Gen F HSV GTS Review, 0-100 in 4.4s

[jimmyxr6t04]

Embargo on the Gen F GTS has been lifted and reports indicate a 4.4s 0-100km/h and a 12.3 quarter mile...

http://www.caradvice.com.au/244470/2013-hsv-gts-review/

Very impressive results, particularly some of the comments regarding the handling of the car.

Touch choice next year when i am due for a new car, GT or GTS... Is it worth the extra 30-40k, i'm not sure... But i do like the look of them, much more modern looking over the FPV, with a lot of tech... Might need to go a GT next year, and a GTS a few years later... Hopefully store the GT if funds permit!

Will be interesting to see other reviews, and also how they respond to some mods!

[Express]

The times are quoted by HSV and not yet confirmed by any other source.

I’m interested to see how quick it will be in the real world.

Plus 4.4sec to 100 from 430kw seems a fraction off the pace to me.


.

[jimmyxr6t04]

Will be interesting to see the real world figures. But i think 4.4 is pretty good. It's up there with the high end euros, provided it performs that time in the real world.

Considering the GT 335 is much more than 335kw, and probably closer to 400kw, and it does the 0-100 in about 4.9s, i think if the GTS can get to 4.4s in the real world, it'll be a good time.

[Express]

Originally Posted by jimmyxr6t04

Will be interesting to see the real world figures. But i think 4.4 is pretty good. It's up there with the high end euros, provided it performs that time in the real world.

Considering the GT 335 is much more than 335kw, and probably closer to 400kw, and it does the 0-100 in about 4.9s, i think if the GTS can get to 4.4s in the real world, it'll be a good time.

The C63 does 4.4 – 4.2 sec with only 336 naturally aspirated kws.

The GTS is putting down a good time if it's verified.
But it's just my thoughts, I’d prefer a bit more from 430kw.


.

[jimmyxr6t04]

Originally Posted by Express

The C63 does 4.4 – 4.2 sec with only 336 naturally aspirated kws.

The GTS is putting down a good time if it's verified.
But it's just my thoughts, I’d prefer a bit more from 430kw.


.

Yeah, i know what you're saying. But look at it from another angle, since when were Holden or Ford known for being able to get their power to the ground!

Also, some of the bigger power euro's are around that 4.2-4.5s mark, so i think it's pretty impressive. The euro's in general have a better set up chassis, suspension and all the other components to help them achieve maximum acceleration.

[UberKnee]

Originally Posted by Express

The C63 does 4.4 – 4.2 sec with only 336 naturally aspirated kws.

The GTS is putting down a good time if it's verified.
But it's just my thoughts, I’d prefer a bit more from 430kw.


.

Even with all the new fancy tech and Holden trying to bandy the GTS about as a Ferrari/Porsche kitted Commodore the performance Euro's still have vastly superior chassis, suspension set ups, tech, and general ability to get maximum power to the ground and in a usable fashion.

[ray38l]

Originally Posted by UberKnee

Even with all the new fancy tech and Holden trying to bandy the GTS about as a Ferrari/Porsche kitted Commodore the performance Euro's still have vastly superior chassis, suspension set ups, tech, and general ability to get maximum power to the ground and in a usable fashion.

really? then why did the gts beat the amg around the racetrack in the wheels test?

[tezxr8man]

Originally Posted by jimmyxr6t04

Will be interesting to see the real world figures. But i think 4.4 is pretty good. It's up there with the high end euros, provided it performs that time in the real world.

Considering the GT 335 is much more than 335kw, and probably closer to 400kw, and it does the 0-100 in about 4.9s, i think if the GTS can get to 4.4s in the real world, it'll be a good time.

I thought the R-specs were 4.5sec 0-100km and 12.5 quarters? and with a perceived nearly 100 killers difference an da fair whack off the price?

[Sorted]

Originally Posted by Express

The times are quoted by HSV and not yet confirmed by any other source.

I’m interested to see how quick it will be in the real world.

Plus 4.4sec to 100 from 430kw seems a fraction off the pace to me.
.

Exactly - but this will be plastered all over websites and mags as tested unlike FPV where we had to wait for Wheels to test it before any numbers were released.

[XD ESP! XELR8]

[QUOTE=Express;4834142]The times are quoted by HSV and not yet confirmed by any other source.

I’m interested to see how quick it will be in the real world.

Plus 4.4sec to 100 from 430kw seems a fraction off the pace to me.


How's the real world looking mate?

[jimt3te50]

I tell you what, I'm impressed.

And I'll go further, I'm not even sceptical and I'd reckon its worth every bloody cent.

I'd love one. Even if it is as ugly as faeces. Well done HSV.

[jimmyxr6t04]

Originally Posted by jimt3te50

I tell you what, I'm impressed.

And I'll go further, I'm not even sceptical and I'd reckon its worth every bloody cent.

I'd love one. Even if it is as ugly as faeces. Well done HSV.

I actually don't mind the look, i suppose i like the fact that they stand out from the general commodore line up. I wish the FPV's had more distinguishing features over the falcon.

I'd like a white one with the larger spoiler. I usually hate spoilers, but i think it suits the GTS well.

[BHDOGS]

Sounds more like an advert then a review better tell those Porsche people to cancel there orders to cause this handles better hahahah

[Dave R]

Hmm, claimed 12.3 from SC 430kw. If it's like anything HSV has claimed in the past, add half a second. Let's hope it's not like that. GTs are getting similar numbers with 100 less kw on the boot.

Not that power matters, it's just interesting. The handling and brakes are what I like to read about and it seems they've nailed it.

[jimmyxr6t04]

Originally Posted by Adrenaline

Hmm, claimed 12.3 from SC 430kw. If it's like anything HSV has claimed in the past, add half a second. Let's hope it's not like that. GTs are getting similar numbers with 100 less kw on the boot.

Not that power matters, it's just interesting. The handling and brakes are what I like to read about and it seems they've nailed it.

I suppose the masses won't be aware that the GT figure is so understated and actually closer to 400kw, so perception might be that the GTS is slow compared to the GT.

The torque vectoring seems to be doing a great job with the handling of the GTS.

Will be interesting to see how it goes compared to some other high end cars with lap times etc.

[fte50]

Seems a weapon, and if it wore an AMG or M badge it would easily sell with the plus $100k price tag.

[GQ_Smooth]

Reads very well, be interesting to compare it to a R-Spec. Unfortunately out of my price range for another 5 years and I suspect cost of ownership with give a few people a shock. Hopefully a S/C V8 2014 Falcon (what ever they chose to call it) with 5K worth of modifications isn't too far behind.

[Trump]

I think I need to drive the GTS...

[tex]

If it can run under mid four on road tires, that's impressive!

11 second passes on a drag strip with mts should be a snack for it if these results are accurate.

Seriously quick motorcar with a warranty.

[Trump]

Originally Posted by tex

If it can run under mid four on road tires, that's impressive!

11 second passes on a drag strip with mts should be a snack for it if these results are accurate.

Seriously quick motorcar with a warranty.

This.

Excuse my senility, but didn't the R-Spec GT reel off 4.4-4.5 seconds 0-100 and near on 12 dead on the quarter?

[Rodge]

Originally Posted by Loud_Noises

This.

Excuse my senility, but didn't the R-Spec GT reel off 4.4-4.5 seconds 0-100 and near on 12 dead on the quarter?

Yeah so I for one am underwhelmed by HSV's "claimed" figures keeping in mind the long history that no independent tester has ever been able to replicate any of HSV's previously claimed figures in real world testing. I guess that's what happens when in the real world you don't have access to a vehicle with the press special tune, a 45 KG jockey sized driver, a 60 knot tailwind and 110 octane fuel all at the same time

Then there's the "small" additional matter of the "pimp my ride" Holden Epica looks

[tex]

Originally Posted by Loud_Noises

This.

Excuse my senility, but didn't the R-Spec GT reel off 4.4-4.5 seconds 0-100 and near on 12 dead on the quarter?

And?

I made no reference to the R Spec.

I'll be impressed by the GTS if those figures are accurate. As you are apparently impressed by the R Spec.

This is a GTS thread?

[FalconXV]

I'd be interested in seeing the in-gear acceleration figures.
Still rather that tuned GTE that ran 3.8 in Hot Tuner.Forget who did it.

[Smoke Pursuit]

Hsv... I just want one!

[stazza]

Weren't hsv quoted saying it will achieve well under 4.5sec easily? Sorry but .1 of a second isn't well under 4.5. The R-Spec got similar times with less tech and (supposedly) less power, yet everyone here is congratulating Hsv.

btw, werent GT owners getting 12.3 1/4 mile times for the standard GT in the drag section of the 5.0 forum?

I think no matter what times this pulled it would still be the best thing since sliced bread.

[F6 Aimz]

Big power and packed with tech but I can't get over that rear end.. looks so camry to me.

[usernametaken]

That rear!

Looks like a fat chick in a G-string!

[bigwil]

Originally Posted by usernametaken

That rear!

Looks like a fat chick in a G-string!

That's what I thought as well, a big fat sumo wrestler from behind.

[ebv8]

there are some 0-100 vids on youtube for the VF SS and SV6, they tested them and say the ss got 5.1 and the sv6 got 5.9, i think they just counted in their head and used the speedo not a gps

[mik]

I still want a GT 335 !