Confusion over VF SS 0-100 times

[1TUFFUTE]

I'm not swayed by 0-100 or 1/4mile times when buying, but I'll tell you what does get me in my G6ET happy......and that's the 3 different vfssv commadores that I've had runs against over the last few months and beat them all comfortably.(as in still pulling away when on the brakes). All were rolling starts from round about exits or highway entry!

Maybe it's me but there's zero chance in hell I'd change for a sluggish 6.0ltr with tech when I have a far better looking smick Ford Turbo beast that eats hsvs.....but with less tech.meh It's all about the power delivery rush.....but if I drove anything from Holden shy of the new VFGTS HSV, I'd be embarrassed everytime I pulled up beside a xr6t, a g6et, a GT or aF6 knowing that if I give it a squirt(and I'd want too,otherwise I'd own a Camry). That I'd get eaten every time. No thanks.

[Dave R]

Here you go OP, about 5.1 seconds Magazines also claim F6s are mid 13 second cars, don't believe everything you read. After owning both I'd take the XR6T to a drag strip and the SS to a winding road, they're both good at what they do.

[muso]

Originally Posted by Adrenaline

Here you go OP, about 5.1 seconds Magazines also claim F6s are mid 13 second cars, don't believe everything you read. After owning both I'd take the XR6T to a drag strip and the SS to a winding road, they're both good at what they do.

image

Agreed.....cheers for the video that's about as quick as my BA XR6T with 270 rwkw's or maybe even slightly quicker by a bees dick As long as the car in the video was stock and on flat road. The auto SS is probably quicker than the manual.
Due to the better chassis the holden would put the power down better, when my car comes on boost putting it onto the ground is sometimes a joke.....but it is a BA so not a reasonable comparison to these newer cars.

5.1 seconds 0-100 is good for what it is, didn't the supercharged VF HSV get only a bit less like 4.7 secs on one road test? I could be wrong though, can't remember.

F6's mid 13 second cars

[PepeLePew]

The Aussie industry is dead, surely we're all over caring about a few tenths of a second when it wasn't that long ago our fastest affordable best we're seconds slower?

For your average daily drive it's the driving experience that matters not mines bigger than yours numbers. Like the SC 8 and the F6 they're too totally different drives thanks to the way they breathe and chassis etc on top. That's all that matters. If you like the V8 thing and are keen on the SS get the Walkinshaw upgrades and listen to the purr and rumble. It'll entertain you the 999 times out of 1000 when your foot isn't on the floor.

[Professor Farnsworth]

Xrt is about 4.9 with a good launch

The biggest problem with the t is traction. If I need to take off quickly in the wet/damp in the turbo, forget it.

SS is a decent car though for sure. More predictable power delivery too being an NA V8

[chris0]

Originally Posted by Professor Farnsworth

Xrt is about 4.9 with a good launch

The biggest problem with the t is traction. If I need to take off quickly in the wet/damp in the turbo, forget it.

SS is a decent car though for sure. More predictable power delivery too being an NA V8

4th and 5th in wet is my biggest drama

As I said earlier, the only ones who argue a performance car needs to have more then just performance are usually the ones getting dusted.

[muso]

As I said before traction in my car even in the dry is a really big problem, I would love to see what my car could do with a pair of 12" Mickey Thompsons that would really finish off the already 3/4 buggered Diff Bush

It is strange that the G6ET with open wheeler doesn't seem to suffer as much as the XR6T with traction issues.

[Dave R]

Originally Posted by chris0

As I said earlier, the only ones who argue a performance car needs to have more then just performance are usually the ones getting dusted.

Depends on what you're looking for in a car. I think we as Australians are slowly moving past the age where the only measure of a car is how fast it accelerates to a given speed. It's an archaic view and something the Europeans got past a long time ago. If all you want out of the car is to beat other people in traffic light duels, you're never going to be happy because there's always going to be a faster car out there. What matters (to me) is whether you're enjoying your time behind the wheel, not whether you think another car will beat you in drag race.

[duaned]

Originally Posted by Professor Farnsworth

Very bold statement. One I disagree with.

Without starting a troll fight, can you elaborate why you disagree with this? I base my judgement on previously owning a FG XR6 (non turbo) and the judgement of the press and motoring journos.

Please put any bias to the side since you own a XR6T.

[muso]

Originally Posted by Adrenaline

Depends on what you're looking for in a car. I think we as Australians are slowly moving past the age where the only measure of a car is how fast it accelerates to a given speed. It's an archaic view and something the Europeans got past a long time ago. If all you want out of the car is to beat other people in traffic light duels, you're never going to be happy because there's always going to be a faster car out there. What matters (to me) is whether you're enjoying your time behind the wheel, not whether you think another car will beat you in drag race.

Agreed

[Professor Farnsworth]

Originally Posted by duaned

Without starting a troll fight, can you elaborate why you disagree with this? I base my judgement on previously owning a FG XR6 (non turbo) and the judgement of the press and motoring journos.

Please put any bias to the side since you own a XR6T.

I have no interest in arguing. You said the VF SS was superior to an FG turbo in every way other than poke. So tell me why you came to this conclusion. I'm open minded more than most people I've ever met, about anything.

[Professor Farnsworth]

Originally Posted by Adrenaline

What matters (to me) is whether you're enjoying your time behind the wheel, not whether you think another car will beat you in drag race.

exactly. I agree. My au makes me smile every time I drive it. So lazy and relaxing to drive. My FG is for the fun.

[Professor Farnsworth]

I might add that I think the VE and onward v8s are great cars. Never hidden from that.

[PepeLePew]

I just reread my own post good old iPhone makes me sound like a grammatical tool. Me thinks in balance the VF undoubtedly is a better vehicle 'almost' across the board with the benefit of years and development dollars. But there is a little too much tendency to kick the FG which still accounts for itself well in the passage of time although definitely EOL.

VF will win every review and test and it should, but it's like performance figures, better is relative for the buyer/driver and the performance side of the GM and Ford families are a much more personal equation And the FG has the fortune of housing two of the finest engines ever to hit Australian roads in a Australian vehicle and arguably the first auto transmission in a Aussie car EVER to cull the argument that manual is automatically better

[muso]

Originally Posted by Professor Farnsworth

I might add that I think the VE and onward v8s are great cars. Never hidden from that.

Ditto VE onwards V8's

But what I really love about the BA/BF/FG Falcons is how I can see out of them with such great vision all round especially behind and rear quarter. The Commodores from VT to VF seem to have that high rear window which hides so much. Even with a spoiler I can reverse park, lane change or whatever with full confidence which I cannot do in my son's VT or a VE I drove at work, I am always scared of hitting something or worse someone or even worse someone's kid when reversing in a VT onwards Commodore, the fact that I'm only about 5' 8" on a good day doesn't help

[Professor Farnsworth]

try our Rio, backing out of an angled park gives you ZERO rear vision, and no option for a reverse camera (in this country)

regarding the FG, i got mine for $36,000 drive away with: leather, auto, metallic paint, full size spare, full tank of fuel, $100 coles myer voucher, 5 year warranty and 15K service free. To me, it's just unbeatable value. When i compare the two cars all that upsets me to be honest is the fact mine doesn't sound like a v8, and i can rarely ever get traction. Other than that, in my mind it's no comparison. But this varies from person to person and this debate has lingered for generations. They're both great cars, get em while you can. As far as one being a whitewash over the other however, i couldn't agree less.

I've seen the VF SS auto do 5.0 to 100 in some tests.

In the end, the light will guide you to the right choice :P

[2242100]

Originally Posted by muso

I think most people have seen the drag strip comparison between a VF SS A6 and an FG XR6 Turbo A6 and they were pretty much line ball in spite of the fact that VE SS was usually quite far behind the FG Turbo. I can't see how a 40 kg weight reduction and wider rear tyres could make so much difference with no extra engine power from VE to VF (still 260 kw) Technically the FG Turbo should have been quicker than the VF SS.

Then just today I read a motor magazine comparing Golf GTI, VF SSV and can't remember what the third car was but the VF SSV 0-100 km time was 6.1 secs 0-400 m time was 14.2 (about the same as an original stock BA/BF XR6 Turbo)

The SSV was a manual so maybe there were traction issues but it is still confusing. I was so impressed when I saw that a stock auto VF SS could now match a stock FG Turbo in a straight line that I was almost ready to jump ship and go for a VF SS instead of a G6ET :( Of course a tune and injector change for the FG Turbo would change the game considerably

It's hard to understand the latest MOTOR Magazine Commodore times and to me the Drive com.au 5.0 second 0 to 100 kph Commodore time seems about right for the very good conditions of that particular test, but when it comes to the Turbo FG Falcons, I think most people are unaware of how fast they really are, at least when the Overboost feature is working.
My car is a standard , "untuned" 2009 FG XR6 Turbo Auto that I have owned since new, and it's best 0 to 100 kph time to date is 4.56 seconds.That was done under good, but definitely not perfect high altitude conditions ( I posted that data in 10 k increments on 20/03/2014 and the thread is, FG FPV GT Rspec vs VF HSV GTS by Motor Mag).
What is also interesting is that Drive got a 4.9 second time to 100 out of the Turbo Falcon which they described as "mind blowing", whereas my own car also managed a 4.90 sec time, but with the handicap of the transmission being locked in second gear and second is high enough to run beyond 110 kph ( data was posted in "Holden SSV Redline drive impressions " thread on 26/03/2014).
I can't say for sure, but I suspect that 4.9 would likely be an achievable time for my car in Drive without the Overboost feature working. I had one test occasion where the transmission was torqued up a bit too much for the back brakes to hold, and the wheels started to briefly rotate, this caused the following run to be around 10 to 12% slower than it should have been. I'm thinking that the computer may have stropped the engine from going into Overboost mode during that run, and the cars pace on this occasion was similar to the pace of the cars that I have seen tested in Magazine road tests.
Another point to note is that it's Overboost rolling acceleration pace (at least in second gear) is very similar to an F6.
From dyno runs I've found that it has 9 pounds of boost in normal mode and around 10.7 pounds in Overboost mode and that seems to add at least 10% more power. So I think it's not surprising that it's close to an F6, particularlly considering it's slightly lighter weight. Of course in long runs where hot lapping is involved I'm sure an F6 would beat it comfortably.
My times were recorded with an accurate Racelogic Performance Box whereas Drive used a Driftbox. They are the same basic unit except that the Driftbox can measure the cars drift angle which isn't applicable to this situation.
So it seems to me that an SS Commodores straight line performance isn't in the same class as the Falcon in everyday driving conditions because of the Falcons Overboost feature, but that said I think that the SS Commodore is a great Allrounder.

[BHDOGS]

there is no confusion its slower the end

[AndyXR6T]

I would love to see this exact same thread on the holden forums. I bet they would be saying "the fg is crap blah blah".

The VF is undoubtedly a good bit of gear. Yes the tech is ahead of the FG but so are the years of development. We are comparing a newer model over and older model. When and if there is a FH (or whatever) THEN we can compare tech and any other advancements. Until then, the FG is bloody quick and the VF is a great all rounder!

[Whistlr]

Electric power steering would of freed up some power.
The first magazine tests it got pwned by the turbo then later for some reason it became quicker.

It's puzzling really. I don't get how it goes as hard as the HSVs with so much less power. Not denying adrenaline's efforts but wheres the incentive to buy a HSV?

My ve2 sv6 doesn't give anything away to the vf equivalent I drove recently but could be due to tight motor.

[johnydep]

Check out your times here http://www.automobile-catalog.com/simulation.php

To answer some frequently asked questions: all these numbers are results of the ProfessCars™ software car dynamics simulation. Although it’s accurate and sophisticated, as each simulation has a margin of error. In most cases acceleration times presented in a-c, calculated for cars with full fuel tank and 200lb (90kg) load, could be rather underestimated. It means, that with really good driving skills or/and using special tires, it is possible to achieve even better times. On the other hand, everyday practical accelerations, with extra equipment and load, could be worse.

[muso]

For the price the VF SS is amazing value with all the tech and safety.

The 0-100 time which varies from 5.0 to 6.1 secs is probably down to driver/conditions etc. Lets hope the 2014 Falcon will be a good competitor to the VF. I hope features such as collision avoidance, park assist, lane change etc will be present or available in the new Falcon.

I think the conclusion is that the FG Turbo is the faster car (at the strip best out of three I'd put my money on the Ford) but the VF SS the better chassis/package etc.....it would want to be it's all new.

I wait eagerly to see what the 2014 Falcon will have to offer especially the XRT and XR8 models (supercharged 5.0 as standard hard to ignore) I hope their chassis set up is improved so some of that power can actually get to the ground

Stock VF SS going as hard as HSV's still has me scratching my head

As far as after market mods go I would imagine that injector upgrade, high flow cat and tune would have the FG Turbo way ahead of the VF SS even with similar upgrades to the SS (as long as the ford could get traction)

[Professor Farnsworth]

yeah wider wheels is the problem - 8" just doesn't cut it

sounds sus

[Dash_XR]

Even if it is faster it still looks like a Hyundai/Mazda love child.

[Rodge]

Originally Posted by Adrenaline

Depends on what you're looking for in a car. I think we as Australians are slowly moving past the age where the only measure of a car is how fast it accelerates to a given speed. It's an archaic view and something the Europeans got past a long time ago. If all you want out of the car is to beat other people in traffic light duels, you're never going to be happy because there's always going to be a faster car out there. What matters (to me) is whether you're enjoying your time behind the wheel, not whether you think another car will beat you in drag race.

I agree that there is sooo much more to the drive experience than 0-100 times but the turbo six Falcon has such a wonderful easy delivery of its ample torque it makes a stock SS seem somwhat breathless in the first 4,000 revs which is where poeple spend most of their time so too a certain extent the NA 6.0 Holden engine takes away some of the everyday joy you experience behind the wheel, which is something I agree with you on, is all that really matters. Its almost like, this SSV-Redline is a great car but I feel its missing something and that something in my opinion is torque at everyday revs !!
Nothing quite satisfies the same as ample easy flowing torque and that's part of the unique charm of the legendary turbo six Falcon motor.

In a perfect world at an affordable price you'd have the easy effortless power and torque of the turbo six engine together with the superior chassis and the full equipment and technology kit of the SSV-redline. I think i've solved the dilema seeing as thw world will never be perfect, well not at this price point, but everyone has to search for their own answer and we're all looking for different things.

[dl86]

Pretty simple formula regarding traction... Don't put **** tyres on your car and you wont have traction issues! 8" is perfectly fine with decent tyres. I get traction 95% of the time in my GT from a standing start WOT in the stock size. The remaining 5% can be attributed to cold tyres and/or bad road. Bridgestone RE11 need some heat.

[Professor Farnsworth]

Originally Posted by dl86

Pretty simple formula regarding traction... Don't put **** tyres on your car and you wont have traction issues! 8" is perfectly fine with decent tyres. I get traction 95% of the time in my GT from a standing start WOT in the stock size. The remaining 5% can be attributed to cold tyres and/or bad road. Bridgestone RE11 need some heat.

I dont have a GT I have a turbo. The power delivery is different. I am running new OEM tyres and don't have the budget to just throw them away. I'm not the only person with traction issues in a turbo, read up. And not many of us are running cheap crap tyres either. My new Dunlop sp sport maxx 18s were a little better than the new 19 of same spec but at wot they will both shred to second gear and beyond in the dry every time.

[johnydep]

Originally Posted by Rodge

I agree that there is sooo much more to the drive experience than 0-100 times but the turbo six Falcon has such a wonderful easy delivery of its ample torque it makes a stock SS seem somwhat breathless in the first 4,000 revs which is where poeple spend most of their time so too a certain extent the NA 6.0 Holden engine takes away some of the everyday joy you experience behind the wheel, which is something I agree with you on, is all that really matters. Its almost like, this SSV-Redline is a great car but I feel its missing something and that something in my opinion is torque at everyday revs !!
Nothing quite satisfies the same as ample easy flowing torque and that's part of the unique charm of the legendary turbo six Falcon motor..

I must have picked up a freak engine. I have the auto & haven't noticed it being "breathless in the first 4,000 revs".

Maybe I'm using the gears better than most.

When I want to drive like an old man I put it in D, when I want a bit more response I go S, and when I'm going the full hog it's manual shifts. With the great sound of blipping throttle on downshifts.

Unless changing the engine oil at 3000 km with a full synthetic had something to do with my engines extra responsiveness. Or maybe I've run it perfectly.

Oh well whatever it is that has given my engine good torque & exceptional take off

[muso]

Yes I agree with Professor, the power delivery of the Turbo 6 is far from the linear power delivery from a V8. Once spooled up the power delivery is so brutal that when I first got the car tuned I'd get a bit car sick from it while I was driving I took a friend for a drive in the country and it was amusing to see her head fly back into the passenger seat when I floored it at 90 kph....it looked quite funny......of course I had to almost immediately back off to avoid exceeding the 110 kph limit. Traction in 1st gear is hit and miss with it often struggling and stepping out sideways to gain traction in the dry.......in the wet don't bother! These Turbo Ford 6's would be amazing with a world class chassis or 4WD aka Territory.

[muso]

I think the older LS1's etc were sluggish under 4000 rpm but the 6.0 in VF form has addressed this.