Any VF performance figures out there yet?

[40RDT]

Originally Posted by BHDOGS

It didn't ******* spank anything at all you big liar

Please explain how I am lying? Im just stating the times that were recorded in the comparison between the two.

12.7 v 13.4 is a pretty big difference imo. It would be closer no doubt if the conditions weren't so crap though but on the occasion the R Spec got spanked

[1TUFFUTE]

Well for starters the last article above is a review of the new gts and the best they got was 4.6 and 12.6 . We all know the Gt rspec does 4.4-5 secs 0-100. And every guy you talk to here in a regular Gt335 beats 12.6......with anything from as low as 12.3-5.
So correct me if im wrong.......but a car with all that power......sophistication grip and weightloss, should be punching far better numbers then this.
As my thread hints at.....maybe this is why it's takin soooooo long for any real numbers to come out.
And before u make excuses ......that video shows a very rubbered track and a coolish lookin day.
The muscle king is the fastest......not the comfiest

[40RDT]

Originally Posted by 1TUFFUTE

Well for starters the last article above is a review of the new gts and the best they got was 4.6 and 12.6 . We all know the Gt rspec does 4.4-5 secs 0-100. And every guy you talk to here in a regular Gt335 beats 12.6......with anything from as low as 12.3-5.
So correct me if im wrong.......but a car with all that power......sophistication grip and weightloss, should be punching far better numbers then this.
As my thread hints at.....maybe this is why it's takin soooooo long for any real numbers to come out.
And before u make excuses ......that video shows a very rubbered track and a coolish lookin day.
The muscle king is the fastest......not the comfiest

You still dont get it, just because a car can go fast in a straight line doesn't make it the muscle car king of aussie performance cars

Members on here running faster times than motoring journos doesn't surprise me one bit. I'm yet to see a journo run a 12.3 in GT R Spec and I wouldn't be surprised that once the public get their hands on the new GTS that someone runs faster than 12.6.

And even if the GTS ends up only running the same time down the 1/4 as the R Spec its still the best overall aussie performance car, put the two around a track and I would guess it wouldn't even be close

[1TUFFUTE]

Originally Posted by 40RDT

You still dont get it, just because a car can go fast in a straight line doesn't make it the muscle car king of aussie performance cars

Members on here running faster times than motoring journos doesn't surprise me one bit. I'm yet to see a journo run a 12.3 in GT R Spec and I wouldn't be surprised that once the public get their hands on the new GTS that someone runs faster than 12.6.

And even if the GTS ends up only running the same time down the 1/4 as the R Spec its still the best overall aussie performance car, put the two around a track and I would guess it wouldn't even be close

Journos in nz ran the fastest times for the rspec. 12.3
But you don't get it either,......by your logic....back in the 70s the Gt was king because it was faster. But if the Holden gts came with heated seats and sticky tyres...I spose you'd say that was the muscle king back then.
Another thing....you've been hiding under a rock if you don't know hsv claimed times r never met by customers....but on the flip side.....Ford customers consistently better if not match times. So if your not questioning why there are no blistering times yet by the car thats been media blasted as the greatest and most powerfull thing since Adam n eve....then I question your understanding that these cars meet on the street with occasional blasts around the road......not the track
The thing with the Rspec is,it's launch control works...so 4.5 could be expected almost everytime . So for 100k, this supercars isn't impressing performance wise the way it should. Yet...im hoping

[GQ_Smooth]

2 Cars, same track, same conditions, on the same day. One will be quicker (You run with what you brung! Simple, excuses are what you give your wife/partner when you come home late, not running drag times).

What one car did in one set of conditions compared to what another car did in another set of conditions is only relevant to teenagers on a forum or pub arguments (same with manufacturers performance claims).

[Rodge]

There's f all GTS's out there yet so the fan boys need to chill a bit and wait for some more times.

If you can't help yourself waiting then here's some stat's for ya that Autocar N.Z. got with the VF HSV 340 KW car 0-100 4.88 seconds 80-120 2.88 seconds.
VF SV6 0-100 6.35 seconds.

That should be enough to satisfy some people's apparent rampamt appetite for more news for a while till be have some more meaningful data from dry track comparisons, wet track comparisons mean absolutly nothing when the R Spec was wheel-spinning half way down the track at 120 k.p.h due to its savage top end power delivery.
For goodness sake lets all hold out horses for a while and chill out...obviously the HSV's considerably more expensive rubber has better wet weather grip...and that's about the sum total of most of what we know so far.

[jimmyxr6t04]

geez guys, the first GTS hasn't even been delivered yet. Wait until a few owners get a hold of them and then we'll all know more. In a couple of months i'm sure their true potential will be apparent to all, or perhaps it'll be a flop! No one really knows at this stage.

Regardless, for the price and the equipment on offer i think it's pretty good value. If FPV had a similar car, i'm sure most here would agree. A car that is arguably as quick as the R-Spec but with a lot more tech and features presents as good value to me...

[99AUXR]

Motor Car NZ mag here achieved sub 12.5 in the r-spec but cant remember the time might have be a .2 or .3, If I dig the mag up Ill share.

Either way the most powerful "Australian" Muscle car was always going to be the FPV not the imported LS donk.

[XD ESP! XELR8]

Tried playing with one on a trip over fathers day..(G6ET)
Didn't want to even look over..

Then driving a 13-200 Ser sahara(lazy 700nms) I ran into him again in shep, I tried but he smoked me lol

This was a Ss..

Just shows even Ss drivers know there slower

[1TUFFUTE]

Originally Posted by 99AUXR

Motor Car NZ mag here achieved sub 12.5 in the r-spec but cant remember the time might have be a .2 or .3, If I dig the mag up Ill share.

Either way the most powerful "Australian" Muscle car was always going to be the FPV not the imported LS donk.

Yes this is the article i was referring to earlier where in NZ they ran a 12.3 for the Rspec but i couldn't find it either. Maybe it's the cooler weather or maybe the nz guys can drive better....but I'd deny the latter lol.


See what I mean...a 4.3 is a long way ahead of 4.6-8.........half a second. But we will see.

[99AUXR]

Originally Posted by 1TUFFUTE

Yes this is the article i was referring to earlier where in NZ they ran a 12.3 for the Rspec but i couldn't find it either. Maybe it's the cooler weather or maybe the nz guys can drive better....but I'd deny the latter lol.


See what I mean...a 4.3 is a long way ahead of 4.6-8.........half a second. But we will see.

NZ autocar always seem to get the fastest times, I remember they posted fastest time for F6 a few back and same has been for every car they have tested.

Maybe its our water .

[flooded one]

Originally Posted by 99AUXR

NZ autocar always seem to get the fastest times, I remember they posted fastest time for F6 a few back and same has been for every car they have tested.

Maybe its our water .

I always put it down too being a cooler place?? I could be wrong?? I've never been to NZ. so really the R-spec clocked 12.3 sec down the quarter???

as for the comment about the king of muscle cars has too be able to handle as well as be fast in a straight line. well what was the phase 3 GTHO?? It wasn't the best handling car, what made it special was its top speed. Its is considered the King of Australian muscle cars. In modern terms the R-spec takes the cake. It is as close as we will get to a modern day GTHO. no HSV GTS has beat the FPV GT-R spec yet in straight line acceleration
http://motoring.ninemsn.com.au/cars/...-fpv-gt-r-spec

till the GTS beats this and even wheels tested the GTS and only managed 12.7 or 12.8. It is NOT AUSTRALIAS FASTEST CAR!! maybe the GTS should stand for = Government Tax Support. I'm with 1TUFFUTE on this one!! show us the real world times!!! not some poxy estimated or claimed time!!!

[BadMax]

[QUOTE=wildrider;4869261]I always put it down too being a cooler place?? /QUOTE]

I thought it was their secret weapon...Sheep dip instead of VHT down on the track

[40RDT]

Originally Posted by wildrider

I always put it down too being a cooler place?? I could be wrong?? I've never been to NZ. so really the R-spec clocked 12.3 sec down the quarter???

as for the comment about the king of muscle cars has too be able to handle as well as be fast in a straight line. well what was the phase 3 GTHO?? It wasn't the best handling car, what made it special was its top speed. Its is considered the King of Australian muscle cars. In modern terms the R-spec takes the cake. It is as close as we will get to a modern day GTHO. no HSV GTS has beat the FPV GT-R spec yet in straight line acceleration
http://motoring.ninemsn.com.au/cars/...-fpv-gt-r-spec

till the GTS beats this and even wheels tested the GTS and only managed 12.7 or 12.8. It is NOT AUSTRALIAS FASTEST CAR!! maybe the GTS should stand for = Government Tax Support. I'm with 1TUFFUTE on this one!! show us the real world times!!! not some poxy estimated or claimed time!!!

I thought the HO had its rep due to its racing history / track ability from that era and the fact you could pretty much buy a race car straight off the showroom floor?

The closest thing to a modern day HO is either the W427 or the new GTS

[zilo]

Dunno how this thread got onto HSV's and FPV's.

The original poster said he was lined up against a VF SS.

I expect to see about as many 440kw GTS as I see Lamborghinis.

But VF SS and Fg XR6T ?

They are/will be everywhere driven by us mere mortals, not just a journalistic 4.xx secs nirvana.

[Rodge]

Being a Kiwi and SC GT-P owner i've taken quite an interest in the R Spec but can't recall any mag here testing the R Spec at the times mentioned above, in fact any magazine testing them at all over here, but its more than plausible that I could have missed it.

What I can say with some authority is that it is a lot cooler in N.Z. and the non-intercooled SC Maimi engine responds exceptionally well to cooler temperatures, so much so that I posted a thread on this exact issue of the incredible difference experienced this winter when it got down to around 2 or 3 degress Celcius and had to resort to filling mine with 95 Octane to try and tame it down a bit, (to try and get some traction) from its regular diet of 98. In my opinion a temperature of around 2-4 degrees adds about 25-30 rwkw's to a SC 335 output compared to say 24 degrees, both readings from my super wide bum-o-metre

By virtue of the fact that the LSA is a already an intercooled engine it may or may not respond so exceptionally well as the SC FPV to cooler temps. N.Z. Autocar have a good rep for posting unbiased reviews and use super accurate Vbox timing equipment.
If they test a GTS in due course and its quicker that 4.5 seconds to 100 and 2.5 seconds for the 80-120, then I'll be impressed and not before but at the risk of repeating myself 4.88 seconds 0-100 and 2.88 seconds 80-120 were pretty credible numbers they got from the new VF HSV 340. That and the fuel rating of 12.9 L/100 km's vs a whopping 15.7 L/100 km's for the GTS perhaps makes the significantly more affordable 340 HSV the thinking mans HSV ?...of course if said person was really thinking hard, they'd come to the inescapeable conclusion that the SC FPV are better

[Chopped]

http://media.drive.com.au/cars/car-n...e-4682590.html

"Both cars returned impressive times, although our drivers felt that under better conditions, each would go even faster."

[stazza]

I'm sick of all these claims of the GTS being "one of the world's most powerful" sedans. Unless it is dynoed and proven then it's just another one of Holden's bull **** claims.

If holden put a 1000kw badge on a car everyone would believe it.

And he has no doubt that in better conditions they would run faster times. He's only saying that because they still can't replicate holden's bull **** claims.

[Bossxr8]

Originally Posted by stazza

I'm sick of all these claims of the GTS being "one of the world's most powerful" sedans. Unless it is dynoed and proven then it's just another one of Holden's bull **** claims.

If holden put a 1000kw badge on a car everyone would believe it.

And he has no doubt that in better conditions they would run faster times. He's only saying that because they still can't replicate holden's bull **** claims.

Over the past 10 years I have never, ever seen anyone run a time as quick as HSV's claims, on any model they have produced.

I remember when the GTS300 was out and HSV offered any journo who could match or beat their claimed acceleration figures a bottle of Grange. I'll bet it's still sitting at HSV headquarters cause no one could get near it.

HSV must test downhill and with a tailwind, cause their claimed times are an absolute joke.

[flooded one]

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

Over the past 10 years I have never, ever seen anyone run a time as quick as HSV's claims, on any model they have produced.

I remember when the GTS300 was out and HSV offered any journo who could match or beat their claimed acceleration figures a bottle of Grange. I'll bet it's still sitting at HSV headquarters cause no one could get near it.

HSV must test downhill and with a tailwind, cause their claimed times are an absolute joke.

very true. I remember when all the talk about the GTS when it was first revelled it would have the LSA motor. all the ******** about it being able to do 0-100km/h "comfortably" in less then 4.5 seconds. HSV's claim of 4.4sec isn't exactly comfortably. HSV and Holden have a history of claiming better then what it actually is

[smoo]

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

Over the past 10 years I have never, ever seen anyone run a time as quick as HSV's claims, on any model they have produced.

I think Motor ran a GTO or GTS auto coupe 0-100 in 4.9 seconds. Don't know how many attempts that took, but you'd think with all the advances the VF GTS has it would shave .5 secs off.

[Cuyper]

Originally Posted by smoo

I think Motor ran a GTO or GTS auto coupe 0-100 in 4.9 seconds. Don't know how many attempts that took, but you'd think with all the advances the VF GTS has it would shave .5 secs off.

Almost anything can run a 5.5, there's a really large amount of diminishing returns trying to get a car to go any faster than 5.0 on real roads. It's all about traction and weight, very little to do with power when you are only going to 100km/h. One of the most effective street cars I ever saw was a mild 355 in a VN wagon, which would consistently run high 4's on the street. Only because everything was just right, not too much power, good torque, good traction not so much weight etc. Because that car would do the same time over and over again on average roads, not many cars on the road are as "real world quick"

[Rob 351]

No offence, but conditions looked perfect to me! On a dragstrip, fine weather....unless it was 30 + degrees in august, what more could you want?
Is that the fastest we have seen from a new GTS now?

[Sorted]

Originally Posted by Rob 18

No offence, but conditions looked perfect to me! On a dragstrip, fine weather....unless it was 30 + degrees in august, what more could you want?
?

This is True

[stazza]

I think it's a case of 'any excuse will do'.

[I6DOHC]

Interesting.

Considering DRIVE also got a 4.9s out of the XR6 Turbo down the drag strip (against the VF)...and with them going out the door for $39480 atm....my hard earned would be on the XR6 turbo every time.

Horses for courses though, if you want a lairy-hairy v8, then good for you. If I was that way inclined it'd be GT RSpec for sure.

[flooded one]

Interestingly this link I posted was for the manual and they also the GT-R spec could go faster with a auto. further more there was wheel spin whilst changing from 1st to 2nd, again when changing into 3rd and a slight chirp whilst changing into 4th. that means it can go faster too!!! http://motoring.ninemsn.com.au/cars/...-fpv-gt-r-spec

[Rob 351]

Originally Posted by wildrider

Interestingly this link I posted was for the manual and they also the GT-R spec could go faster with a auto. further more there was wheel spin whilst changing from 1st to 2nd, again when changing into 3rd and a slight chirp whilst changing into 4th. that means it can go faster too!!! http://motoring.ninemsn.com.au/cars/...-fpv-gt-r-spec

That is a brilliant read. 4.52 with a manual gearbox in the FPV. I love my manual boxs but it would have been great if they tested the ZF in the FPV on the same day & in the same conditions. Would have easily done a 4.4 to 100 & even maybe a high 4.3.
What a great engine the 5.0 sc is eh!!

[flooded one]

Originally Posted by Rob 18

That is a brilliant read. 4.52 with a manual gearbox in the FPV. I love my manual boxs but it would have been great if they tested the ZF in the FPV on the same day & in the same conditions. Would have easily done a 4.4 to 100 & even maybe a high 4.3.
What a great engine the 5.0 sc is eh!!

I want one!! lol

[Sorted]

So there we have it

FPV GT Rspec 335kw IS faster than a HSV GTS 430kw