Supercharged HSV? - Part 3

[GTS LSA]

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 it

[bozodos]

I think it's a bit of a sweeping statement to compare the Evo X offhand - totally different car to the GTS.

[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.

[GTS LSA]

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

[Vulture]

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.

[JimmyXR6T04]

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!

[SV805]

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.

[team illucid]

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.

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.

[bozodos]

They're both forced induction 4 door performance cars aren't they.

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.



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.

[JimmyXR6T04]

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.

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.

[macca_779]

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.



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 tow with my car. That is all

[bozodos]

You could also tow (and probably better mind you) with a turbo diesel 4x4. Correct me if i'm wrong, but you don't buy a HSV then put a cam in it and tune it yourself simply for towing do you? Obviously there are other reasons, which is why you'd buy a GTS over something AWD and 'faster'.

[Vulture]

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.

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.

[team illucid]

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.
.

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

[macca_779]

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

Yep they should be a good tyre. Certainly an improvement over the Bridgestone oem tyres of old