VE HSV's 0-100km/h in less than 5 seconds!

[Jake F6]

From article: http://www.theage.com.au/news/news/h...012460300.html


Mellor's GoAuto also had figures of 4.96 for the manual Clubsport R8...

This seems to put FPV's GT a good 1 second behind the new VE clubsport.
Even the F6 is more than half a second off the pace...

All this and HSV still has the 7.0L Corvette engine up their sleeve
in case of emergencies!!!

Will FPV be able to come close to matching, let alone beating these times?
Has FPV got something up their sleeve for BF MkII or will we have to wait
until the all new Falcon in 2008??? By this time the HSV 7.0 will probably
be running 4.5 seconds 0-100km/h AAARRGGGHH !!!!

[Kenster]

and all that speed and where the fuel efficent while the current jap verision WRX sti can go 0-100km in 3.5second

[JPFS1]

How about we wait and see what they do in the real world on the same day in the same conditions as the FPV's before believing what the HSV spin doctors say?

[Bucket]

Once again, the media are going off the figures from HSV's media release...

[NA XR6]

Believe it when i see it from someone other than HSV

[Quicklier]

Those media releases are pretty far fetched.

I'm thinking about taking a VE for a spin on the weekend (what with all the hype) and see if I can match the times

Actually, I'll probably only drive the Berlina (best looking package in my opinion), I doubt they'll have a V8 model avail :(

[drcook]

Originally Posted by Kenter

the current jap verision WRX sti can go 0-100km in 3.5second

um, i think id like to see some facts about this. doesnt sound quite right to me...

also i think, like already said, i will wait till motor or wheels can compare with fpv on the same day. hsv are famous for their bu!!*****.

[Jake F6]

Intersting info about the claimed new 307kW:

The 307kW is a DIN measurement. The 297 is/was SAE or ECE measurement. 297kW ECE is actually 305kW DIN. I don't think the HSV has gained 10kW I think it's more like 1kw, but by quoting the DIN (which is perfectly acceptable) they are able to legitimately quote 307kW.
From memory there was this argumet a few years back with FPV who were quoting 290kW DIN which was more like 283kW ECE for their GT.

[Gadgetman]

There wont be any mechanical changes to BF MkII FPV. Only the introduction of 2 luxury/performance models known as Force 6 and Force 8. Both will only be available in 6 speed autos only

[JPFS1]

FPV will have what seems to be a pretty congested lineup with these new models also?

It will be interesting to see where they sit..

Force6 - higher output/performance version of the Typhoon but sits lower than GTP in terms of pricing?

Force8 - higher output/performance of GT but sits above everything?

Interesting...

[AWD Chaser]

Yeah - i'll wait till the REAL figures come out. Any way look at the following:

HSV GTS - V8 6.0L 307Kw 550Nm
FPV GT - V8 5.4L 290Kw 520Nm
FPV F6 - I6 4.0L 270Kw 550Nm

What I'm saying is that if the FPV range was to increase their power by 0.5%, it would be see ya later VE...

[merlin]

Couldn't you have jost posted this in one of the other 3 HSV threads already in here rather than starting another VE thread! I'm waiting for the back to back HSV vs FPV magazine figures rather than HSV's.

[Jake F6]

Originally Posted by JEM

FPV will have what seems to be a pretty congested lineup with these new models also?

It will be interesting to see where they sit..

Force6 - higher output/performance version of the Typhoon but sits lower than GTP in terms of pricing?

Force8 - higher output/performance of GT but sits above everything?

Interesting...

That is VERY intersting!

Maybe the new FPV BFII lineup will be something like:

TIER1:

Typhoon 270kw
GT 290kw


TIER2:

Force 6 305kw
Force 8 335kw

The GTP may get the chop?

[Falcon Freak]

Originally Posted by Bucket

Once again, the media are going off the figures from HSV's media release...

Funny that. Also 'funny' is that there has been no public outcry when HSV vehicles push the performance envelope to new extremes. Yet when Ford pushed the perfomance envelope with the release of the F6 model in 2004, there were a number of people who criticised Ford and wanted to ban such powerful cars.

FF

[BlueRaven]

Originally Posted by Falcon Freak

Funny that. Also 'funny' is that there has been no public outcry when HSV vehicles push the performance envelope to new extremes. Yet when Ford pushed the perfomance envelope with the release of the F6 model in 2004, there were a number of people who criticised Ford and wanted to ban such powerful cars.

FF

Oh it'll come... don't you worry about that.

[ADSXR8]

This is claimed by HSV.

Quoted from article

"Acceleration to 100km/h is now achieved in less than five seconds, according to HSV’s engineering boss John Clark. But that’s only in the six-speed manual, which gets a slightly shorter final drive ratio (so the engine is revving harder and faster at any given speed) compared to the automatic models.It reaches the 100km/h mark in a claimed 4.96 seconds."

Dont forget HSV also claimed a manual GTO did a 4.99 0-100 and 13.2 quarter. Subsequently, in this years PCOTY, the GTO did a 6.4 and 14.3something.

[Kenster]

Originally Posted by drcook

um, i think id like to see some facts about this. doesnt sound quite right to me...

also i think, like already said, i will wait till motor or wheels can compare with fpv on the same day. hsv are famous for their bu!!*****.

that true well im comparing the actually build verision than the Aust verision of sti.

I havent heared any bad news much about BF FPV or the basic falcon still im going to see if i could drag a friend along into test driving the car very soon to see how it goes compare to the current falcon

[HSE2]

Originally Posted by BLACK XR6-VCT

That is VERY intersting!

Maybe the new FPV BFII lineup will be something like:

TIER1:

Typhoon 270kw
GT 290kw


TIER2:

Force 6 305kw
Force 8 335kw

The GTP may get the chop?

The GT-P isn't going anywhere and don’t expect any power increase. It’s not impossible as companies lie to dealerships all the time but the info coming out of FPV point to no mechanical changes for BF2.

Force 6 and Force 8 are FPVs answer to the Senator. If you think luxury Fairmont Ghias with attitude you will be getting close and not be disappointed. Anything more and I would say buy Kleenex shares. I have no idea why they chose Force for the name but they have and it appears to have nothing to do with engine spec.

[JPFS1]

Originally Posted by HSE2

The GT-P isn't going anywhere and don’t expect any power increase. It’s not impossible as companies lie to dealerships all the time but the info coming out of FPV point to no mechanical changes for BF2.

Force 6 and Force 8 are FPVs answer to the Senator. If you think luxury Fairmont Ghias with attitude you will be getting close and not be disappointed. Anything more and I would say buy Kleenex shares. I have no idea why they chose Force for the name but they have and it appears to have nothing to do with engine spec.

Hi Ian

Interesting choice of words from FPV that's for sure. Maybe the intention of living up to the name will come in time....

[WASP]

Originally Posted by HSE2

I have no idea why they chose Force for the name but they have and it appears to have nothing to do with engine spec.

Do you know that for a fact Ian? I'm not doubting you my friend, but I've heard, well lets just say some 'conflicting' reports.

[HSE2]

Originally Posted by CDAA

Do you know that for a fact Ian? I'm not doubting you my friend, but I've heard, well lets just say some 'conflicting' reports.

No I certainly don't know that for a fact but I am unsure what can be posted on this subject.

I guess it only becomes fact after the 26th of October but I do know why gadget man has said what he has.

There is always the chance that dealerships are only being told what they need to know but to me it looks like the same standard as was used in BA 2 and BF and neither of them were wrong so although there is some hope I won't hold my breath.

The ordering information contains wording to the effect BOSS 290 and F6 270. The extreme optimist in me would say perhaps that’s misleading on purpose to allow for a surprise, in that it allows dealership stock allocation to be ordered without giving the game away, but it is something they haven’t tried in the past. No I think the best policy with FPV is to think negatively then be completely over come that the Kleenex shares are used to good effect on a different part of the anatomy.

[HSE2]

Originally Posted by JEM

Hi Ian

Interesting choice of words from FPV that's for sure. Maybe the intention of living up to the name will come in time....

Well I had another choice word other then interesting. MRC is said to have cost HSV 4.5 million which is astonishing when you think of the volume they are aimed at. (Here comes the global attack)

One reason why the HSV has dropped the six piston callipers is DCS calibration. Would you be really surprised to learn all FPV cars will have 19 inch wheel from Oct 26th?

At the time I didn't think to check the GT-Ps brake package.

Just to keep these comments somewhere near the topic, don't under estimate the value of rear rubber. FPV had some interesting views about what increasing the rear tread width would do for them back in 2002.

[JPFS1]

Originally Posted by HSE2

Well I had another choice word other then interesting. MRC is said to have cost HSV 4.5 million which is astonishing when you think of the volume they are aimed at. (Here comes the global attack)

One reason why the HSV has dropped the six piston callipers is DCS calibration. Would you be really surprised to learn all FPV cars will have 19 inch wheel from Oct 26th?

At the time I didn't think to check the GT-Ps brake package.

Just to keep these comments somewhere near the topic, don't under estimate the value of rear rubber. FPV had some interesting views about what increasing the rear tread width would do for them back in 2002.

Yes i understand exactly what you are saying.

The rear tread contributes so much to many performance facets of the performance car. Increasing to a wider tyre has a few trade-offs, but the benefits it will bring many more positives that will totally mitigate the negatives. If FPV do indeed increase rear tread significantly, then we can expect some great improvements in performance times, track capability and even braking performance.

To answer your question as to whether i'd be surprised, the answer is no, considering 19's are going to be standard on XR8's come Orion.

On the subject of HSV's MRC and the 4.5mil development costs... It doesn't seem excessive, afterall they were working on it for several years. I am beginning to question the real merit in the system though and it's benefit over a well sorted convential setup that would cost far less to maintain.

I do understand that only a handful of manufacturer's have implemented this technology, but it seems a little on the gimmick side to me, much like many older adjustable suspension setups that have been around for a devade or more now. Ofcourse i could be totally wrong on that subject.

[Wezza]

^^
Gimmicks like a start button?

[AWD Chaser]

Originally Posted by Falcon Freak

Funny that. Also 'funny' is that there has been no public outcry when HSV vehicles push the performance envelope to new extremes. Yet when Ford pushed the perfomance envelope with the release of the F6 model in 2004, there were a number of people who criticised Ford and wanted to ban such powerful cars.

FF

Yes, but now there are laws that ban younger drivers from driving these vehicles...

[HSE2]

Originally Posted by JEM

On the subject of HSV's MRC and the 4.5mil development costs... It doesn't seem excessive, afterall they were working on it for several years. I am beginning to question the real merit in the system though and it's benefit over a well sorted convential setup that would cost far less to maintain.

I do understand that only a handful of manufacturer's have implemented this technology, but it seems a little on the gimmick side to me, much like many older adjustable suspension setups that have been around for a devade or more now. Ofcourse i could be totally wrong on that subject.

This is a pet subject of mine because I am a big fan of achieving results without compromise which essentially that’s what a sports suspension is.

In 2002 I was very keen to sound out FPV to see if they might be thinking along these lines. No such luck as they genuinely didn't seem to know what active suspension was.

What it is, isn't MRC as that is basically a semi active suspension. I am yet to read why it has cost so much as Delphi would have already had the "guts" but there would have been calibration issues for HSV use providing there is no exclusive HSV features built into it.

The very best adaptive suspension is brilliant; it basically had to be banned from F1 because it was so good. In my opinion the best system is probably that of Citroen but that is the real deal. HSV are basically using adaptive dampers with dumb springs (steel) Fully adaptive systems utilise active springs which are either pneumatic or hydraulic which work with the dampers. Conventional spring tend to work against. Recently manufacturers have taken advantage of such spring medium to raise the front of the car on owner request to negotiate gutters or to lower the car at high speed for greater stability. For a single minded purpose conventional systems can be used. If you wanted a track car you could build a better car. Problem is you would have either another car or a swap out suspension to make it cope with the road because there is no room for compromise. It’s basically an evolution of engine mapping and transmission mapping but for the suspension well thats the theory anyway.

The first applications for public use were exactly that, a gimmick. The chooser settings provided no real benefit and the systems ability to react was questionable. Over time the electronics have caught up to the point where the user can detect a difference and the system can provide real world performance gains.

I honestly haven't read about the HSV system but I suspect they have the GTS wrong for the buyer they are aiming at. At the risk of sounding stupid and pre emptive I suspect the verdict on the system will be firmly on the side of the senator settings. The track setting using MRC will need to be brilliant because I don’t think HSV would have used active stabilizer bars. If you don’t there is very little room for compromise. It most likely will be seen as being too stiff for anything other then track work. The "real GTS" well that might have been ok but this R8 version I think will appeal to a different person that would appreciate the option of performance over Track for club days while enjoying extra comfort during the week.

I will be happy to be proven wrong and like I said I have no inside knowledge other then what has happened to other manufacturers.

[JPFS1]

Originally Posted by Wezza

^^
Gimmicks like a start button?

no nothing like a starter button.

I'm not doubting the effectiveness of MRC as it is an evolution of adjustable suspension which can be a good thing. What i am questioning is the advantages against cost....

[HSE2]

Originally Posted by JEM

no nothing like a starter button.

I'm not doubting the effectiveness of MRC as it is an evolution of adjustable suspension which can be a good thing. What i am questioning is the advantages against cost....

Would have to be a huge issue. This outlay by HSV is meant to be its biggest ever. According to John the LS1 nearly broke HSV because they hadn't seen a return from the investment on the last of the 5 litres.

If you look at the HSV structure there seems little point in buying the R8. The SSV offers more and the real advantage in the HSV range is MRC and that’s where the focus will concentrate. I assume that is

The problem they have and the thing that sounds strange to me is the assumption people paying 80k are looking for a track option. To convince people of its worth you are going to have to demonstrate the difference and the advantage of one setting over another. If track is so hard it is useless on anything other then a controlled surface they might be in trouble.

If its not they will be ok and people should see the benefit and but the GTS. I am sceptical that this is one reason why the GTS name has been returned. If in doubt offer them a desirable badge. What has more desire then GTS on the HSV side? Not much

[WASP]

Originally Posted by JEM

On the subject of HSV's MRC and the 4.5mil development costs... It doesn't seem excessive, afterall they were working on it for several years. I am beginning to question the real merit in the system though and it's benefit over a well sorted convential setup that would cost far less to maintain.

I do understand that only a handful of manufacturer's have implemented this technology, but it seems a little on the gimmick side to me, much like many older adjustable suspension setups that have been around for a devade or more now. Ofcourse i could be totally wrong on that subject.

I think here is your answer JEM.
Taken from Goauto a comment from HSV:

We want to go after buyers that purchase their car just for the brand snobbery

It's about have a point of difference that you can leverage, regardless of performance benefits. As long as there is seen to be some benefit to the consumer the ROI should be there from a marketing i.e. 'gimmic' stand point.

[HSE2]

Some information - from the net- some from wheels.

The engine seems better then the 10ks and 20nm claimed with mid range feeling about the same as the F6

The wide rear rubber allows for more agressive launch revs. HSV have stopped short of implimenting launch control - just yet.