Motor Sept 2005 - BFYB - Another FPV failure!

[Citric GT]

Originally Posted by XR_Strider_GuY

I have read this thread from start to finish and I feel i have to say my 2c (plus 10% gst and fuel excise).

At the end of the day its all down to development costs. For a totally new model EL-AU Ford spent $750m and i believe for the BA Ford spent $500m. Reality of that budget is very cheap compared to say the development cost of a 3 series BMW which i think was in the reigns of $2-3 billion. So asking FPV to churn out the same level of engineering as AMG or BMW M division is unrealistic.

However, I will have to agree with Mr Sparkles here. What we are talking about and why where all here is that we have an interest in "Performance" Fords and in this case it's FPV thats at the pinacle of Performance in the Falcon development.

Fact of the matter is lapt times, 0-100km/h and 1/4miles are all measurements of "Performace". I fail to see how many of you's think that the Motor and Wheels magazines are junk reading and not real. I challenge anyone to do a test like Wheels and Motor with 20+ cars and take them through their paces. Yes i will agree that not all cars are equal, but manufactures who enter in BYFB know full well that their will be measured on "performance" and it's up to them to provide a fit car.

So to conclude, the fact that the FPV cars are down in cornering speed is fact that they will need to improve this on their next models, no if no but. Considering Holden can perform quicker (being it's arch rival) proves this even more that FPV have home work to do in this department. And please don't say that i don't like FPV's. If i had the money right now a GT will be in garage. And to the people whop say 1-2km per hour is no bid deal i'll put this to you, a 13 second car is not much different to a 15 sec car hmmm i don't think so.

Well written and very true.

[HEMI POWER]

Originally Posted by MrSparkle

Much like some will always lap up what Ford/FPV deliver without ever wanting more, or facing up to proven inadequacies. Blind zealotry can be such a comfortable place for a fanatic! : sleep:

Geez, I just wish I worked for people like some of you guys, so damn easy to please! Slap a badge on, lose against the competition, and shift the focus off the main marketed objective of the company! Where do I sign up! :

Hmm, clearly you are right though - it looks like my PCOTY winning vehicle isn't really a "performance" car after all since it's not as "comfortable" on the road... time I started pricing LPG XT wagons and taught myself the real definition of performance. :

Well I'm over this whole discussion, there are some logical heads in here and some that just don't grasp it. Time to leave it to the buzzards! :

I always thought u had 1/2 an idea on the subject, but i have just realised how wrong i was. :

[RED_EL_XR8]

Originally Posted by FPVGT

I always thought u had 1/2 an idea on the subject, but i have just realised how wrong i was. :

Lets all play nice now..... :

[Firefox7]

Originally Posted by XR6turbo

i will say one thing, the AU2 XR8 is a better balanced car than any of the FPV range! thats an idea of how far back we have gone in performance terms!

I might have to remind a few..


Of the unknown rebel with a bog standard Factory AU Series 3 XR8 220...flogged fords finest at the Ford Vs holden day 2004....he won overall...against everyone in it's class..including.....Dick Jonhson in the DJR 320 BA Falcon. A lowly 220 box AUXR8 driven by an unknown driver vs a V8 Supercar legend. And he cained em. I think the car speaks for itself, more than the drivers.....IMO.


Cheers....

[GT0193]

Man ... some T3 guys have got a complex. A "superseded" complex by a superior car. :evil_laug

[sbutler]

Originally Posted by 4Vman

Yawn.... it absolutely amazes me the amount of energy some of you people put into bagging the absolute crap out of Ford for producing a product that clearly meets their market and sales plan, is clearly an awesome package and is clearly meeting with huge consumer approval...
The vast buying public can see it, why cant you guys?
How many of you "critics" and "experts" actually own or could afford to buy a XR8 F6 or BAGT today?

Best sales ever for a Ford performance product = success,
No sales = failure,
FPV build road cars not race cars,
Lap times mean jack Sh!t!
Get over it.

Yeah go the safe option the sales are the best for a long time, but that means jack mate.. Ford sales are great & they dont have a bad performance in the XR turbo, but its not about sales! Its about the BFYB & FPV/Ford failed yet again!! Last year a FPV car s!it itself, This year another car sh!t itself.
Yeah but they sell well. So do Hyundai Getz . whata crock!! :

[XA-Coupe]

If you guys can't get over this crap then holidays will start to be handed out.
GET OVER IT.. both sides of this 'discussion'
Enough.

[RED_EL_XR8]

Steve.

One day either side of this argument must have something new, original, or vaguely interesting to offer, or the pointlessness would surely not continue! Hmmm? Take the advice in your own sig please, ditto for your combatants.

Reading back it's clear today isn't going to be that day. Yawn. :

[Bossxr8]

Originally Posted by Firefox7

I might have to remind a few..


Of the unknown rebel with a bog standard Factory AU Series 3 XR8 220...flogged fords finest at the Ford Vs holden day 2004....he won overall...against everyone in it's class..including.....Dick Jonhson in the DJR 320 BA Falcon. A lowly 220 box AUXR8 driven by an unknown driver vs a V8 Supercar legend. And he cained em. I think the car speaks for itself, more than the drivers.....IMO.


Cheers....

That car finished top 10 overall, so it would have had the works done to it to keep up with some of the other highly modified cars out there. Wait to DJ gets his modified alloy blocked XR8 out there, should be interesting.

[sbutler]

Originally Posted by MrSparkle

Not sure if that one was aimed at me, but you are right and wrong. No I haven't owned a BA. Have spent enough time in them to know them though. Trust me when I say I can afford anything in the range at this point in time, however! :dr_Evil:



Markets? Well FPV claim they are in the performance end of the market, and BFYB provided a solid empirical test of this - hence my whole reason for starting this thread.



They make a great product, but it must be improved to compete in the market FPV want to play in. That is, unless of course, they are trying to create a new niche market for only themselves to be in?

Again Sparkle is bang on the money with his response.
Performance means exactly that! & FPV are running behind there compitition in that market.. :

[HSE2]

It’s pretty tough when both sides are right but there are bottom lines for each side.

Negative press of any sort is damaging. I agree with Mike. Judged by what Ford or FPV say the primary objectives are and not just the mantra from FPV, there should be concern. If one builds a car and then supplies that car for evaluation with a criteria that is well known, if those criteria aren’t a design philosophy one subscribes to, the point to the exercise is questionable. If Ford want to build a younger demographic, if FPV want to polish that blue oval we come back to the spotlight scenario. You have to take advantage and get that message across as the opportunities are limited.

I personally don't rate track performance. I know I have asked Mr. Taylor previously about the intent behind the Holden’s chassis design on other forums. I find it unfathomable that a car design for the road would have such a track intent built into its chassis when viewed in this price category if as I believe it does compromises its ability to handle key road conditions that enthusiast might experience. The question is how big of a compromise is there?

I would much rather see a closed road loop used for evaluation but understand fully the reasons behind track use. But as a publication these article don’t answer the questions and observations I have. Road holding in the real world is a little bit different. The way the tyre package works with the suspension and chassis on corrugated mid corner approaches, how it impacts on grip especially if the surface is variable are different to a grip prepared surface of a race track. In my family we have both cars, one just upgraded to the VZ R8. While we aren't the quality of drivers of these esteemed publications and the experience is far from controlled the advantage to the Holden isn't as great in these situation as it is on the track, and this comes from a person that has been very critical of the BA falcons appeal to the driver orientated. There is no question this Ford applies real world appeal but that really isn't the intent of the thread originator as I understand it.

If you have blue blood pulsing through those veins it’s not a matter of simply sitting back and flying the flag blindly. It’s a bit like tough love. These guys are of high value to the Ford world because they say what they feel even though the backlash is often severe. It’s done so with the intent on focus and improvement.

In this case Ford has two choices. In the past they have shown no ability to market the direction they believe is relevant to the segment. More often then not they miss the market because of this. It doesn't mean the problem is product related just that the way it is perceived and presented doesn't give it a chance. Ford has only made one attempt to explain the weight penalty of its BA Falcon and that was hidden away in an obscure publication. It is a large car with features that everyday people can appreciate. Given a car the ability of split fold rear seats has to add weight through strengthening of the rear bulkhead. Its little things like this that give convenience but add a penalty over the competition in this case. It is correctly stated as the question should be “what do cars of similar size that weigh less lack more of”


If Ford disagrees with what Motor mag has to say they have every right to not present cars for these tests. They can say yes evaluate the car in a normal road environment and do it in the context for which the car spends 99.9 percent of its life.
If they believe they won’t compromise key road design to make it more track compliant come out and clearly state as much and FFS promote the engineering intent behind the product.

Despite my questions about the alignment of certain track like environments I have to concede that this world is changing. To be politically correct race tracks are gaining more relevance. A judgment criterion is clearly established by the media outlet that publicises guides and information people listen to. If people listen they are therefore influenced. The perception is that FPV play catch up. The perception is that FPV are followers. Media coverage that adds weight to these perceptions is very damaging even if it doesn’t completely correlate to the product we buy and the reason behind such decisions. In FPV past and mostly likely future their view of the world and the enthusiasts probably won’t see eye to eye. That’s when you get enthusiast at each others throats proclaiming the virtues of both sides. If you so comprehensively lack the ability to market the product in the way it is intended, subjecting it to negative exposure knowingly which is counter productive to the image being presented is hugely damaging. You either get better or send a stronger message. Ford, at this point seemed inclined to do neither.

[mickey t]

Originally Posted by 4Vman

Here's a thought, grab a couple of novice car enthusiasts who represent the average buying public and let them evaluate the cars!!! They might get some more meaningful real world feedback? although you are right, FPV's strength is how it performs its designed purpose, a performance ROAD vehicle...

we did. it's called the Lucky Bastard competition, and he agreed with everybody else.

It was Warren Luff (a Ford V8 Supercar driver, and demon production car racer) last year at PCOTY, so no anti-Ford bias there.

we seem to have a simple misunderstanding of what "Performance" actually means. To us, it's the whole package of the car, not just how it goes at traffic lights.

If your car can't carry any speed across the face of the apex, or get its power down on the way out of a corner, or gather any bite on turn in, then it's severely hampered in its performance, isn't it?

there is enormous relevance for on-road driving. the car with the higher cornering speeds, quite simply, will have more in reserve - a greater safety margin - when you're driving normally and need to take evasive action. Or, even, if you're driving briskly (no, not hooning) and a road condition surfaces that you need to get around.

it's all related to the performance package. And it's all hard data. when it's out of grip, it's out of grip, and i don't really understand how any perceived bias could come into that. We got accused of bias a couple of years ago when we had both McConville and Marcos Ambrose doing the driving duties, and ever since then i figured we would just never win with some people...


By the way, we're still not flatshifting ( had a giggle when i read that!)

[6T]

IMO HS has nailed the philosophical aspect of this argument.
There is, again IMHO, a major mechanical aspect of the "performance" in FPV V8s which may or may not have resulted in better dynamics if it were possible to do it differently. This is the use of a heavy long-stroke block combined with twin-cam heads, resulting in an unavoidable high Cof G. The question could also be asked as to whether it is necessary to use 4V heads on a slow-revving, long-stroke motor with its consequential very high piston speeds and (I assume) resulting heavy crank and bearing loadings. A short-stroke motor with multi-valve heads, variable cam timing and big valves would possibly be lighter, quicker-revving and be responsible for a lower C of g over the front axle.
Nevertheless, I feel that FPV did what they could with what they had available. For that alone they have done well, bearing in mind the popularity of their products carrying the strangely laid-out motor. Once they get that tall heavy block lowered and lighter, I feel the cars will really begin to get the performance thing nailed. Their technology is heads above the opposition, they just have to find the resources to lay it out in a modern performance manner.
This opinion is just that - an opinion - and is not an invitation for everyone with a boss motor to become seriously offended.

[JPFS1]

It should be a pretty simple excercise for all to see, the BA is a damn heavy beast with a big iron V8 lump up front that sits pretty high in the engine bay, now that wouldn't help the centre of gravity or the push that would be evident when at the limit.

The difference is marginal...

I see the coupe4 had an even slower speed through the corner, yet there is no questioning its ability by MOTOR?? What the hell did HSV even bother with an AWD coupe then?

There would no doubt be a difference in the cornering ability of an AMG and a similarly equiped Msport, but i wouldn't even begin to suggest that the slower one is not a performance car.

There will always be differences between performance cars, whether it's the FPV against the HSV, or an AMG against an equivalent BMW MSport. It's ridiculous to suggest that being a few km's down through a corner than your counterpart excludes you from being classified as a 'performance' car or that you haven't acheived the set criteria of the goals set in the first place.

Mickey T, how about you throw some decent tyres on some FPV's as an excercise to get to the bottom of what seems to be a growing concern with every review published in MOTOR???

Sometimes it's the simplest of things that provide the answers.

[4Vman]

Originally Posted by JEM

It should be a pretty simple excercise for all to see, the BA is a damn heavy beast with a big iron V8 lump up front that sits pretty high in the engine bay, now that wouldn't help the centre of gravity or the push that would be evident when at the limit.

The difference is marginal...

I see the coupe4 had an even slower speed through the corner, yet there is no questioning its ability by MOTOR?? What the hell did HSV even bother with an AWD coupe then?

There would no doubt be a difference in the cornering ability of an AMG and a similarly equiped Msport, but i wouldn't even begin to suggest that the slower one is not a performance car.

There will always be differences between performance cars, whether it's the FPV against the HSV, or an AMG against an equivalent BMW MSport. It's ridiculous to suggest that being a few km's down through a corner than your counterpart excludes you from being classified as a 'performance' car or that you haven't acheived the set criteria of the goals set in the first place.

Mickey T, how about you throw some decent tyres on some FPV's as an excercise to get to the bottom of what seems to be a growing concern with every review published in MOTOR???

Sometimes it's the simplest of things that provide the answers.

That was why i suggested BFYB +$5K, so enthusiasts who need "Mag brag" rights to win an argument in the play ground or pub can see what 5K well spent will do to their dream ride of preference, or allow serious perspective buyers an opportunity to see the potential of the cars for "off road" activity, lets face it, someone who's interested in track activity isnt going to be satisfied with any car in its std form are they?
At the end of the day there is an enourmous amount of BA XR/GT owners out there who have spent a few extra $ and get consistant very low 13's over the 1/4 and terrorise plenty of Holden counterparts, you could only seperate the cars with a stop watch on a track and lets face it, who drives their car at 95% all the time anyway.
I personally think Motor have hung FPV out to dry, im not saying Motor are biased or rigged, they just dont show the full story of how the car does its job.
How about doing an article with their ideas of how they'd improve the F6/GT with bolt ons like tyres, edit, shocks, exhaust etc and post the results?

[mickey t]

How has MOTOR hung FPV out to dry? By having the cheek to actually test the depth of the chassis engineering using quantifiable data?

have us hung, drawn and quartered then!

It isn't up to us to determine what tyres get engineered into the development programs of anybody's new car, let alone FPV's.

I take your point that they'll be faster, grippier cars with $5k spent on them - but so will the opposition. The point is, we are testing them in the exact state in which they are presented to the customer. From that point, modify them however you like to suit yourself.

We simply wanted to find out why the FPVs and Fords were consistently slower on racetracks, and we did that fairly comprehensively. They carry no mid-corner speed.

People are focused on the mid-corner differences between the Falcon-based cars and the Holdens, but no mention of Hyundais or Focuses or Clios that are plenty faster.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, however it is NOT ridiculous to suggest something's not a performance car because it's a "few kays down" on mid-corner speed. The simple fact is that if you drive an FPV - any FPV - you'll get blown away on mid-corner pace by a Suzuki Swift.

Is this seriously what you expect from the brand?

[parawolf]

Originally Posted by mickey t

The simple fact is that if you drive an FPV - any FPV - you'll get blown away on mid-corner pace by a Suzuki Swift.

Is this seriously what you expect from the brand?

And this deserves a : moment.

How can you classify a car with a "Performance" monikier that is being out handled by that effort on four wheel transport.

Sorry to say it but I agree with Motor magazine, mickey t and Mr Sparkles on this one. Ford/FPV fell short on BYFB. FPV are great at 7/10ths however at 8.5/10ths they fall short. It not a scaleable performance function.

[4Vman]

Originally Posted by mickey t

How has MOTOR hung FPV out to dry? By having the cheek to actually test the depth of the chassis engineering using quantifiable data?

have us hung, drawn and quartered then!

It isn't up to us to determine what tyres get engineered into the development programs of anybody's new car, let alone FPV's.

I take your point that they'll be faster, grippier cars with $5k spent on them - but so will the opposition. The point is, we are testing them in the exact state in which they are presented to the customer. From that point, modify them however you like to suit yourself.

We simply wanted to find out why the FPVs and Fords were consistently slower on racetracks, and we did that fairly comprehensively. They carry no mid-corner speed.

People are focused on the mid-corner differences between the Falcon-based cars and the Holdens, but no mention of Hyundais or Focuses or Clios that are plenty faster.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, however it is NOT ridiculous to suggest something's not a performance car because it's a "few kays down" on mid-corner speed. The simple fact is that if you drive an FPV - any FPV - you'll get blown away on mid-corner pace by a Suzuki Swift.

Is this seriously what you expect from the brand?

yeah no worries, obviously im totally wrong, how stupid of me, what was i thinking?
Mid corner speed is the only criteria that determines if a car is a performance car...
Obviously FPV should shut up shop right now, thats it, all over, the message is loud and clear, if your car is a few K's slower "mid corner" its a taxi, regardless of how popular it is to the buying public...

Clearly according to Motor's measuring stick FPV dont make a "performance" car....

Im selling the BA and ill stick to the XW to XB GT's, that is unless someone tells me their "mid" corner speed wasn't as good as a GTS Monaro then im totally stuffed...

[GT0193]

Yeh 4VMAN, I agree with you, I better sell up my BA GT and go get a Suzuki Swift. At least then I will know that we I am driving along and approach a corner that I will be the first one out of that corner (with all that mid corner speed you know!)...WTF was I thinking about! :

Now I know what I have been reading when I pick up a MOTOR magazines...the likes of people like Mickey T are coming up with facts like this???

Like I said before "Own one" or "Drive one for a while" and then lets hear what you have got to say. :sm_headba

[4Vman]

Originally Posted by GT0193

Yeh 4VMAN, I agree with you, I better sell up my BA GT and go get a Suzuki Swift. At least then I will know that we I am driving along and approach a corner that I will be the first one out of that corner (with all that mid corner speed you know!)...WTF was I thinking about! :

Now I know what I have been reading when I pick up a MOTOR magazines...the likes of people like Mickey T are coming up with facts like this???

Like I said before "Own one" or "Drive one for a while" and then lets hear what you have got to say. :sm_headba

Ive seen the light folks, Im buying a 250cc GoKart, im told they're quicker "mid corner" than a V8 supercar and superbike around most tracks in Australia and much quicker than a Suzuki swift so that makes it the ultimate performance vehicle...
Ill proudly zoom around melbourne proudly knowing im driving a true performance vehicle because "its lightening quick mid corner"... How proud ill be....

[GT0193]

Originally Posted by 4Vman

Ive seen the light folks, Im buying a 250cc GoKart, im told they're quicker "mid corner" than a V8 supercar and superbike around most tracks in Australia and much quicker than a Suzuki swift so that makes it the ultimate performance vehicle...
Ill proudly zoom around melbourne proudly knowing im driving a true performance vehicle because "its lightening quick mid corner"... How proud ill be....

LOL...You crack me up man...How bout we go buy 2 (one each)...Might get a good deal. : :

[4Vman]

Originally Posted by GT0193

LOL...You crack me up man...How bout we go buy 2 (one each)...Might get a good deal. : :

Yep! im sure there will be a flood of people ditching their BA's now, in fact i saw a bloke crying on the side of the road before because a magna over took him on a corner! We might get a group deal!!

FPV might want to look into it seeing they'll have to shut up shop and stop producing Taxi's.
They've got a big factory that they'll have to find something to do with, why not put in a Go-kart production line.
hmmm, an FPV GoKart, its got a nice ring to it doesn't it...

[JPFS1]

one thing i have now discovered and am totally surprised by, is the obvious lack of logical comprehension by Mickey T on this subject. It is not uncommon for small, underpowered (compared to these big V8's) cars to corner significantly better than the large powerful cars we are talking about. To compare these totally different classes of vehicle for the obvious opportunity to bag the Ford is a low blow. It is simple physics here people, it shouldn't be surprising at all.

[russellw]

I've been a critic at various times of the Motor testing methodologies and score weighting systems but on this occasion I'm going to have to agree with the validity of the testing and the outcome provided.

If FPV are going to hang their hat on the "total performance" mantra then they should expect that the cars will be judged against that criteria in a test such as BFYB and if they aren't good enough then they should expect MT and his crew to say so.

They aren't good enough. I've resigned myself to this fact.
FPV are either living in a delusional world where they believe this is a total performance package or they are merely content to keep racking up healthy sales numbers to those who are either loyalists or smitten by the look.

It is a good looking and comfortable package that offers strong braking performance (let down by poor rubber) and reasonable value for money in the market segment.

It isn't an outright performance package as witnessed by the grip imbalance between front and rear which although improved in Mk. II is still well short of where it needs to be; the aforementioned poor rubber which is mismatched to the (already) mismatched suspension settings and the sheer lack of outright grunt which fails to overcome the weight penalty.

HSE2 is right. The philosophical debate at FPV (assuming they even bother these days) is one that has been won by the marketing department at the expense of the engineers. There is a wealth of engineering talent at FPV and they are well capable of producing a worthy rival to the red corner but they seem to continually fall short of the mark. Whether this is a result of marketing or finance influence is a question we are left to ponder.

For me it's a nice car to run around in and enjoy the sounds it makes and the 7/10th performance. I accept that it's slower than a well driven XR8 in a straight line and will lose tenths through every corner to a Clubbie but I'm a blue oval man and that's the pinnacle of the Ford range as it stands at present. I'll hope for a better effort in the future but the recent decisions at FPV don't leave me with a great deal of confidence.

Cheers
Russ

[JPFS1]

Originally Posted by russellw

The philosophical debate at FPV (assuming they even bother these days) is one that has been won by the marketing department at the expense of the engineers.
Cheers
Russ

This is not only true at FPV, but also at Ford. It is a struggle on a daily basis.

[4Vman]

Originally Posted by JEM

one thing i have now discovered and am totally surprised by, is the obvious lack of logical comprehension by Mickey T on this subject. It is not uncommon for small, underpowered (compared to these big V8's) cars to corner significantly better than the large powerful cars we are talking about. To compare these totally different classes of vehicle for the obvious opportunity to bag the Ford is a low blow. It is simple physics here people, it shouldn't be surprising at all.

JEM, we must change our way of thinking my friend, mid corner speed is the name of the game! there are no classes, sizes or catagories, only mid corner speed.
All performance cars are ranked according to how fast they go "mid corner". !
mid corner speed, mid corner speed, mid corner speed, mid corner speed ... : :

[4Vman]

Delete, double post.. too much mid corner speed....!

[Laminge]

Originally Posted by 4Vman

Delete, double post

See what happens when you have too much mid corner speed.......

[4Vman]

Originally Posted by Laminge

See what happens when you have too much mid corner speed.......

[SpoolMan]

Originally Posted by JEM

This is not only true at FPV, but also at Ford. It is a struggle on a daily basis.

its also about dollars and cents, i know we have spoken here about this before, maybe the GTP should be a all out attack on the total hardcore package, but will buyers pay the extra $15,000 plus for it.
will a bigger price tag scare prospective buyers, as FPV are starting to build a good following under there current line-up.
Buyers seem to be happy to buy the Vehicle and then do there own performance and suspension mods. i personally dont know to many that leave there FPV as a stock car.
Do FPV want to change anything, as there line up they have now is widely excepted.
Could it be that FPV are more interested in 6 cylinder turbo charging, must be more profitable for them.
If change is to happen, maybe there will need to be a huge slump in sales.
One thing FPV need to do badly, is change there poor quality oil pump gears on there Boss Motors to billet gears.
.

Originally Posted by Laminge

See what happens when you have too much mid corner speed.......

To clever Gaz :