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

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

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

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by duke5700

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.

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cashie

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 ?.

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

http://www.wheelsmag.com.au/news/140...t-controversy/

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

https://www.facebook.com/WheelsAustralia

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by adr8

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

http://www.wheelsmag.com.au/news/140...t-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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by macca_779

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:

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

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!

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

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jkgmh

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vulture

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.

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 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

---

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.

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 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.

---

Who knows... Maybe an LT4!!!

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?

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/f...-upgradetuning :thumbsup:

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 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?

---

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sjhugh

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by adr8

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

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SUZUKI MALISHA

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Plenty

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.....

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SUZUKI MALISHA

.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.

http://www.wheelsmag.com.au/news/140...t-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.

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....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 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....

---

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.

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

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

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...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 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)

---

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 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....

---

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!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HSVManboy

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...