fastest Aussie performance car??

[CAMS290]

Originally Posted by 4Vman

14.4 seems to be the most accurate and commonly accepted time but seeing it was 1971 and they quote single didget decimal points id say a good old analog stopwatch was their measuring tool!!! hardly very accurate!
Either way a good Phase 3 with the 3.9 factory rear end would have been a fair bit quicker.

An E49 was 1 second faster to 100mph than a phase 3, the E49 was tested with a 3.5:1 diff and the phase 3 was tested with a 3.25:1 diff and wide ratio top loader.
E49 14.1 seconds to 100mph 14.4 second 1/4
Phase 3 15.2 seconds to 100mph 14.7 second 1/4

[jcxr]

Camo, you on the money with your times. Me being aan old fart, i drove both of them when newand the e49 would hose a phase 3. E49 was half a second quicker.

[4Vman]

Originally Posted by CAMS290

An E49 was 1 second faster to 100mph than a phase 3, the E49 was tested with a 3.5:1 diff and the phase 3 was tested with a 3.25:1 diff and wide ratio top loader.
E49 14.1 seconds to 100mph 14.4 second 1/4
Phase 3 15.2 seconds to 100mph 14.7 second 1/4

Wrong wrong wrong! dont believe everything you read on chrysler sites!
How could it be a second quicker to 100 mph if the phase 3 on average was running 14.2 @ 101mph and the E49 ran a 14.4 @ 98mph?
The figures quote on that site are for a STD XYGT, not a Phase 3! its totally inaccurate, Phase 3's were made with a 3.25 rear end (this is the car they tested), and 3.5 and 3.9 rear ends, the 3.9 Phase 3 was capable of mid to high 13's, how do i know? ive got 4 friends with Phase 3's, the car with 3.9's has run a 13.7 @ 103mph.
Everyone knows the Phase 3 in bathurst sec is a difficult car to get off the line, its tall gearing and peaky motor were better suited to fast lap times than 1/4 mile racing, the 3.9 car was much faster over the 1/4..

[Steffo]

Originally Posted by ED Classic

Low Volume Special _ _

Is it so difficult to understand that it is a PRODUCTION car. :

Come up with whatever excuse gets you off... but you'll still be wrong. The Elfin is the fastest Australian production car ever built.

[jcxr]

4v man , your mate with a 13 sec phase 3 would NOT have run that time on Aquajet yres as fitted original fullstop.No ph 3 ever did those times. Tyre technology has come a long way and respectable times may be gettable now but in the 70s impossible mate.

[4Vman]

Originally Posted by jcxr

4v man , your mate with a 13 sec phase 3 would NOT have run that time on Aquajet yres as fitted original fullstop.No ph 3 ever did those times. Tyre technology has come a long way and respectable times may be gettable now but in the 70s impossible mate.

Very True, traction was the main culprit in 71 for the Phase 3, unfortunatly people don't seem to understand that in 2006 when talking about comparing both cars.
People like to quote chrysler websites as gospil yet no-one can logically explian how a car that has significantly less HP, significantly less Torque, a worse power to weight ratio and worse gearing options could be quicker?
I suspect because its not possible to!
The only logical explination is the E49 put its lower power to the ground better and was an easier car to launch compared to the over powered and under tyred Phase 3.
Top speed wise the Phase 3 could pull 245 kph down conrod, the E49 was flat out pulling 200 kph.
Imagine how that must have looked, getting overtaken by a Phase 3 going 45 kph faster!
Also don't forget the phase 3 was lapping bathurst in 1971 @ almost 5 seconds a lap faster!! think about it, 5 full seconds.. thats an eternity in racing
In 1973 the XAGT was almost 11 seconds a lap faster than the E49!

[jcxr]

Whoa there with the lap times 4v man, originally we were talking qtr mile times.Modern motors times in the 70s gave the e49 as low 14s and the ho in the high 14s. Granted the e49 didnt handle as well, they still had the wood on the gt in a straight line.

[4Vman]

Originally Posted by jcxr

Whoa there with the lap times 4v man, originally we were talking qtr mile times.Modern motors times in the 70s gave the e49 as low 14s and the ho in the high 14s. Granted the e49 didnt handle as well, they still had the wood on the gt in a straight line.

Ok, both cars start at forrest elbow and have a drag to the end of conrod in 71, who would win? remember, its a straight line!
Id love to see a stock E49 and a Stock 3.9 Phase 3 with what ever tyres they liked have a drag today... GAME OVER to the HO.

[jcxr]

I think you may have summed it up in your previous post in admitting " thatthe only logical explanation is the e49 put its power to the ground better"

[4Vman]

Originally Posted by jcxr

I think you may have summed it up in your previous post in admitting " thatthe only logical explanation is the e49 put its power to the ground better"

That's right, but if you choose to ignore that the Phase 3 had poor traction then it doesnt tell the whole or true story does it!
Today, in 2006 had the Phase 3 and E49 been compared @ calder on what ever tyres they liked using what ever listed option that was avaliable for the cars in 1971 (dont forget that you could order the optional QC blue printed race engine in the Phase 3) the phase 3 would be at least half a second quicker over the 1/4.
As far as that drag down conrod goes the phase 3 would be a long way in front because it had 45kph of speed up its sleave over the E49 so i guess that makes it a faster accelerating car too!
See how things look when you look at the WHOLE story?

[ED Classic]

Originally Posted by Steffo

Is it so difficult to understand that it is a PRODUCTION car. :

Come up with whatever excuse gets you off... but you'll still be wrong. The Elfin is the fastest Australian production car ever built.

Can be what it wants. I dont see any around..Very low volume Special

[flappist]

Originally Posted by Steffo

Is it so difficult to understand that it is a PRODUCTION car. :

Come up with whatever excuse gets you off... but you'll still be wrong. The Elfin is the fastest Australian production car ever built.

Calling Elfin a production car is streching the definition just a little bit.
The original definition of a production car was that a particular number had top be build in a year to gain that status. The number varied over the years but was always in the hundreds. How many Elfins are sold a year?

Elfin like CSV, Roaring 40s, Bullet, DJR etc etc is a boutique manufacturer who makes a product for a very narrow and specific market.

If anyone can make a car and if it is registered call it "production" then the "Geea XR6T" would have to be close to the quickest or maybe one of these riceball mega turbo skylines with about 8,000,000 hp.
After all a Typhoon is just a XT that has been modified, isn't it?

If the Elfin is, in fact, a production car why was it not entered into the PCOTY? Be great markering if it won......

[Rev28K]

Originally Posted by flappist

If the Elfin is, in fact, a production car why was it not entered into the PCOTY? Be great markering if it won......

According to the article it will be in PCOTY at the end of the year.

What about some of the production cars that have been pulled apart after they went down a production line and rebuilt with special bits (like the early HSV's) are these production cars? Is a Herrod/DJR a production car?

[CAMS290]

Originally Posted by 4Vman

Wrong wrong wrong! dont believe everything you read on chrysler sites!
How could it be a second quicker to 100 mph if the phase 3 on average was running 14.2 @ 101mph and the E49 ran a 14.4 @ 98mph?
The figures quote on that site are for a STD XYGT, not a Phase 3! its totally inaccurate, Phase 3's were made with a 3.25 rear end (this is the car they tested), and 3.5 and 3.9 rear ends, the 3.9 Phase 3 was capable of mid to high 13's, how do i know? ive got 4 friends with Phase 3's, the car with 3.9's has run a 13.7 @ 103mph.
Everyone knows the Phase 3 in bathurst sec is a difficult car to get off the line, its tall gearing and peaky motor were better suited to fast lap times than 1/4 mile racing, the 3.9 car was much faster over the 1/4..

A standard GT was 0 - 160 in about 18 seconds, similar to a 350 Chev engined HG or HT.

The E49 was the factory 1/4 mile and 0 - 160kph king, you prove otherwise !!

Which cars are constantly at the top of the classic aussie car sprints ??? E49's are !!

E49's on modern rubber run in the mid to hi 13's, ask Alex "FPVGT", he will tell you a few things about them.

It hurts a few people, that the Phase 3 was beaten over the 1/4 and to the ton, but the P3 was faster in a straight line, No Arguments Here !!

[CAMS290]

Originally Posted by 4Vman

How could it be a second quicker to 100 mph if the phase 3 on average was running 14.2 @ 101mph and the E49 ran a 14.4 @ 98mph?

It all in the 60' time, simple !!
1 tenth in the 60' is worth 2 tenths on the 1/4.
E49 would of got off the line quicker, P3 would of started to reel it in after say 100 + mph, by then it was game over for the E49,

[Steffo]

Originally Posted by flappist

Calling Elfin a production car is streching the definition just a little bit.
The original definition of a production car was that a particular number had top be build in a year to gain that status. The number varied over the years but was always in the hundreds. How many Elfins are sold a year?

You need to make at least 100 units to be called a production car (hence why the 100-unit McLaren F1 is considered so).

Elfin will make that many Clubman's, if not more. They didn't sell many McLaren's a year in its nearly 10 year production run either...

[LeMans]

Originally Posted by flappist

Calling Elfin a production car is streching the definition just a little bit.
The original definition of a production car was that a particular number had top be build in a year to gain that status. The number varied over the years but was always in the hundreds. How many Elfins are sold a year?

Elfin like CSV, Roaring 40s, Bullet, DJR etc etc is a boutique manufacturer who makes a product for a very narrow and specific market.

If anyone can make a car and if it is registered call it "production" then the "Geea XR6T" would have to be close to the quickest or maybe one of these riceball mega turbo skylines with about 8,000,000 hp.
After all a Typhoon is just a XT that has been modified, isn't it?

If the Elfin is, in fact, a production car why was it not entered into the PCOTY? Be great markering if it won......

So where does the Enzo Ferrari fit in this reasoning? It’s not even registerable in Australia

But as far as build quantity being a determining factor, there is some merit in that argument, but it’s limited. There are competition rules that use this as a definition, but the organizers of the competition will drawer whatever definition they want according to the requirements of that competition. For example, the Roaring Forties GT40 has been deemed a production car by CAMS for the purposes of competition because it has produced 20 identical cars over a period of two years. The requirement for the original GT40 however was somewhere around 50 before it was permitted to compete at the Le Mans 24 Hour.

Another definition of a production car is the recognition of the design for road use by a governing authority such as VIC Roads. The problem with this definition however, is that you don’t actually have to build another car once the design has been approved.

A third definition is the threshold for safety test requirements as defined by the a governing authority. I’m not sure of the critical number, but it’s around 100 cars produced per year. If a manufacturer builds more than this number per year, then they are required to undergo a more comprehensive safety test procedure, such as crash testing. Less than this number would require the manufacturer to instead present an engineer’s analysis of its crash safety. But even here, the governing authority will still describe the two types as “high production” or “low production” vehicles.

OK, now make up your own minds

[Rollin]

Well apart from all that, UNR8D spoke to a commo driver tonight (OLS108 or something? he owns a quick VX 5.7) who reckons he watched said F6 do the 12.9 second runs, (it was an LS1 nationals meet or something???) and was satisfied in his mind that said F6 was stock, and also said everyone there was well impressed with it.

Ford Rock!!!

[nb_351]

thats pretty awesome and a credit to ford if a stock 6 cyl turbo falcon can beat and even impress holden v8 fans... well done...

[borry]

tsk tsk tsk is all i have to say..... maybe the lock soon ?

[CAMS290]

Originally Posted by Rollin

Well apart from all that, UNR8D spoke to a commo driver tonight (OLS108 or something? he owns a quick VX 5.7) who reckons he watched said F6 do the 12.9 second runs, (it was an LS1 nationals meet or something???) and was satisfied in his mind that said F6 was stock, and also said everyone there was well impressed with it.

Ford Rock!!!

I was there too, and i saw it, and i spoke to the guy that owns it, and yep, i'm very impressed.
Hail the F6, the new king of Aussie 4 door performance cars

[Gadgetman]

Yeah the Elfin is brilliant. But Let face it. How many of us would buy the Elfin to use as a daily driver and as our only car?? The typhoon is certainly a brilliant 1800kg family car with the highest levels of safety, perfomance and driveability EVER seen in an Australian car...