Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hi all,

For those who don't buy Motor magazine I have provided some reasonably interesting info below in relation to their recent test of Ford and Holden's toughest.

Car kW(wheels)

HSV GTS (manual) 245.2 @ 5,700

HSV R8 (auto) 243.9 @ 5,500

SS Comm (manual) 236.2 @ 5,500

SS V Comm (auto) 232.0 @ 5,500

FPV Force 8 (auto) 229.2 @ 5,900

FPV Force 6 (auto) 229.2 @ 6,200

Falcon XR6T (auto) 195.1 @ 5,700

In July 2003 Motor had a similar test. The results were as follows:

Car kW (wheels)

Caprice (auto) 5.7ltr 158

Falcon XR8 (manual) 193

Monaro CV8 (manual) 189

SS Commodore (manual) 182

Commodor SV8 (manual) 178

GTS Coupe (manual) 222

HSV Clubbie 5.7ltr (manual) 196

FPV Falcon GT (manual) 225

XR6T (manual) 185

Interesting comparison. You can make as much or as little as you like out of the results. There are many factors that effect the figures and I understand the different dynos produce different results.

There are some significant differences and a few minor movements over this 4 year time period.

In relation to say the SS Commodore when tested in 2003 the quoted figure by Holden at the flywheel was 235kw where as the current power is 270kw at the flywheel. This is an increase of 14.9%. The figure at the wheels has increased from 182kw to 236kw. This is an increase of 29.7%.

All in all this may be an accurate or inaccurate comparison and we will never know.

Cheerio

  • Replies 54
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Hey Ronin,

For the recent test it was the Swinburne TAFE, Victoria, Dyno Dynamic AWD dynamometer, 16 deg C ambient temp.

The 2003 test was also sone on a Dyno Dynamics dynamometer however with a group called C&V.

One last comment, I'm impressed by some of the power figures. No wonder their quick in a straight line. It would take a reasonably well modded and tuned Skyline GTST to outrund the Aussie contingent. And I say this not because I am a Ford or Holden fan but because I think it is a fact. Am I wrong in thinking that that a standard GTR would be outrun by most of these cars? Not trying to start a war, just curious.

Edited by Smurf
they may have more power at the wheels...but its all about power/weight ratio...

yep, power to weight is the winner.

belive that an R8 is around 1800kgs, giving 7.38kg/rwkw

if a stock GTR is 1450kgs, then to match a 7kg/rwkw, the GTR will have to make 207rwkw.

I reckon a stock GTR will make around 180rwkw, so with an exhaust it will be close.

plus don't forget rear wheel vs 4wd - will the R8 get the power to the ground efficiently as the GTR?

all so many variables.

I find it odd that you would mention that a stock GTR only puts out about 180rwkw. I have a kinda old HPI magazine, which was a GTR special edition mag, In their they mention that most GTR's put out 195-200+ rwkw.. who should i believe?

but the new GTR will just bitch slap them back into the kitchen.

GTR is an AWD car most Aussie vehicles are RWD, a GT-T or GTST would be a more valid comparison.

A GT-T with a highflow turbo is enough to bitch slap even the all mighty HSV GTS back into the kitchen :D

Here's a point of reference for future comparison. Lap times around Calder park from the same bunch of cars were:

HSV GTS (manual)1:10.96

HSV R8 (auto) 1:09.90

SS Comm (manual) 1:11.01

SS V Comm (auto) 1:10.80

FPV Force 8 (auto) 1:11.93

FPV Force 6 (auto) 1:10.06

Falcon XR6T (auto) 1:20.20

Points to note, times are not in order. Also I think there was a misprint for the XR6T, I think it should have been 1:12.20.

Are there an sub GTR's (i.e. GTS25T) that can top the R8's time. if so what mods did they have. Is there anyone who has raced at Calder in a stock GTR.

Cheers

Will

Here's a point of reference for future comparison. Lap times around Calder park from the same bunch of cars were:

HSV GTS (manual)1:10.96

HSV R8 (auto) 1:09.90

SS Comm (manual) 1:11.01

SS V Comm (auto) 1:10.80

FPV Force 8 (auto) 1:11.93

FPV Force 6 (auto) 1:10.06

Falcon XR6T (auto) 1:20.20

Points to note, times are not in order. Also I think there was a misprint for the XR6T, I think it should have been 1:12.20.

Are there an sub GTR's (i.e. GTS25T) that can top the R8's time. if so what mods did they have. Is there anyone who has raced at Calder in a stock GTR.

Cheers

Will

These cars all are very heavy...with no 4 wheel drive.

An Evo...WRX...or gtr32/33/34 will all beat those times in standard clothes.

Technology is always improving..but our Aus. cars are also getting heavy.

Please do not compare these cars to a GTR.

GTST/GTT may be a better comparison..rear wheel drive.

A stock gtr does..or did...13.4s 1/4 mile

I believe all the above cars are 13.7s and above..most around 15s..LOL.

I have no idea what you are after....do you want to buy a gtr, and just want to know if they are better at the track?

YES YES YES......they are race breed...and band from v8Aus racing because they were to good...lol

So forget the dyno. results..they mean nothing...take a ride...you will feel the power.

Please do not compare these cars to a GTR.

GTST/GTT may be a better comparison..rear wheel drive.

A stock gtr does..or did...13.4s 1/4 mile

I believe all the above cars are 13.7s and above..most around 15s..LOL.

I have no idea what you are after....do you want to buy a gtr, and just want to know if they are better at the track?

It was more out of interest than trying to source a definitive answer as to which car is better, the answer to that question lies in the eye of the beholder of course.

Just in relation to your comment, you are saying that I shouldn't compare a GTR to the cars in the list however one of your reasons for this is the quarter of a mile time. This is surely only one form of comparison.

It is interesting that you state the quarter mile as a worthy method of comparison when your signature states that performance can only be measured from 0 - 1,000 metres, which leads me to my next question, where do you think they would all stand after the 1,000 metre mark. The GTR would get the jump no doubt and would most likely make it to 400 or 500 metres first though the torque may allow the others to catch up.

Once again I am not trying to really acheive anything, just providing info for those who are interested and also making some mild comparisons.

So does anyone have Calder times?

Here's a point of reference for future comparison. Lap times around Calder park from the same bunch of cars were:

HSV GTS (manual)1:10.96

HSV R8 (auto) 1:09.90

SS Comm (manual) 1:11.01

SS V Comm (auto) 1:10.80

FPV Force 8 (auto) 1:11.93

FPV Force 6 (auto) 1:10.06

Falcon XR6T (auto) 1:20.20

Points to note, times are not in order. Also I think there was a misprint for the XR6T, I think it should have been 1:12.20.

Cheers

Will

those times look pretty good from what ive seen of calder times

shows you that a 6 can beat a 8 - the force 6 was quicker than the GTS

i think that also shows the awesomeness of the ZF 6 speed auto - better ratios and quicker shifting in the ZF then in the GM 6sp manual

here is the formula vee record: 1:11.9963 set in 1995 (not sure what configuration)

according to here: http://www.hsv.com.au/racing/tracks/calder.htm

the record for v8 supercars was 56.14 in a 96 vr commo by lowndes

yep, power to weight is the winner.

belive that an R8 is around 1800kgs, giving 7.38kg/rwkw

if a stock GTR is 1450kgs, then to match a 7kg/rwkw, the GTR will have to make 207rwkw.

I reckon a stock GTR will make around 180rwkw, so with an exhaust it will be close.

plus don't forget rear wheel vs 4wd - will the R8 get the power to the ground efficiently as the GTR?

all so many variables.

meh who cares, different cars for different uses, seems kinda stupid to me if u buy a GTR and all ur worried about is how fast it will go in a straight line.

Are there an sub GTR's (i.e. GTS25T) that can top the R8's time. if so what mods did they have. Is there anyone who has raced at Calder in a stock GTR.

I think i was running 1.08's in my stockish GTR, street tyres etc... But i'm sure someone with more driving skills than me would of gone much faster.

There are a few gtst/gtt's running quicker times than that, but modded....

For laptimes around different tracks, including calder, check.

http://www.skylinesaustralia.com/forums/in...showtopic=46199

Calder isn't really a great circuit track to compare, somewhere like Sandown would of been better...

Still some impressive figures out of stock taxi's there....

i think that also shows the awesomeness of the ZF 6 speed auto - better ratios and quicker shifting in the ZF then in the GM 6sp manual

I'm pretty sure that GM and Ford are both using the ZF 6 speed now, just with different ratio's and shifter set ups.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Yeah, the latter. No diff should have a centre replaced without checking clearances because its unlikely to be the same as whatever came out. Not that that stops most people just checking a new centre in
    • Major thread necro but how bad of a job is it to DIY? Looking at it online it looks like if you reuse your ring and pinion as long as those are in good condition it should be fine to just pull the axles/front cover and replace the diff that way? Or should I be replacing everything and doing preload measurements/gear mesh testing like the factory service manual mentions for the rear diff?
    • in my list I had the R33 GTR as the best Skyline. Infact I had all GTR's (33>34=32), the NSX, the GTO, the 300ZX, the 180SX, the S15 better than the FD RX7. I had the MR2 and the A80 as 'just' better. I also think the DC5R Integra looks better but this is an 01 onwards car. I also think the FC>FD. It's almost like aesthetics are individual! The elements @GTSBoy likes about the FD and dislikes about the 180 are inverse in my eyes. I hate the rear end of the FD and it's weird tail lights that are bulbous and remind me of early hyundai excels. They are not striking, nor iconic, nor retro cool. The GTO has supercar proportions. I maintain these look much better in person (like the NSX) especially with nice wheels and suspension which is mandatory for all cars pretty much. Some (or all) of these you have to see in person to appreciate. You can't write a car off until you see one in the flesh IMO. Like most people we probably just like/dislike cars which represent certain eras of design or design styles in general. I also think the 60's Jag E type looks HORRIBLE, literally disgusting, and the 2000GT is nothing to write home about. FWIW I don't think the Dodge Viper Gen1's have aged very well either. You can probably see where I rate bubbly coupes like the FD. I know we're straying now but the C4 and C5 absolutely murder the Viper in the looks department as time goes on, for my eyes. Wouldn't surprise me if people who love the FD, also love the MX5, Dodge Viper, Jag E Type, etc etc.
    • I used to hate R31s, and any of the other Nissans that led up to it, and any of the Toyotas with similar styling, because of the boxiness. They were, and remain, childish, simplistic, and generally awful. I appreciate R31s a lot more now, but only the JDM 2 door. The ADM 4 door (and any other 4 door, even if they are unique compared to our local one) can eat a bowl of dicks. The Aussie R31 is also forever tarnished by their association with stereotypical bong clutching Aussie R31 owners of the 90s and early 2000s. I think the Nissans of the 70s (other than 120Y/180B/200B) are far superior looking to the 80s cars. The 240K era Skylines are boss. The same is broadly true of Toyotas. Hondas don't ever register in my thinking, from any era. Mitsus are all horrid shitboxen in any era, and so also don't register. Subarus are always awful, ditto. Daihatsus and Suzukis also don't generally register. They are all invisible. I think the SW20 MR2 looks fiddly. The 3000GT/GTO is like that but way worse. Too many silly plastic barnacles and fiddly gimmicks ruined what could have been a really nice base shape. Kinda-sorta looks like a big heavy ST165 Celica coupe (and I'm not sure if that's a good thing or a bad thing). I think the 180SX is dreadfully bland. It's not bad looking. But it has no excitement to it at all. It's just a liftback coupe thing with no interest in its lines, and bad graphical elements (ie wide expanses of taillight plastic on the rear garnish). The S13 Silvia is a little better - getting closer to R32 shapes. But still....bland. S14? Nope. Don't love it. S15...a little better. Probably a lot better, actually. Benefits from not being like a shrunk in the wash R34 (where the S13 was a shrunk in the wash R32 and the S14 looked like a Pulsar or something else from the stable on Nissan mid 90s horrors). The Z32 was hot as f**k when it came out but hasn't aged as well as the A80. Keep in mind that I think the R33 is the most disgusting looking thing - and out of all the previous cars mentioned is objectively closest to my precious R32. It's just....real bad, almost everywhere you look. And that is down to the majority of what was designed in the 90s being shit. All Nissans from that era look like shit. Most other brands ditto. In that context, the FD absolutely stands out as being by far the best looking car, for reasons already discussed. Going behind the aesthetics, the suspension alone makes it better than almost any other car.  
    • If they just called it the "Mazda Tiffany", it would have been spot on.
×
×
  • Create New...