VE HSV's 0-100km/h in less than 5 seconds!

Jake F6 · 23-08-2006, 12:11 PM

From article: http://www.theage.com.au/news/news/h...012460300.html

Mellor's GoAuto also had figures of 4.96 for the manual Clubsport R8...

This seems to put FPV's GT a good 1 second behind the new VE clubsport.
Even the F6 is more than half a second off the pace...

All this and HSV still has the 7.0L Corvette engine up their sleeve
in case of emergencies!!!

Will FPV be able to come close to matching, let alone beating these times?
Has FPV got something up their sleeve for BF MkII or will we have to wait
until the all new Falcon in 2008??? By this time the HSV 7.0 will probably
be running 4.5 seconds 0-100km/h AAARRGGGHH !!!!

Kenster · 23-08-2006, 12:14 PM

and all that speed and where the fuel efficent while the current jap verision WRX sti can go 0-100km in 3.5second

drcook · 23-08-2006, 12:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kenter

the current jap verision WRX sti can go 0-100km in 3.5second

um, i think id like to see some facts about this. doesnt sound quite right to me...

also i think, like already said, i will wait till motor or wheels can compare with fpv on the same day. hsv are famous for their bu!!*****.

Kenster · 23-08-2006, 01:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by drcook

um, i think id like to see some facts about this. doesnt sound quite right to me...

also i think, like already said, i will wait till motor or wheels can compare with fpv on the same day. hsv are famous for their bu!!*****.

that true well im comparing the actually build verision than the Aust verision of sti.

I havent heared any bad news much about BF FPV or the basic falcon still im going to see if i could drag a friend along into test driving the car very soon to see how it goes compare to the current falcon

ADSXR8 · 23-08-2006, 01:20 PM

This is claimed by HSV.

Quoted from article

"Acceleration to 100km/h is now achieved in less than five seconds, according to HSV’s engineering boss John Clark. But that’s only in the six-speed manual, which gets a slightly shorter final drive ratio (so the engine is revving harder and faster at any given speed) compared to the automatic models.It reaches the 100km/h mark in a claimed 4.96 seconds."

Dont forget HSV also claimed a manual GTO did a 4.99 0-100 and 13.2 quarter. Subsequently, in this years PCOTY, the GTO did a 6.4 and 14.3something.

2kool4u · 23-08-2006, 04:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ADSF6

This is claimed by HSV.

Dont forget HSV also claimed a manual GTO did a 4.99 0-100 and 13.2 quarter. Subsequently, in this years PCOTY, the GTO did a 6.4 and 14.3something.

MOTOR magazine managed to get a 4.99 0-100km from the GTO.

colossus · 23-08-2006, 04:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 2kool4u

MOTOR magazine managed to get a 4.99 0-100km from the GTO.

No they didn't - HSV supplied the time, it was published in an article by MOTOR it was not tested by MOTOR

:

JPFS1 · 23-08-2006, 12:26 PM

How about we wait and see what they do in the real world on the same day in the same conditions as the FPV's before believing what the HSV spin doctors say?

4Vman · 23-08-2006, 04:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JEM

How about we wait and see what they do in the real world on the same day in the same conditions as the FPV's before believing what the HSV spin doctors say?

Exactly right, im yet to EVER see a HSV reproduce HSV's performance claims back to back against a BF. Even on chassis dyno's the Boss powered cars hold their own against HSV's. 9 times out of 10 back to back tests seem to show a much closer result.

Bucket · 23-08-2006, 12:29 PM

Once again, the media are going off the figures from HSV's media release...

Falcon Freak · 23-08-2006, 01:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bucket

Once again, the media are going off the figures from HSV's media release...

Funny that. Also 'funny' is that there has been no public outcry when HSV vehicles push the performance envelope to new extremes. Yet when Ford pushed the perfomance envelope with the release of the F6 model in 2004, there were a number of people who criticised Ford and wanted to ban such powerful cars.

FF

BlueRaven · 23-08-2006, 01:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Falcon Freak

Funny that. Also 'funny' is that there has been no public outcry when HSV vehicles push the performance envelope to new extremes. Yet when Ford pushed the perfomance envelope with the release of the F6 model in 2004, there were a number of people who criticised Ford and wanted to ban such powerful cars.

FF

Oh it'll come... don't you worry about that.

AWD Chaser · 23-08-2006, 03:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Falcon Freak

Funny that. Also 'funny' is that there has been no public outcry when HSV vehicles push the performance envelope to new extremes. Yet when Ford pushed the perfomance envelope with the release of the F6 model in 2004, there were a number of people who criticised Ford and wanted to ban such powerful cars.

FF

Yes, but now there are laws that ban younger drivers from driving these vehicles...

NA XR6 · 23-08-2006, 12:33 PM

Believe it when i see it from someone other than HSV

Jake F6 · 23-08-2006, 12:41 PM

Intersting info about the claimed new 307kW:

The 307kW is a DIN measurement. The 297 is/was SAE or ECE measurement. 297kW ECE is actually 305kW DIN. I don't think the HSV has gained 10kW I think it's more like 1kw, but by quoting the DIN (which is perfectly acceptable) they are able to legitimately quote 307kW.
From memory there was this argumet a few years back with FPV who were quoting 290kW DIN which was more like 283kW ECE for their GT.

BadMac · 23-08-2006, 04:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BLACK XR6-VCT

Intersting info about the claimed new 307kW:

The 307kW is a DIN measurement. The 297 is/was SAE or ECE measurement. 297kW ECE is actually 305kW DIN. I don't think the HSV has gained 10kW I think it's more like 1kw, but by quoting the DIN (which is perfectly acceptable) they are able to legitimately quote 307kW.
From memory there was this argumet a few years back with FPV who were quoting 290kW DIN which was more like 283kW ECE for their GT.

The fact that there are multiple standards causes much confusion.

hp (DIN)
DIN horsepower is the power measured according to the German standard DIN 70020. It is measured at the flywheel, and is in practical terms equivalent to the SAE net figure. Because the test conditions are so similar, it is safe to divide DIN horsepower by 1.0139 to arrive at SAE net. This value is so close to equal that for all but the most technical purposes DIN and SAE net are interchangeable.

hp (ECE)
ECE R24 is another standard for measuring net horsepower. It is quite similar to the DIN 70020 standard, but the requirement for connecting an engine's fan during testing varies. ECE is seen as slightly more liberal than DIN, and ECE figures tend to be slightly higher than DIN.

Therefore:
297KW (SAE) = 301KW (DIN) NOT 305KW !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
297KW (ECE) greater than 297KW DIN (see bolded bit in last paragraph).

The upshot is that DIN appears to be a better standard and now allows direct comparision between Ford and Holden. That said Holden now use ECE figures so why are HSV using DIN?

4Vman · 23-08-2006, 04:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BadMac

297KW (SAE) = 301KW (DIN) NOT 305KW !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
297KW (ECE) greater than 297KW DIN (see bolded bit in last paragraph).

The upshot is that DIN appears to be a better standard and now allows direct comparision between Ford and Holden. That said Holden now use ECE figures so why are HSV using DIN?

Are you sure?
HSV themselves directly quoted VZ @ 297kw or 305KW DIN, so which of those 2 figures is accurate?

HSE2 · 23-08-2006, 04:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BadMac

The fact that there are multiple standards causes much confusion.

Therefore:
297KW (SAE) = 301KW (DIN) NOT 305KW !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
297KW (ECE) greater than 297KW DIN (see bolded bit in last paragraph).

That said Holden now use ECE figures so why are HSV using DIN?

It doesn't matter what the calculations come up with unless you can contact HSV and get a straight answer. Then and only then will this line of thought be beneficial. HSV claimed and still continue to claim 305 DIN kws for VZ -that’s the bottom line. It s not us making it up and no one was trying to down play the claim at the time as everyone assumed HSV knew what they were talking about. I think we all know the claim to be full of holes by dynos around the country not showing the claim to have merrit but that's not the point. HSV are too good at making such marketing moves.

When the subject is a manufacturer’s product the only reference of note is what they claim to be fact. If you can get HSV to print a retraction then you have a story to tell, until then we will continue to quote manufacturer specs as they have been quoted to us.

That being said the only language we are interested in is real world times, and I suspect HSV will deliver because they appear to spend greater effort trying to achieve these benchmarks.

On your other point I am with you. Something about this doesn’t sound right given what has been printed in the media and used by Holden. I am still sceptical about what they are using.

AWD Chaser · 23-08-2006, 12:51 PM

Yeah - i'll wait till the REAL figures come out. Any way look at the following:

HSV GTS - V8 6.0L 307Kw 550Nm
FPV GT - V8 5.4L 290Kw 520Nm
FPV F6 - I6 4.0L 270Kw 550Nm

What I'm saying is that if the FPV range was to increase their power by 0.5%, it would be see ya later VE...

Quicklier · 23-08-2006, 12:39 PM

Those media releases are pretty far fetched.

I'm thinking about taking a VE for a spin on the weekend (what with all the hype) and see if I can match the times

Actually, I'll probably only drive the Berlina (best looking package in my opinion), I doubt they'll have a V8 model avail :(

Gadgetman · 23-08-2006, 12:43 PM

There wont be any mechanical changes to BF MkII FPV. Only the introduction of 2 luxury/performance models known as Force 6 and Force 8. Both will only be available in 6 speed autos only

JPFS1 · 23-08-2006, 12:49 PM

FPV will have what seems to be a pretty congested lineup with these new models also?

It will be interesting to see where they sit..

Force6 - higher output/performance version of the Typhoon but sits lower than GTP in terms of pricing?

Force8 - higher output/performance of GT but sits above everything?

Interesting...

Jake F6 · 23-08-2006, 12:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JEM

FPV will have what seems to be a pretty congested lineup with these new models also?

It will be interesting to see where they sit..

Force6 - higher output/performance version of the Typhoon but sits lower than GTP in terms of pricing?

Force8 - higher output/performance of GT but sits above everything?

Interesting...

That is VERY intersting!

Maybe the new FPV BFII lineup will be something like:

TIER1:

Typhoon 270kw
GT 290kw

TIER2:

Force 6 305kw
Force 8 335kw

The GTP may get the chop?

HSE2 · 23-08-2006, 01:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BLACK XR6-VCT

That is VERY intersting!

Maybe the new FPV BFII lineup will be something like:

TIER1:

Typhoon 270kw
GT 290kw

TIER2:

Force 6 305kw
Force 8 335kw

The GTP may get the chop?

The GT-P isn't going anywhere and don’t expect any power increase. It’s not impossible as companies lie to dealerships all the time but the info coming out of FPV point to no mechanical changes for BF2.

Force 6 and Force 8 are FPVs answer to the Senator. If you think luxury Fairmont Ghias with attitude you will be getting close and not be disappointed. Anything more and I would say buy Kleenex shares. I have no idea why they chose Force for the name but they have and it appears to have nothing to do with engine spec.

JPFS1 · 23-08-2006, 01:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HSE2

The GT-P isn't going anywhere and don’t expect any power increase. It’s not impossible as companies lie to dealerships all the time but the info coming out of FPV point to no mechanical changes for BF2.

Force 6 and Force 8 are FPVs answer to the Senator. If you think luxury Fairmont Ghias with attitude you will be getting close and not be disappointed. Anything more and I would say buy Kleenex shares. I have no idea why they chose Force for the name but they have and it appears to have nothing to do with engine spec.

Hi Ian

Interesting choice of words from FPV that's for sure. Maybe the intention of living up to the name will come in time....

HSE2 · 23-08-2006, 02:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JEM

Hi Ian

Interesting choice of words from FPV that's for sure. Maybe the intention of living up to the name will come in time....

Well I had another choice word other then interesting. MRC is said to have cost HSV 4.5 million which is astonishing when you think of the volume they are aimed at. (Here comes the global attack)

One reason why the HSV has dropped the six piston callipers is DCS calibration. Would you be really surprised to learn all FPV cars will have 19 inch wheel from Oct 26th?

At the time I didn't think to check the GT-Ps brake package.

Just to keep these comments somewhere near the topic, don't under estimate the value of rear rubber. FPV had some interesting views about what increasing the rear tread width would do for them back in 2002.

WASP · 23-08-2006, 02:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HSE2

I have no idea why they chose Force for the name but they have and it appears to have nothing to do with engine spec.

Do you know that for a fact Ian? I'm not doubting you my friend, but I've heard, well lets just say some 'conflicting' reports.

HSE2 · 23-08-2006, 02:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CDAA

Do you know that for a fact Ian? I'm not doubting you my friend, but I've heard, well lets just say some 'conflicting' reports.

No I certainly don't know that for a fact but I am unsure what can be posted on this subject.

I guess it only becomes fact after the 26th of October but I do know why gadget man has said what he has.

There is always the chance that dealerships are only being told what they need to know but to me it looks like the same standard as was used in BA 2 and BF and neither of them were wrong so although there is some hope I won't hold my breath.

The ordering information contains wording to the effect BOSS 290 and F6 270. The extreme optimist in me would say perhaps that’s misleading on purpose to allow for a surprise, in that it allows dealership stock allocation to be ordered without giving the game away, but it is something they haven’t tried in the past. No I think the best policy with FPV is to think negatively then be completely over come that the Kleenex shares are used to good effect on a different part of the anatomy.

freaky · 23-08-2006, 04:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BLACK XR6-VCT

That is VERY intersting!

Maybe the new FPV BFII lineup will be something like:

TIER1:

Typhoon 270kw
GT 290kw

TIER2:

Force 6 305kw
Force 8 335kw

The GTP may get the chop?

Do they really need more power ? My stock F6 scares the crap out of me as it is.

i guess DSC will not be able to be retrofitted if it is released with Mkii.

I would be willing to pay to have this fitted on my f6.

**Falcon Coupe** · 23-08-2006, 09:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JEM

FPV will have what seems to be a pretty congested lineup with these new models also?

It will be interesting to see where they sit..

Force6 - higher output/performance version of the Typhoon but sits lower than GTP in terms of pricing?

Force8 - higher output/performance of GT but sits above everything?

Interesting...

Who said anything about higher output for the Force 6/8 ?