Another Ford vs Holden Comparison!

[uranium_death]

Originally Posted by Outback

Thats why the Commodore has out sell the Falcon for the last 12 years i think the Australian Public have spoken.

Lovely post.

Absolutely pointless.

If you had bothered to read anything worthwhile on this forum, you'll see that we aren't concerned with numbers at all. Ford's financial performances have been very solid of recent, despite less sales than some opposition.

Holden on the other hand, despite their larger sales made a considerable loss.

Think again.

[vztrt]

Originally Posted by Outback

Thats why the Commodore has out sell the Falcon for the last 12 years i think the Australian Public have spoken.

Ahh the troll, maybe when Holden makes a profit (and their parent company makes a real profit) you can post something.

[4Vman]

Originally Posted by vztrt

Ahh the troll, maybe when Holden makes a profit (and their parent company makes a real profit) you can post something.

Yes... its easy to sell the most when you "buy" sales...

[Falc'man]

lol the SS now struggles to break traction.

[vztrt]

Originally Posted by Falc'man

lol the SS now struggles to break traction.

lol, it can now join its v6 brethren

[Falc'man]

Originally Posted by vztrt

lol, it can now join its v6 brethren

Jokes aside, I think the SS afm might be just as slow as the SV6.

[1TUFFUTE]

yes trying my hardest to remain unbiased reading that..it is very hard to see that as no more than a holden pump up. Not really a tit for tat comparo...more like this car is better because of this this and this...lets not mention anything we have alwyas done in other comparos like drag times...lol....tools

[Bossxr8]

Luxury pack has 19 inch wheels, not 18's, and the IRS is Control Blade, not Cross Blade. Goes some way to explain the quality of journalism here, especially as you cannot buy an XR8 now as they finished production of them a few months ago.

Why test a car you can no longer buy, at least not until September when the new one arrives.

[phillyc]

Well, that article reads like they were determined to be biased but sound unprejudiced...

The minor things where the FG had the clear advantage over VE were announced. The substantial advantages over VE were downplayed.

Oh, no the XR8 can break traction. That must be terrible in a performance model. The VE's best quality is it's powerdown. If you want to talk rear suspensions, it is 'control blade' not 'cross-blade' as per the article. Duh. The whole article was based around this rear end grip. Surely, you research the suspension's name.

The XR8 should be commended for the subdued sound quietness of the FG. The VE is 'much the same'. Basically SS, wasn't as good.
The XR8 has the better gearbox.
The XR8 turns in more sharply.
The XR8 has better brakes.
The two are equal (if you believe the regularly dodgy GMH) on trip computer readings.
Perhaps they should note that the GMH SS requires 98 RON for its 260kW. The XR8 95RON for its 290kW. But that went unmentioned...
The XR8 has the better & more modern interior. The VE shortcoming was downplayed...
The XR8 has a better boot.
From previous tests, it is clear that the FG XR8 is faster than AFM SS. Yet testing of the performance models, had no performance testing...

The article was a square up. A badly written one at that.

[phillyc]

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

Luxury pack has 19 inch wheels, not 18's, and the IRS is Control Blade, not Cross Blade. Goes some way to explain the quality of journalism here, especially as you cannot buy an XR8 now as they finished production of them a few months ago.

Why test a car you can no longer buy, at least not until September when the new one arrives.

+1 Poorly executed. Poorly researched. Irrelevant. The XR8 is out of production until the next generation of V8 arrives. If they were desperate for a comparo, they should've tested a XR6T It would've caned the SS, but then how could they possibly justify a GMH win?

[prydey]

this is just a bit of a general comment, but there are many cars that 'feel' fast but the stopwatch tells a completely different story. there are also those that feel like they aren't really doing much but when timed, are quite impressive.

i notice there were no performance figures in the article to back up their claims.

[4Vman]

Originally Posted by prydey

this is just a bit of a general comment, but there are many cars that 'feel' fast but the stopwatch tells a completely different story. there are also those that feel like they aren't really doing much but when timed, are quite impressive.

i notice there were no performance figures in the article to back up their claims.

They wont use performance measures because it contradicts their story.. its been a glaring issue in the past..
Still cant understand why they're testing a car Ford no longer produce...

[Falc'man]

Originally Posted by phillyc

Well, that article reads like they were determined to be biased but sound unprejudiced...

The minor things where the FG had the clear advantage over VE were announced. The substantial advantages over VE were downplayed.

Oh, no the XR8 can break traction. That must be terrible in a performance model. The VE's best quality is it's powerdown. If you want to talk rear suspensions, it is 'control blade' not 'cross-blade' as per the article. Duh. The whole article was based around this rear end grip. Surely, you research the suspension's name.

The XR8 should be commended for the subdued sound quietness of the FG. The VE is 'much the same'. Basically SS, wasn't as good.
The XR8 has the better gearbox.
The XR8 turns in more sharply.
The XR8 has better brakes.
The two are equal (if you believe the regularly dodgy GMH) on trip computer readings.
Perhaps they should note that the GMH SS requires 98 RON for its 260kW. The XR8 95RON for its 290kW. But that went unmentioned...
The XR8 has the better & more modern interior. The VE shortcoming was downplayed...
The XR8 has a better boot.
From previous tests, it is clear that the FG XR8 is faster than AFM SS. Yet testing of the performance models, had no performance testing...

The article was a square up. A badly written one at that.

Thanks for taking the time to point all that out.

But they didn't even mention the power ratings let alone the fuel used to achieve them.

[Eu-GenixX]

Originally Posted by 4dlvr

that dyno run was done in second..
hence the optimistic power run and the super dooper optimistic torque figure, so you sir once again are the tool.

power stays the same no matter what gear you run in... only torque figures will change with gear...

[Eu-GenixX]

the author lost all credibility for me.. when he was trying to justify speeding on a public road...

[Eu-GenixX]

and i just submitted a comment....

[mik]

it appears they used trip computer for fuel comparison (accuracy anyone?), it does seem this bloke likes to talk down the Henry where it counts, but journo`s have to try and make some controversial statements to make it interesting, did both cars have limited slip diffs?

[Swordsman88]

Originally Posted by phillyc

Well, that article reads like they were determined to be biased but sound unprejudiced...

The minor things where the FG had the clear advantage over VE were announced. The substantial advantages over VE were downplayed.

Oh, no the XR8 can break traction. That must be terrible in a performance model. The VE's best quality is it's powerdown. If you want to talk rear suspensions, it is 'control blade' not 'cross-blade' as per the article. Duh. The whole article was based around this rear end grip. Surely, you research the suspension's name.

The XR8 should be commended for the subdued sound quietness of the FG. The VE is 'much the same'. Basically SS, wasn't as good.
The XR8 has the better gearbox.
The XR8 turns in more sharply.
The XR8 has better brakes.
The two are equal (if you believe the regularly dodgy GMH) on trip computer readings.
Perhaps they should note that the GMH SS requires 98 RON for its 260kW. The XR8 95RON for its 290kW. But that went unmentioned...
The XR8 has the better & more modern interior. The VE shortcoming was downplayed...
The XR8 has a better boot.
From previous tests, it is clear that the FG XR8 is faster than AFM SS. Yet testing of the performance models, had no performance testing...

The article was a square up. A badly written one at that.

Great summation phill. I opened up this review and turned to my mate and said....'i suppose we have this one in the bag then', given the recent awakening in some media circles to the AFM con and the superiority of (well run in) V8 FGs (see caradvice et al).

Sadly, no. THe article seemed quite poorly written, even by recent standards, and i imediately picked up on a range of overstated quibles on the XR8, but no such issues with the SS. The Holden was the 'safe' option according to the reviewer, since when did a aussie muscle car retain that atribute as a 'positive'. The article was not well researched with several errors no least of which was the ommision of any proper performance/handling data.

The use of the trip computer in the VE was laughable, i can't recall any reviewer in any comparison test VE vs FG that went for the VE....apart from not having backlit steering wheel butons and a too low steering wheel adjustment, the FG won EVERYTHING in the entire interior......

As usual though, the outcome is not particualry relevant (esp with the car no longer on sale). Its the perceptoin being invoked that the XR8 ford is no match for the SS because it isnt as good as its 6pot brothers. I find this notion spurious.....why can't all FGs be on balance better than all comparable VEs? Maybe because it would the final embarassment for the General....are the journos worried it would affect readership and/or manufacturer patronage if they were seen to 'heap it on' Holden??

I am not sure, but either way its a weak review, with little substance and alot of manipulation that appears, on initial reading at least, to be designed to 'gift' the Holden product a last chance at winning something. Come Coyote they will have no where to hide, between a turbo rock and a very hard V8 place!!!

[Paull]

Originally Posted by Swordsman88

Come Coyote they will have no where to hide, between a turbo rock and a very hard V8 place!!!

Best line so far!!!!!

[GK]

Originally Posted by Paull

Best line so far!!!!!

+1. A great comment indeed!

GK

[Brazen]

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

Luxury pack has 19 inch wheels, not 18's, and the IRS is Control Blade, not Cross Blade. Goes some way to explain the quality of journalism here, especially as you cannot buy an XR8 now as they finished production of them a few months ago.

I thought the Falcon does use a cross-blade suspension set up-as released on the Focus about 12 years ago, which Ford marketing calls Control blade. I am actually impressed a journalist understood what it is and not simply regurgitated marketing-speak.

[Bossxr8]

Ford have never referred to it as anything other than control blade. As far as I am aware there is no such thing as cross blade suspension. The only form of cross blade I know of is used in twist beam rear suspension, which is totally different to control blade.

I think its just wishful thinking. He couldn't even figure out that the XR8 had 19's, and claimed they are the same size 18 inch tyres as fitted to the SS.

[oranpark addict]

Originally Posted by Falc'man

Jokes aside, I think the SS afm might be just as slow as the SV6.

Well that thread on ls1 says that a bloke pulled a high 14 in an sidi and that a mid 14 seems pretty achievable. I imagine that an afm ss would not be doing much faster than this.


Also http://www.caradvice.com.au/wp-conte...ress14mile.jpg

[Falc'man]

Originally Posted by oranpark addict

Well that thread on ls1 says that a bloke pulled a high 14 in an sidi and that a mid 14 seems pretty achievable. I imagine that an afm ss would not be doing much faster than this.

Mid to low 14s in the 3.6 sidi, which is comparable to the AFM V8.

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by Brazen

I thought the Falcon does use a cross-blade suspension set up-as released on the Focus about 12 years ago, which Ford marketing calls Control blade. I am actually impressed a journalist understood what it is and not simply regurgitated marketing-speak.

There are no cross blades, the blades run longitudinally.
The Focus version of the CB IRS is very different, being FWD there is no provision for differential of rear drive shafts.
The beauty of the Dana/Ford design is that it uses mostly stamped steel members
that can be assembled as a complete module and bolted into the car..

[smoo]

So is control blade a Ford term for trailing arm?

[4Vman]

Originally Posted by Falc'man

Mid to low 14s in the 3.6 sidi, which is comparable to the AFM V8.

AFM is a mid 14 car in "mag" mode.....

[Falc'man]

Originally Posted by 4Vman

AFM is a mid 14 car in "mag" mode.....

Either way, the sidi 3.6 gives it a run.