Motor comparo XR6 V SV6

[snappy]

Originally Posted by 4Vman

geez.. "blipping" auto's = : .

If you want to DRIVE a car get a manual.

Ford's manual is not even in the same class as the auto in terms of refinement though.
An they dont seem to think fixing the issues is of any importance.

[4Vman]

Originally Posted by snappy84

Ford's manual is not even in the same class as the auto in terms of refinement though.
An they dont seem to think fixing the issues is of any importance.

You cant compare then anyway, different tools for different jobs.

[snappy]

There made to drive .
I highly doubt ford to a manual in a xr6 for people to drive a the track.

[5.4 GT]

Originally Posted by 4Vman

You cant compare then anyway, different tools for different jobs.

They do the same job.

[Swordsman88]

Originally Posted by 4Vman

geez.. "blipping" auto's = : .

If you want to DRIVE a car get a manual.

Yes a good point. While the manual (sequential) modes on modern autos are great (particulary if descending hills/towing etc.) the fact is that is you are going around a track (or driving like you are on one....) then the manual is much better. Yes it aint the best manual in the world (though unsurprisingly better than the GMH version...) but still better than an auto in 95% of track situations.

The impressive things about mondern autos (particularly the ZF) is that they are so good in auto mode/s. They pick the right gear nearly always and shift quickly and smoothly. Most drivers have played around with the sequential mode on the ZF and always get bored of it because it works so well in auto mode and if they wanted a manual...ah they would of bought one..... Ford hasn't put the 'blipping' feature on the ZF because they couldnt be bothered....they are pretty sure that most of the buyers dont' know or care what it is. I also suspect that alot of the 'rev matching' that holden and others allude to is pretty much pointless. Sounds good but i'm not sure (for regular road use) it really makes all that much difference, certainly not in the higher gears (maybe going into the short first gear it would???). I wouldn't blame ford if they put it on in the next update but they have seemed pretty reluctant to bother so i wouldn't be holding my breath.

[4Vman]

Originally Posted by 5.4 GT

They do the same job.

Not by a long shot... both have their strengths and weaknesses when applied to different tasks....

[snappy]

Originally Posted by 4Vman

Not by a long shot... both have their strengths and weaknesses when applied to different tasks....

I agree with that . They do have there strengths and weaknesses but they are very uneven.
In a Auto
Smooth to drive
Better fuel economy
Tow more wieght
faster in a straight line
Can be switched to manual mode witch gives you 3/4 of control a manual does .

Manual
noisey shifts
diff clunk
worse fuel economy
tow less
maybe a couple points of a second faster around a track maybe .
glass clutch

Now one could argue that extra couple thousand dollars is what it costs to have a refined car and built at satisfactory standard .
But for me personally i think ford have chosen to forget about the purists that like a manual car by offering a substandard version of the vechicle for the person that chooses manual.
The problem has been around since 2003 and still has these issues , small aftermarket companies have fixes for it but not the billion dollar company them selves. It is simply poor form how many people here are happy that there 40k/ 50k fords and even 70k fpv's come standard with diff clunk and noisey shifts . I know you will think im just having a winge but i honestly think if they dont intend to build it well they might aswell dont build it at all .

[paule11]

Originally Posted by Swordsman88

Yes a good point. While the manual (sequential) modes on modern autos are great (particulary if descending hills/towing etc.) the fact is that is you are going around a track (or driving like you are on one....) then the manual is much better. Yes it aint the best manual in the world (though unsurprisingly better than the GMH version...) but still better than an auto in 95% of track situations.

The impressive things about mondern autos (particularly the ZF) is that they are so good in auto mode/s. They pick the right gear nearly always and shift quickly and smoothly. Most drivers have played around with the sequential mode on the ZF and always get bored of it because it works so well in auto mode and if they wanted a manual...ah they would of bought one..... Ford hasn't put the 'blipping' feature on the ZF because they couldnt be bothered....they are pretty sure that most of the buyers dont' know or care what it is. I also suspect that alot of the 'rev matching' that holden and others allude to is pretty much pointless. Sounds good but i'm not sure (for regular road use) it really makes all that much difference, certainly not in the higher gears (maybe going into the short first gear it would???). I wouldn't blame ford if they put it on in the next update but they have seemed pretty reluctant to bother so i wouldn't be holding my breath.

Yep im one of these drivers occasionaly play around in sequential but then put it back in auto every time I drive it I think what a fantastic gearbox

[Swordsman88]

Originally Posted by snappy84

Now one could argue that extra couple thousand dollars is what it costs to have a refined car and built at satisfactory standard .
But for me personally i think ford have chosen to forget about the purists that like a manual car by offering a substandard version of the vechicle for the person that chooses manual.
The problem has been around since 2003 and still has these issues , small aftermarket companies have fixes for it but not the billion dollar company them selves. It is simply poor form how many people here are happy that there 40k/ 50k fords and even 70k fpv's come standard with diff clunk and noisey shifts . I know you will think im just having a winge but i honestly think if they dont intend to build it well they might aswell dont build it at all .

I agree in many respects snappy. There is a very good reason 'billion dollar companies' don't bother developing proper manuals....there is no market for them. Fact is that buyers demand auto overwhelmingly, so this is where the development dollars go. (i used to be against people getting auto-only licenses...but now i think...well why bother getting a manual one???)

Tremec is pretty much the only mob left building proper old school manual boxes that can atcually handle the sort of power/torque we are talking about for the Falcon. No one else does it. Ford does their best to make it work smoother but there is no money to be made so why spend it?? Tremec themselves are hardly investing much in refinement.

You will get your wish soon enough...DSG/auto will replace 90% of the remaining manual boxes....soon you will only be able to get (probably as an option) a few of the sportscars of the world in manual. And probalby only cheaper ones (370Z etc.)...top spec stuff will go straight to DSG. The europeans were the last hold outs and they are going DSG...the americans kept manuals for the muscle cars (because autos kept exploding on burnouts) but with modern drive by wire throttles/launch control systems they will go fully auto now too. I wouldn't be surprised if australia and the japanese are the last left with old school stick and clutch pedal within 5 years....

[Franco Cozzo]

I don't know about you guys but when I was looking for my car I wanted manual only, and thats what I got. I don't like driving auto because they're too boring to drive, you may suggest ZF with sequential but it doesn't beat the clutch and the gear stick when it comes to pure enjoyment, something about that third pedal on the very left excites me.

[MITCHAY]

I've seriously been considering lately buying a new or near new SV6 or XR6 to replace my WRX to save some dollars.

They both seem to pack some punch. I don't want something super fast but has a good useful power band.

I would be 99.9% keen on getting a manual so which has the better auto box is not an issue unless it really really impresses me. Fuel consuption is also not an issue either will use way less than what I pay now.

I will have to have some test drives. I was originally thinking an SS or XR6T but it's too much money for something I don't use or abuse.

At the moment I would love a Poison Ivy SV6 with the SS-V tail lights and rims or a Nitro XR6 with one of those fancy packs they have.

[Dave R]

Originally Posted by MITCHAY

I've seriously been considering lately buying a new or near new SV6 or XR6 to replace my WRX to save some dollars.

They both seem to pack some punch. I don't want something super fast but has a good useful power band.

I would be 99.9% keen on getting a manual so which has the better auto box is not an issue unless it really really impresses me. Fuel consuption is also not an issue either will use way less than what I pay now.

I will have to have some test drives. I was originally thinking an SS or XR6T but it's too much money for something I don't use or abuse.

At the moment I would love a Poison Ivy SV6 with the SS-V tail lights and rims or a Nitro XR6 with one of those fancy packs they have.

Two reasons to go FG..

1. There are less of them out there compared to VE SV6's, which are a common sight these days.
2. I think you will find next year Holden will significantly update the VE, with both an exterior and interior refresh. Remember, VE's design is now over three years old and although it is a terrific design, it is overdue for a refresh. FG turned 1 a few months back.

[Smoke Pursuit]

VEs have really bad resale value now too.. FG = better resale in the short term being a newer car..

[Deco28]

Originally Posted by bfiipursuit

VEs have really bad resale value now too.. FG = better resale in the short term being a newer car..

Trying to steal a sale? I think both resales are as bad as each other.

Unless you get a MY10 SV6, get the XR6.

I see more XR6's out then SV6's. Maybe Cairns is not representative of the norm.

[MITCHAY]

Resale or what is more exclusive will not be a deciding factor should I go this route by the way. I'm not 100% certain as yet. I know financially either one would be a good decision in comparison.

I'm not in a position of where I can not afford what I have now rather I reckon dollars could be saved and put towards my house. It's just ridiculously expensive, and I'm looking for a decent compromise.

I reckon the 6 packs of late have made it more enticing compared to other years which is why I have been thinking this way recently

[Smoke Pursuit]

Originally Posted by Deco28

Trying to steal a sale? I think both resales are as bad as each other.

Unless you get a MY10 SV6, get the XR6.

I see more XR6's out then SV6's. Maybe Cairns is not representative of the norm.

Not at the moment.. The VE is 2 years older then the FG.. Therefore theres alot more VEs on the market then FG, and VEs are getting smashed on resale... I know this because i just went thru the process of trading a VE Calais V8 in...

[irish2]

Originally Posted by snappy84

I agree with that .
Manual

worse fuel economy

I think you will find that auto's have a larger loss of power till the convertor locks up. Therefore fuel economy is down in autos compared to manuals.

[5.4 GT]

Originally Posted by irish2

I think you will find that auto's have a larger loss of power till the convertor locks up. Therefore fuel economy is down in autos compared to manuals.

Nope.

FG Series:

XR6
6-Speed Auto - 10.1 L/100km
5-Speed Auto - 10.5 L/100km
6-Speed Manual - 11.1 L/100km


XR6T
6-Speed Auto - 11.7 L/100km
6-Speed Manual - 12 L/100km


XR8
6-Speed Auto - 14 L/100km
6-Speed Manual - 14.2 L/100km

From Ford Australia (http://www.ford.com.au)

[5.4 GT]

Originally Posted by 4Vman

Not by a long shot... both have their strengths and weaknesses when applied to different tasks....

Name one measurable (as in must contain units) strength the Ford offered 6 speed Manual has over its Auto counterpart on a stock standard model in the Ford range that you can back up with evidence.

[XR Martin]

Originally Posted by 5.4 GT

Name one measurable (as in must contain units) strength the Ford offered 6 speed Manual has over its Auto counterpart on a stock standard model in the Ford range that you can back up with evidence.

Its cheaper to service :P

[flappist]

Originally Posted by 5.4 GT

Name one measurable (as in must contain units) strength the Ford offered 6 speed Manual has over its Auto counterpart on a stock standard model in the Ford range that you can back up with evidence.

1) The ability to move from any gear to any other gear (e.g. 4th to 2nd) exactly when you wish to regardless of engine RPM.

2) The ability to disengage the engine from the drive line and control exactly how much of and how quickly the engagement is restored.

3) Ability to jump start the engine.

4) Ability to stop the engine without using the key.

People want choice and many do not want automatic gearboxes.

Now your turn:

Name one measurable (as in must contain units) strength the Ford offered BOSS V8 has over its Turbo 6 counterpart on a stock standard model in the Ford range that you can back up with evidence other than number of stripe options, fantasizing about races held before you were born and noise.

No single model, technology or combination suits everyone which is probably why they offer a range.

[5.4 GT]

Originally Posted by XR6 Martin

Its cheaper to service :P

Is it? We have a T-56 equipped GT and a ZF equipped GT and so far the servicing costs have been identical (maybe they don't have enough kms on them yet and maybe the TR6060 is different in that respect?). Not saying your wrong, but that's why I requested units (in this case possibly $ each service and the kms the service was done at?).

Originally Posted by flappist

1) The ability to move from any gear to any other gear (e.g. 4th to 2nd) exactly when you wish to regardless of engine RPM.

2) The ability to disengage the engine from the drive line and control exactly how much of and how quickly the engagement is restored.

3) Ability to jump start the engine.

4) Ability to stop the engine without using the key.

People want choice and many do not want automatic gearboxes.

Now your turn:

Name one measurable (as in must contain units) strength the Ford offered BOSS V8 has over its Turbo 6 counterpart on a stock standard model in the Ford range that you can back up with evidence other than number of stripe options, fantasizing about races held before you were born and noise.

No single model, technology or combination suits everyone which is probably why they offer a range.

5) The ability to push a 3rd Pedal

Come on I said the strengths measured in units... (hence to keep the **** factor attributes out of it)

Point 1) for example: if you could tell me that you've found a legitimate source that says the Ford 6 speed manual used in a stock standard Falcon of the BA/BF/FG range can downshift from 4th to 2nd faster than its ZF counterpart can kick down to 2nd from 4th gear then you might have something there.

Other e.gs of possible measurements from legitimate sources:

Track Times (both 400m and Circuit): in units of time
Fuel Economy (been there done that... see above): in L/100km
Shifting times: again in units of time
Servicing costs was a good one from XR6 Martin if we can get actual $s involved.

I'm not debating that people want choice. I'm debating the measurable strengths the 6 Speed Manual equipped cars purportedly have over their ZF option.

Flappist I don't know why your so hung up about the V8 vs T6 thing (it seems to come up in a lot of your threads). FYI We've tried both sides of what Ford has to offer in the form of a daily driver fully optioned FGXRT.

Back on topic...

Good times from the Ford there! Not sure how it destroyed the SV6 so badly on the track as the reviews always claim the VE sport variants have more mechanical grip than their FG rivals.

[flappist]

Originally Posted by 5.4 GT

Is it? We have a T-56 equipped GT and a ZF equipped GT and so far the servicing costs have been identical (maybe they don't have enough kms on them yet and maybe the TR6060 is different in that respect?). Not saying your wrong, but that's why I requested units (in this case possibly $ each service and the kms the service was done at?).



5) The ability to push a 3rd Pedal

Come on I said the strengths measured in units... (hence to keep the **** factor attributes out of it)

Point 1) for example: if you could tell me that you've found a legitimate source that says the Ford 6 speed manual used in a stock standard Falcon of the BA/BF/FG range can downshift from 4th to 2nd faster than its ZF counterpart can kick down to 2nd from 4th gear then you might have something there.

Other e.gs of possible measurements from legitimate sources:

Track Times (both 400m and Circuit): in units of time
Fuel Economy (been there done that... see above): in L/100km
Shifting times: again in units of time
Servicing costs was a good one from XR6 Martin if we can get actual $s involved.

I'm not debating that people want choice. I'm debating the measurable strengths the 6 Speed Manual equipped cars purportedly have over their ZF option.

Flappist I don't know why your so hung up about the V8 vs T6 thing (it seems to come up in a lot of your threads). FYI We've tried both sides of what Ford has to offer in the form of a daily driver fully optioned FGXRT.

Back on topic...

Good times from the Ford there! Not sure how it destroyed the SV6 so badly on the track as the reviews always claim the VE sport variants have more mechanical grip than their FG rivals.

Having ALSO owned several V8 and T6 FPVs and raced against autos and manuals on track days at Lakeside, QLD Raceway, Willobank, Benaraby and Morgan Park and taken notice of all the other FPVs and XRs and how well they went over many years it is common knowledge that the manuals are quicker on circuits, the autos are quicker on 0-400m.

This has been reflected several times in various magazine tests such as PCOTY, BFYB etc over the last few year where when there were two similar vehicles with auto and manual e.g. XRT auto & XRT manual, the manuals ALWAYS won.

If you do not wish to accept this then that is your problem, it will not change the world. Go and drive on track days, read through all the old MOTOR, WHEELS et al.

As far as speed of change, go and put your auto into 2nd from 4th while passing through 130km/h on entry to a corner under full brakes then use the back pressure of your engine to help you line up leaving the apex so you are in the right gear for maximum accelleration when you exit.

I have seen autos try this. If they are lucky they bog and understeer if not they cut grass. The computer will not let you do what it thinks are silly things.

There are plenty of members on here who have ACTUALLY driven on track days many of whom I have competed against. This is not anecdotal 4th hand friend of a mate of a bloke who saw it on facebook....

Of course this only really applies to when you are driving hard using the PERFORMANCE part of FORD PERFORMANCE VEHICLES, not day to day urban commuting. It is only important or even relevant to those who wish to walk the walk instead of just talk the talk.....

[5.4 GT]

Originally Posted by flappist

Having ALSO owned several V8 and T6 FPVs and raced against autos and manuals on track days at Lakeside, QLD Raceway, Willobank, Benaraby and Morgan Park and taken notice of all the other FPVs and XRs and how well they went over many years it is common knowledge that the manuals are quicker on circuits, the autos are quicker on 0-400m.

This has been reflected several times in various magazine tests such as PCOTY, BFYB etc over the last few year where when there were two similar vehicles with auto and manual e.g. XRT auto & XRT manual, the manuals ALWAYS won.

If you do not wish to accept this then that is your problem, it will not change the world. Go and drive on track days, read through all the old MOTOR, WHEELS et al.

As far as speed of change, go and put your auto into 2nd from 4th while passing through 130km/h on entry to a corner under full brakes then use the back pressure of your engine to help you line up leaving the apex so you are in the right gear for maximum accelleration when you exit.

I have seen autos try this. If they are lucky they bog and understeer if not they cut grass. The computer will not let you do what it thinks are silly things.

There are plenty of members on here who have ACTUALLY driven on track days many of whom I have competed against. This is not anecdotal 4th hand friend of a mate of a bloke who saw it on facebook....

Of course this only really applies to when you are driving hard using the PERFORMANCE part of FORD PERFORMANCE VEHICLES, not day to day urban commuting. It is only important or even relevant to those who wish to walk the walk instead of just talk the talk.....

All that and no actual data again. Round and around we go...

[FalconXR6]

Wow.
Mighty impressed with the straight line acceleration of both cars !!!

As it says in the back of Motor mag (and it's so true) "V6 effective, but uninspiring" of the VE SV6.

[flappist]

Originally Posted by 5.4 GT

All that and no actual data again. Round and around we go...

MOTOR Magazine April 2006 PCOTY Page 68

Winton lap time:

F6 1:44.60
XR6T manual 1:44.95 (T56)
XR6T auto 1:45.90 (ZF)
GT 1:46.05

[4Vman]

Originally Posted by flappist

MOTOR Magazine April 2006 PCOTY Page 68

Winton lap time:

F6 1:44.60
XR6T manual 1:44.95 (T56)
XR6T auto 1:45.90 (ZF)
GT 1:46.05

That's for one lap too...
The margin is amplified when you run over consecutive laps and start to kill the brakes because you have far less compression braking help in an auto...
Im not sure how well the auto's cope with constant "manual" abuse either..

[iliov]

lol 6.7 seconds 0-100

I call bullsh&&

[Wretched]

Originally Posted by iliov

lol 6.7 seconds 0-100

I call bullsh&&

Why?
Would you care to elaborate?

[Rev28K]

Originally Posted by flappist

MOTOR Magazine April 2006 PCOTY Page 68

Winton lap time:

F6 1:44.60
XR6T manual 1:44.95 (T56)
XR6T auto 1:45.90 (ZF)
GT 1:46.05

Makes you wonder why FPV don't give the magazines manuals if they are going to track test the cars.

I've seen Motor claim high 1:43's from an F6 at a later date (might've been the R spec). It's welded in to my memory because I am currently doing low 1:44's in my car and should really be doing high 1:43's.

Also from memory that high 1:43 was an auto (no manual to compare it with and please don't compare it too closely with other times from other days)