|
|
|
|
|
|
Welcome to the Australian Ford Forums forum. You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and inserts advertising. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features without post based advertising banners. Registration is simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today! If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. Please Note: All new registrations go through a manual approval queue to keep spammers out. This is checked twice each day so there will be a delay before your registration is activated. |
|
|||||||
| The Pub For General Automotive Related Talk |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
18-06-2013, 08:14 AM
|
#1 | ||
|
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,801
|
So we have the new VF which according to the lab tests is supposed to be 10% more economical than the Falcon (V.F.SV6 combined cycle 9.0L/100 km's, Xr6 9.9L/100 km's).
But in this interesting test we have Car Advice comparing the two back to back in real world conditions over 500 km's and the VF SV6 used a staggering 14.5 L/100 km's on the open road 20% more than XR6 auto tested in exactly the same way over the same roads !! http://www.caradvice.com.au/235713/h...arison-review/ Okay, the overall winner of this comparison test was probably a forgone conclusion to some extent seeing as the VF is a generation ahead but...So much for the lab tested 10% lab test fuel savings. Thoughts anyone ? Could it just be that the little 3.6 direct injected Holden wonder is short of torque and you have to rev the living guts out of it to extract decent performance and in so doing negate any benifet of its alluminium this and direct injected that ? As for the self parking gizmo, what self respecting man would ever use that ? |
||
|
|
| 4 users like this post: |
VF's fuel savings an illusion ?
Threaded Mode