Holdens dodgy acceleration claims

Bossxr8 · 26-12-2009, 10:42 PM

Anyone read Motors PCOTY and the little bit about how Holden/HSV always complain about the acceleration times that Motor get being way off what they think they are capable of, so they sent Garth Tander along to prove them wrong, only for him to only match the times set by Motors usual tester Warren Luff. GT's best time in the GTS was a pitiful 13.72 and 0-100 in 5.6, recorded at the sticky WSID strip. HSV claim 0-100 in 4.99, so he couldn't even get close. Just proves how bs HSV's claims are.

Epic fail.

HSV must do their usually testing off a cliff.

flappist · 26-12-2009, 10:50 PM

Jan 2010?

Holden's spin doctors are not have a lot of fun lately are they?

gtfpv · 26-12-2009, 10:53 PM

i think a GT 315 WOULD MATCH OR BETTER THAT WOULDNT IT . ??
Sounds on the money anyways i think.

4Vman · 26-12-2009, 10:54 PM

Its amazing the different approaches that HSV and FPV use.. in contrast FPV seen to consistently understate everything....

4Vman · 26-12-2009, 10:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

Anyone read Motors PCOTY and the little bit about how Holden/HSV always complain about the acceleration times that Motor get being way off what they think they are capable of, so they sent Garth Tander along to prove them wrong, only for him to only match the times set by Motors usual tester Warren Luff. GT's best time in the GTS was a pitiful 13.72 and 0-100 in 5.6, recorded at the sticky WSID strip. HSV claim 0-100 in 4.99, so he couldn't even get close. Just proves how bs HSV's claims are.

Epic fail.

HSV must do their usually testing off a cliff.

The car Motor tested didnt have the "press pack" fitted though....

gtfpv · 26-12-2009, 11:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 4Vman

The car Motor tested didnt have the "press pack" fitted though....

LOL

Maggot · 26-12-2009, 11:07 PM

Tochi got that time in his bog stock xr8!! There is no doubt the holdens can go faster tho.. just not all the time.

eb2fairmont · 26-12-2009, 11:15 PM

Depends on the press pack. A bit like those vy-vz ss commodores which would pull better times than HSV's....

Now Holden wouldn't supply a chipped/modified car for press now would they...

Bossxr8 · 26-12-2009, 11:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 4Vman

The car Motor tested didnt have the "press pack" fitted though....

Exactly what I was thinking.

I'm sure there will now be an investigation in to who forgot to load the special "press pack" tune into the ECU, and then he will be disciplined by being forced to drive an Epica for a month.

They also managed to break the rear end in one GTS too, so HSV had to send a replacement.

**Dave R** · 26-12-2009, 11:40 PM

5.6 is pretty average, traction is probably the issue. It'd be more telling to know rolling figures and how fast it was travelling at the end of the 400m.

fordOwner · 26-12-2009, 11:57 PM

Hahaha this is hillarious! Garth Tander along with Holden & HSV would have been so red faced! - Would have been a quiet trip home.

pauljh74 · 27-12-2009, 12:00 AM

HRT drivers have had trouble getting off the line with clutch issues in recent years

:

Grechie · 27-12-2009, 12:01 AM

13.7 in a 6.x litre VE? traction issues for sure?

351capri · 27-12-2009, 12:33 AM

: they should test them down a 400m vertical mine shaft !

**SSD-85** · 27-12-2009, 12:42 AM

If I remember correctly, wasn't GT the one who crashed the W427? Either way, it would seem Holdens' BS chest-beating is finally catching up with them....

Bossxr8 · 27-12-2009, 01:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Adrenaline

5.6 is pretty average, traction is probably the issue. It'd be more telling to know rolling figures and how fast it was travelling at the end of the 400m.

Testing was done at WSID, surface is probably the stickiest in NSW, so they can't use that as an excuse.

mik · 27-12-2009, 02:54 AM

it would`nt be like red team to send in a ringer would it?....

:

block58 · 27-12-2009, 03:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

I'm sure there will now be an investigation in to who forgot to load the special "press pack" tune into the ECU, and then he will be disciplined by being forced to drive an Epica for a month.

LOL

WOLF · 27-12-2009, 09:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 4Vman

Its amazing the different approaches that HSV and FPV use.. in contrast FPV seen to consistently understate everything....

and for good reason, after all fords are normally slower aren't they??(aside from the F6 that is!)
Its annoying people keep bashing Holden all the time?? Rivalry is fantastic for the end customer, so with holden pushing the performance image all the time atleast it gets ford of its butt....it seems they are finally heeding the call hence demise of the BOSS in favour of Coyote. But will Ford still be playing catch up? Time will tell I suppose. Either way, again the customer will be the winner

:

**ebxr8240** · 27-12-2009, 11:45 AM

You have to keep in mind ....
Which company has the most profits...
We are looking at it from an enthusiast point of view ..

MAD · 27-12-2009, 12:16 PM

I remember a similar time (13.7x) to this being achieved by an AFF member in a phantom BA XR8, with only CAI, at calder quite a while back. Maybe the extra 47kw in the GTS is used to power the ego of the driver.

Was the VE GTS a manual or auto?

Chopped · 27-12-2009, 12:25 PM

Top Gear Aus Mag had a similar experience, The journos got down to 5.2 which the HSV engineers said wasn't goog enough. The engineers showed them how to do it and did a 5.2 !....then explaining that 5.2 was pretty good considering the weight etc !!

Both brands have been averaging mid 5's and mid 13's for almost the last ten years !!!! Are we really getting anywhere ? (only the fuel savings are getting better)

Maggot · 27-12-2009, 12:32 PM

Disagree with the above post tho.. the current range of falcons is the fastest ever across the board (straight line at least).

The holdens have got slower with the AFM but they have in general been faster that Ford for a few years.. (anyone that actually goes out and races against them knows it!).

The series III au strokers were probably an exception to the rule as well.

4Vman · 27-12-2009, 12:46 PM

The BAGT was the first "magazine" 13 second result for a Falcon ever, to be honest since 2003 we've been quibbling over 10ths of a second from brand to brand, track to track, driver to driver, condition to condition.
Remember, magazines dont optimise the cars to suit drag racing or 0-100 with traction compounds, "spooling", fancy launch techniques, removing weight etc etc like people do at the strip, they normally have a passenger and half a tank of fuel too so what you see the mags get is closer to real world that we can expect from them as daily drivers...
In "magazine" mode both brand are "13xxx" cars....

The difference here is that HSV seem to quote "optimised" figures that nobody seems to be able to replicate in real world situations, FPV seem more "realistic" with their claims. In reality both are very close in performance.

Bossxr8 · 27-12-2009, 01:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MAD

I remember a similar time (13.7x) to this being achieved by an AFF member in a phantom BA XR8, with only CAI, at calder quite a while back. Maybe the extra 47kw in the GTS is used to power the ego of the driver.

Was the VE GTS a manual or auto?

Manual.

Chopped · 27-12-2009, 01:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maggot

..... the current range of falcons is the fastest ever across the board (straight line at least)

And by how much 0.3 sec !! - OOohhhh now we are getting somewhere.

4Vman · 27-12-2009, 01:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chopped

And by how much 0.3 sec !! - OOohhhh now we are getting somewhere.

Hey, atleast they're improving.. unlike S1 to S2 HSV VE... or going backward like AFM 6.0l SS

what a performance lemon the auto SS is now....

Iggypoppin' · 27-12-2009, 01:10 PM

All the noise, none of the go??

I don't pay too much attention to these magazine articles anyway, it never seems like a level playing field, and the negativity of the writers to one brand or another is quite obvious at times.

Chopped · 27-12-2009, 01:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 4Vman

Hey, atleast they're improving.. unlike S1 to S2 HSV VE... or going backward like AFM 6.0l SS

what a performance lemon the auto SS is now....

I agree, AFM has done nothing but take the performance backwards and probably cost more to make !!

As for the Ford V8, well it should be easy to improve when you look at the early versions !

If it wasn't for the turbo 6, FPV and Ford for that matter wouldn't have to much to brag about.

Both brands could have done a hell of lot better in the last 10 years than what they have.

Maggot · 27-12-2009, 01:53 PM

The FG series.. hmm. lets see.

F6s doing 12.6 stock
G6et doing the same
Xr6turbos not quite there yet, perhaps the lsd is slowing them a bit.. but they are still MILES faster than BA turbos stock
Fgxr8s 13.6 stock
GT
NA6 are mid 14's

These times are hugely faster than any previous range, so yes we have heaps to crow about.

***

And if you lined up a pre AFM ss manual sedan, against a BFII manual sedan Xr8, competant drivers NOT in there own cars, and you HAD to bet your house on it!!!!... my blood runs blue but I would be betting the other way.

They have had lighter, higher capacity engines for some time and the boss did pretty bloody well to get close.