Confusion over VF SS 0-100 times

[devoGT]

Originally Posted by muso

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

VF R8 0-100 in 4.8s for manual, auto would be quicker

http://performancedrive.com.au/hsv-g...-review-video/

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 !!

Lsx has 480nm from 2000 rpm which is hardly breathless

http://forums.corvetteforum.com/c6-c...ue-curves.html

[40RDT]

Originally Posted by devoGT

VF R8 0-100 in 4.8s for manual, auto would be quicker

http://performancedrive.com.au/hsv-g...-review-video/

4.8s is a very good time for a manual, thats a slightly quicker time than they got with the R Spec which is pretty impressive

[muso]

Yes a white VF R8 will do just fine thanks....just leave it in the driveway

Would the auto VF R8 catch the GT R spec in a straight line that is?

[rancidpunx]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T79GB81cprE

[40RDT]

Originally Posted by muso

Yes a white VF R8 will do just fine thanks....just leave it in the driveway

Would the auto VF R8 catch the GT R spec in a straight line that is?

The longer the race the better for the R Spec with its power advantage over an R8

[Dave R]

Originally Posted by 40RDT

The longer the race the better for the R Spec with its power advantage over an R8

That's what most people don't understand, they assume that you can properly compare the cars with a simple 0-100 run, when in reality you need more than ~5 seconds to compare them. 0-200 would be good, a standing mile even better. My guess is over a standing mile (with the speed limiters removed) it would go GTS > R Spec > F6 > XR6T > R8 > SS.

[Rodge]

Somewhat breathless under 4,000 revs to one person, (who's used to driving a F6 or SC FPV), may feel different to another who's used to a different comparitive yardstick.

[Dave R]

They do need revs.

[Professor Farnsworth]

breathless is a relative term, the 6T just makes everything bar supercars feel slow, that's the "problem"

i do love linear NA V8 delivery though, on tap all the time

ps: i like your tagline Adrenaline - wish more were the same, with everything.

[muso]

Both eyes open.......Amen Me to!

[2242100]

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



Wheels tested an Auto 340 kW HSV on the straight of Eastern Creek Racetrack where the old dragstrip was, and I haven't got the Magazine now, but I think it got to 100 in the 4.9 second bracket and that was on a track that I suspect wasn't as good as the "super sticky" track (according to Drive com.au's Mark Short) that the SS was running on at the nearby WSID Drag facility.
I think the HSV got to 60 in around 2.6 seconds and from 60 to 100 kph (where whellspin shouldn't have been a problem) it's time was between 2.3 and 2.4 seconds. By contrast if you look at Drive's listed times you can see that the SS's 60 to 100 time works out to a slower 2.6 seconds.
Also the HSV further demonstrated it's power advantage by reaching over 177 kph at 400 metres vs the SS's listed 174 kph.
On top of that the old Dragstrip rises towards the end, whereas the new strip has a drop that I'm told is 1%, and although that on it's own shouldn't have too much effect at this power level, there is a double effect at work in this case.
Another factor was temperature, I believe it was 27 degrees at the HSV test and looking at the way Mark Short was dressed, I'd say that the SS was running under much cooler conditions.
So there are a number of factors there to explain the reason for the results, but I must agree that Drive com.au had a very good SS Commodore.

[Rodge]

Drivel always seems to get good Commodores, hmmm...

[muso]

I often wonder if some of these Holden 'press cars' are 'prepared' before the road test and perhaps have a more aggressive tune in them. The SS models do seem to have a lot of variation in their 0-100 and 0-400m times when compared with the FG Turbo test cars that seem to produce consistent numbers usually 5.1 or lower 0-100 and low 13 0-400m.

When comparing atmo engines to Turbo ones I would have always thought the atmo would be more consistent than the Turbo.

[johnydep]

Originally Posted by muso

I often wonder if some of these Holden 'press cars' are 'prepared' before the road test and perhaps have a more aggressive tune in them. The SS models do seem to have a lot of variation in their 0-100 and 0-400m times when compared with the FG Turbo test cars that seem to produce consistent numbers usually 5.1 or lower 0-100 and low 13 0-400m.

When comparing atmo engines to Turbo ones I would have always thought the atmo would be more consistent than the Turbo.

That's why I previously posted this site - http://www.automobile-catalog.com/simulation.php

All the makes are on the right side, follow the links, find your models and compare. Have a look, it's quite good.

Estimation of the engine power/torque curve – the formula based on the maximum power and maximum torque points, the relationship between the power and the torque for an internal combustion engine and the typical shape of the curve for engines of different constructions.

Power/torque loss – between the engine drive shaft and wheels (in differential, gearbox, axes, etc, depending on the drive train architecture). In cases that only gross power/torque values are available, additionally the typical net-gross relation factors for different standards are taken into consideration.

Start phase – for cars with manual transmissions the ProfessCars software simulates the maximum torque revs and quick clutch release. For automatic vehicles with torque converters, the software simulates 3000-4000 revs (dep. on engine construction) and quick brakes release, taking into consideration each specific torque converter factor. Corresponding procedures are used for dual-clutch and other construction transmissions.

Gear change – in redline revs point, if specified, or a few hundred revs above the maximum power revs point, depending on engine construction.

Gear change time – may fluctuate between 1.5 sec for old construction unsynchronized manual gearboxes and first automatics, down to 0.1 sec or less for modern dual-clutch transmissions.

Coefficient of friction – driving wheels spin is simulated, if the calculated driving force exceeds a coefficient of friction between the tire and the road surface multiplied by the drive axle weight (or 2 axles for 4WD cars). Therefore, in many cases it’s possible to receive even better accelerations using special drag race tires or on special high friction road surface.

Weight – calculations are made for the curb weight of a vehicle with standard specifications, full fuel reservoir plus 90 kg (200 lb) load. Therefore you can expect worse acceleration figures for a car with extra equipment and additional load, or better values for emptied car with less fuel.

Final drive ratio – standard axle ratio is considered, if not otherwise noted.

Drag coefficient – if there is no official data provided, the drag coefficient factor (Cx, Cd, Cw-wert) is estimated based on typical values for cars with different body costructions manufactured worldwide in a corresponding time period.

Engine efficiency – typical values depending on the engine construction, the generation, and the shape of the revs curve.

And much more…

[MAGPIE]

Originally Posted by johnydep

That's why I previously posted this site - http://www.automobile-catalog.com/simulation.php

All the makes are on the right side, follow the links, find your models and compare. Have a look, it's quite good.

Damn that's a great site

[muso]

Yes it is a good site

[Bossxr8]

Originally Posted by muso

I often wonder if some of these Holden 'press cars' are 'prepared' before the road test and perhaps have a more aggressive tune in them. The SS models do seem to have a lot of variation in their 0-100 and 0-400m times when compared with the FG Turbo test cars that seem to produce consistent numbers usually 5.1 or lower 0-100 and low 13 0-400m.

When comparing atmo engines to Turbo ones I would have always thought the atmo would be more consistent than the Turbo.

Wouldn't be the first time Holden have sent a tuned car into the press fleet.

[muso]

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

Wouldn't be the first time Holden have sent a tuned car into the press fleet.

I can remember a wheels magazine test in 1989 where an auto VN V6 got 7.8 secs 0-100 which back then was pretty damn quick for a base model family sedan. However most other road tests showed about 9 ish secs 0-100 out of the auto V6 VN's

[Bossxr8]

Not to mention the 255kw HSV GTO that went 0-100 in 4.9, when not even the GTS could get near that with all it's extra power. Actually no HSV has got near that until the VF GTS.

[muso]

The FG Turbo road tests have always been pretty spot on. A G6ET got 4.9 secs 0-100 with 2 people and air cond turned on.

[Dr Smith]

Sorry for going O/T...I blame GP for this. When Holden got wind that the BA XR8 was to have 260Kw they pooed their pants pants and press fleet vehicles suddenly got "stronger" motors. Of course the BA XR8 got a huge jump in power but it also gained a lot more weight with the new BA body for extra strength, particularly for rear end shunts. In fact has any one seen what a BA rear end used to do to VX/VY/VZ. There is a Commodore only taxi fleet in Sandringham (Vic), yes you read that right, and I often talked to the panel shop staff that did their repairs next door.

[shaness8]

I wouldn't be taking these claimed road test and youtube clips seriously 0-100 VFSS 5.1 no way more like high 5's at best same as the VE.

[johnydep]

Originally Posted by shaness8

I wouldn't be taking these claimed road test and youtube clips seriously 0-100 VFSS 5.1 no way more like high 5's at best same as the VE.

Why "at best same as the VE"?

[shaness8]

Originally Posted by johnydep

Why "at best same as the VE"?

Why

Cos it's the same 260kw motor.

I suggest you go to your local drag meeting and see for yourself what they can do.

[johnydep]

Originally Posted by shaness8

Why

Cos it's the same 260kw motor.

I suggest you go to your local drag meeting and see for yourself what they can do.

I suggest you get all the facts before diving in.

Read all the posts, you might learn a thing or two.

I've done the run, and I enjoy reading the posts

[gsd112]

I have 2 mate s with VF SS's ones a redline both autos. If I had to buy a new car it would be the VF SS but I do own a FG G6ET and have no ideas of selling it.
At a recent motorkhana we got the chance to run the VF's against my G6ET and to 0-100 they were no where near me. With proper GPS timing the G6ET went 5 flat and 5.1 the VFs couldn't better 5.8 and they tried

[40RDT]

Originally Posted by gsd112

I have 2 mate s with VF SS's ones a redline both autos. If I had to buy a new car it would be the VF SS but I do own a FG G6ET and have no ideas of selling it.
At a recent motorkhana we got the chance to run the VF's against my G6ET and to 0-100 they were no where near me. With proper GPS timing the GÊT went 5 flat and 5.1 the VFs couldn't better 5.8 and they tried

Same story on YouTube, the auto VF SS times seem much slower than the manuals. I think the manuals have launch control though

[Professor Farnsworth]

the manuals also have 270kw as opposed to 260kw in the auto

[2242100]

Originally Posted by muso

The FG Turbo road tests have always been pretty spot on. A G6ET got 4.9 secs 0-100 with 2 people and air cond turned on.

I may be wrong, but would you be thinking of a test that Wheels did in 2008? That time was 5.1 to 100 and it was done 2 up. I've only ever heard of WHEELS testing 2 up (a practice apparently stopped in the last couple of years). Drive.com.au did get a 5.1 with the aircon running, but it makes no measurable difference to my FG Turbo as the compressor won't work on full throttle acceleration, I can't be sure about other cars though.

[muso]

Sorry it was 4.97 secs 2 People on board, 3/4 tank or fuel 2009 caradvice.com.au

https://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&r...2BaaYZSpNwUmUg