very fast and if it handles great even better and has full warranty ect, but what could the reasons be for these times.
Is engine management limiting power off the mark to protect the drive train. What have other vehicles such as MErc and BMW got that this doesn't.
Over engineering - the thing makes German built cars better than most others, is also the downfall for owners when it comes time to replace bits and pieces.Quote:
Originally Posted by SV805
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. However, a lazy old LS engine can get an extra 100KW for a relatively low spend. I do not doubt that anyone on this forum that gets the new GTS, will be pulling 11's with a low investment, and will be extremely happy with their purchase, despite what the knockers are saying.
Going by that sort of logic, why don't you and I drive Evos then? I did consider that or an STi before getting my VZ. Lackluster styling, boring to commute in and expensive parts / maintenance (also not being a V8) were the deciding factors against for me.Quote:
Originally Posted by macca_779
Also agree re: parts on Euros and relative ease of reliable modification to LS engined cars. That said, for the target market of the GTS, it is a bit of a moot point, because most people do not buy a $100k HSV to modify it.
I'm pretty sure the GT 335 improved heaps when the only modification was the removal of the torque limiters. No tuning or anything else, just removing limiters. If some one in the know can confirm this, then who's to say the new GTS isn't being limited in some ways too... It could mean the difference between a few tenths, or even more down the quarter mile.Quote:
Originally Posted by SV805