Motor Magazine Aug 2009 - Features F6

[DABOSS]

Ive had the pleasure of driving one for a few days from BMW, have to say quite nice to drive and the twin turbo setup on these machines are so linear for everyday driving its an all round nice package of a car, But still having said that Im not keep on the purchase as for that sorta coin Id rather be purchasing a different German beast.

[xr8man83]

i wouldnt believe anything that magazine prints it is at the fore front for bias publications the phase 3 is renowned as the best muscle car this country has ever made it not b the fastest but it will always be the best its like saying that when some1 wins 10 bathurst races brock wont be the king of the mountain cause there now is someone better sure the f6 is fast and diserves a good ranking but not number one not when there is the legend phase 3 there and well 4th is just pathetic but it is the magazine you get free subcription to when you join the hsv or hrt club i forget but as soon as my mate joined and told me that he got a free subscription i never brought another one of ther magazines. Very bias in my opinion just have a look at wot brand of car appears on the cover the most

[prydey]

Originally Posted by xr8man83

i wouldnt believe anything that magazine prints it is at the fore front for bias publications the phase 3 is renowned as the best muscle car this country has ever made it not b the fastest but it will always be the best its like saying that when some1 wins 10 bathurst races brock wont be the king of the mountain cause there now is someone better sure the f6 is fast and diserves a good ranking but not number one not when there is the legend phase 3 there and well 4th is just pathetic but it is the magazine you get free subcription to when you join the hsv or hrt club i forget but as soon as my mate joined and told me that he got a free subscription i never brought another one of ther magazines. Very bias in my opinion just have a look at wot brand of car appears on the cover the most

could you please point out for me where it says the cars are listed in order of best to worst??

jumping to conclusions is a daily passtime on AFF.

[ClevlndStemer]

Originally Posted by xr8man83

i wouldnt believe anything that magazine prints it is at the fore front for bias publications the phase 3 is renowned as the best muscle car this country has ever made it not b the fastest but it will always be the best its like saying that when some1 wins 10 bathurst races brock wont be the king of the mountain cause there now is someone better sure the f6 is fast and diserves a good ranking but not number one not when there is the legend phase 3 there and well 4th is just pathetic but it is the magazine you get free subcription to when you join the hsv or hrt club i forget but as soon as my mate joined and told me that he got a free subscription i never brought another one of ther magazines. Very bias in my opinion just have a look at wot brand of car appears on the cover the most

For starters paragraphing and punctuation would be helpful.

Anyway who are they biased against? Your post makes no sense what so ever. I have the magazine in front of me and they do not state anywhere this is a ranking of 1 - 10 of Aussie muscle cars, they have simply listed a list of the top 10 best aussie muscle cars.

[flappist]

Originally Posted by ClevlndStemer

Where did he say that? I am not doubting you I wasn't aware he tested a F6.

In every issue of TGA magazine, towards the back in the car prices area.

[ClevlndStemer]

Originally Posted by flappist

In every issue of TGA magazine, towards the back in the car prices area.

Oh ok, I don't get that magazine. But thank you.

[EDManual]

Yes, why does the F6 take 1.6 seconds to go from 170 to 180 when every 10km increments under that was around 1.0 seconds or faster? They show no gear change in the gear graph...

[EDManual]

Actually I notice between 110 and 120 in 2nd, before the gear change is also around .3 seconds off the pace of other 10km incremements in 2nd. It obviously drops off the pace at the top of the gear. Maybe if it changed gear early in 3rd it may go a bit quicker?

[Rev28K]

Originally Posted by SpoolMan

No wonder Top Gear's Jeremy Clarkson named the FPV F6 the ‘’best sports sedan under $100,000 Can't get as much car anywhere else for less than $100,000''

Cough, cough. Mitsu EVO 10 with the MRT hot up pack is under $100K
http://www.tmraustralia.com.au/article.php?ref=101

Top Gear’s life blood seems to be exaggeration and hyperbole. I take their statements with large grains of salt nearby. I'm not having a go at the F6, more at Top Gear.

[Bent8]

Originally Posted by EDManual

Actually I notice between 110 and 120 in 2nd, before the gear change is also around .3 seconds off the pace of other 10km incremements in 2nd. It obviously drops off the pace at the top of the gear. Maybe if it changed gear early in 3rd it may go a bit quicker?

Yep, they're revving the F6 to 6250rpm, which is 750rpm above peak power.

A shorter shift should get quicker times as peak torque is available from 1950rpm.

Makes me wonder what the redline/cutout is on F6?...

[Corzza]

Originally Posted by 4Vman

Im really impressed with the Audi range now.

The new charged V6 in the S4 is a fantastic! Far better than the V8 they had in the previous S4

[flappist]

Originally Posted by Rev28K

Cough, cough. Mitsu EVO 10 with the MRT hot up pack is under $100K
http://www.tmraustralia.com.au/article.php?ref=101

Top Gear’s life blood seems to be exaggeration and hyperbole. I take their statements with large grains of salt nearby. I'm not having a go at the F6, more at Top Gear.

Sports sedan <> hyperactive rollerskate.

A sports sedan has to also be capable of being used as a normal car on normal roads by normal drivers for normal purposes.

The mandatory addition of a back and neck brace for the driver and front passenger as well as the prohibition of anyone over 3 ft tall or people who have legs in the rear and the cargo load capacity of half a packet of Jatz tend to reduce the "normality" of the EVO (or STI etc).

[mik]

Originally Posted by GTP-03

How the hell does the A9X beat the GTHO? Sure it was a weapon in group C guise, but so was the 1977 XC Moffat coupes, shouldnt they be in the list then? I think the A9X race cars some how got blurred with the road going models, does anyone else think the ROAD going A9Xs are overated?

actually the A9x`s were`nt any faster than the standard SLR 5000 but had better handling and better braking.

[mik]

Originally Posted by mcnews

It is a fair enough list but it is only a persons opinion. I laugh at the old Holdens, they were so slow standard it is not funny. In all the old tests with stock cars the E49 was more than a second quicker than the Phase Three HO to 100mph and could get to 100mph and stop again before the 350 Monaro could get to 100mph. The Holdens standard had no performance, for god sake 245 Hemi Pacers could accelerate quicker than any Holden muscle car let alone anything with Webers hanging off the side.

we must have had different magazines, the best 1/4 for a charger was 14 dead like wise the xy ph3, i have noticed some of the reprints with different figures though.

[prydey]

Originally Posted by Bent8

Yep, they're revving the F6 to 6250rpm, which is 750rpm above peak power.

A shorter shift should get quicker times as peak torque is available from 1950rpm.

Makes me wonder what the redline/cutout is on F6?...

straightline performance was something they were very impressed with but getting it to the ground was difficult. they changed from first to 2nd at 4500rpm trying to minimise the traction loss of the line. they even pointed out the higher trap speed over the audi and that there is a lot of time to be gained if traction is improved.

[mcnews]

Originally Posted by mik

we must have had different magazines, the best 1/4 for a charger was 14 dead like wise the xy ph3, i have noticed some of the reprints with different figures though.

Australian Sports Car World. 0-100mph was 15.2 for the Phase III, 14.1 for the E49. Same issue they had the V12 E-Type Jag take over 17 seconds. The line that the Charger did 0-100mph and could stop again before the 350 Monaro could get to 100mph was the funny one for me :-)

As they came out of the showroom none of Holden's 'muscle' cars could do better than a lowish 15 on a good day, and most mags couldn't even crack a 15 out of an XU1....

[Falc'man]

Didn't Wheels get 14.2 for the P2, and 14.7 for the P3?

[Watto_Cobra]

Originally Posted by flappist

Sports sedan <> hyperactive rollerskate.

A sports sedan has to also be capable of being used as a normal car on normal roads by normal drivers for normal purposes.

The mandatory addition of a back and neck brace for the driver and front passenger as well as the prohibition of anyone over 3 ft tall or people who have legs in the rear and the cargo load capacity of half a packet of Jatz tend to reduce the "normality" of the EVO (or STI etc).

: After a crappy day at work, I needed that. :hihi:

[4Vman]

Originally Posted by mcnews

Australian Sports Car World. 0-100mph was 15.2 for the Phase III, 14.1 for the E49. Same issue they had the V12 E-Type Jag take over 17 seconds. The line that the Charger did 0-100mph and could stop again before the 350 Monaro could get to 100mph was the funny one for me :-)

As they came out of the showroom none of Holden's 'muscle' cars could do better than a lowish 15 on a good day, and most mags couldn't even crack a 15 out of an XU1....

LOL, give it a rest with your BS.... Must have been a time warp in your world seeing the pig handling e49 was a 1972 model and the H3 was a 1971 model, how may races did the E38 and E49 win? how many bathurst victories went to chrysler??....

Oh wait... that's right.. NONE.... :hihi:

Spin all the garbage you like, face the facts, the chrysler was a pos looser.

[mcnews]

Dominated in NZ but yes never had much luck here, they did take Moffat and the HO to NZ to try and beat them but they failed. Anyway, I just quote the test results on standard machines, when heavily modified in race trim on long tracks and a 1.5 litre bigger engine it doesn't take a genius to work things out. But pig handling is absolute crap, if you want to know how bad the horrible handling Valiants were just look at all the slalom tests throughout the 70s done by the mags, even the CL tank did slaloms quicker than the later top of the line Falcons. Simple minds might just look at race results at Bathurst with well prepared teams against backyarders etc. etc. and take their gospel to help them sleep at night... I instead look at the results achieved by the standard cars, and by that measure the Charger came up trumps.

But back to this magazine in question... how horn was the Brabham, imagine how awesome that thing would be to drive, the exposed pipework, now that is the most beautiful thing seen in Motor for god knows how long.

[Rev28K]

Originally Posted by flappist

Sports sedan <> hyperactive rollerskate.

A sports sedan has to also be capable of being used as a normal car on normal roads by normal drivers for normal purposes.

The mandatory addition of a back and neck brace for the driver and front passenger as well as the prohibition of anyone over 3 ft tall or people who have legs in the rear and the cargo load capacity of half a packet of Jatz tend to reduce the "normality" of the EVO (or STI etc).

Whoops! Silly me for thinking that a sports sedan was just meant to be "sporty" and have 4 doors.

Normal use (daily driver with the odd track day), normal driver (exceedingly normal in my case), normal roads (city & suburban roads). I'm not tall and the back seat of my coupe is lucky if it has someone in it once a year. Cargo capacity is rarely more than a few shopping bags. So I'd say I could justify an EVO.

Not that I ever need to do it but if I wanted to blast all over the back blocks of the top of Oz at warp 6,

[Rev28K]

(stupid I-phone cut off my response) Not that I'd need to do it but if I wanted a car to take me, a few friends and their luggage around the back blocks of Oz at warp 6 then an F6 would be near the top of the list.

Flappist - what are you replacing your 350z with? 370? Something FPV or Euro?

[WASP]

To stop some of the arguements, the GTHO came with various diff gearing options (most cars were fitted with 3.25 :1 - 3.55 :1 and 3.9:1). Depending on what gears were installed will determine it's 400m time/speed, not that it was built for this purpose anyway. Nothing much has changed with the current GT's either yet the 400m is still used as a benchmark.

Lets not get into the whole e49 vs GTHO debate. What's done is done and the achievements for both cars speak for themselves.

Colville

[DJM83]

Thanks Colville, this E49 vs GTHO has been done to death, well everytime a list like this is released. Lets move on shall we.

[phillyc]

Originally Posted by prydey

straightline performance was something they were very impressed with but getting it to the ground was difficult. they changed from first to 2nd at 4500rpm trying to minimise the traction loss of the line. they even pointed out the higher trap speed over the audi and that there is a lot of time to be gained if traction is improved.

So, if the FPV models get rumoured wider tyres, this will go a long way to solving the issue.

Great win by the F6 in that Musclecar list. The F6 also performed strongly in the comparison too. Quality car.

[prydey]

Originally Posted by phillyc

Great win by the F6 in that Musclecar list.

win? its just a compilation labelled 1-10. there is no winner or loser. no mention of any sort of rank at all.

[phillyc]

Originally Posted by prydey

win? its just a compilation labelled 1-10. there is no winner or loser. no mention of any sort of rank at all.

Its a Top 10 list, with cars numbered 1-10. The F6 is Car number 1.

[prydey]

Originally Posted by phillyc

Its a Top 10 list, with cars numbered 1-10. The F6 is Car number 1.

don't agree. i think they have intentionally jumbled up the cars to try to stop these sort of arguments. they have an a9x and vk ahead of the phase 3 and xr gt and the w427 is there at no.8. arguably the w427 should be no.1 given its the fastest, most powerful etc etc.

[mik]

given that my fat 1580 kg au xr6 if you believe the 1/4 mile times out of mags in general can break into the high 15 second mark with 172 kws or 230 HP , it would be a fair slug of a gt to do only half a second faster with the gt weighing in at just 1524 kg with 515 nm of torque and even with the 300 brake horse power that many believe to be grossly under stated and more like 350 or 380, sorry Mcnews they got it wrong its a typo, i was a stats freak on the local muscle cars in the 70`s the xy was a 14 sec dead car easily, this version is closer to the mark http://www.uniquecarsandparts.com.au...ifications.htm as usual i think a lot of these journo`s copy stats from their comrads ......whats that word ....is it plagiarism and accuracy gets lost over time

[mik]

actually given that the xy was 300+ kg`s lighter than the current gt you`d have to think that it would easily have been a 13 second car wit a good driver.