Motor Mag July: XR8 Sprint vs XR6 Sprint vs SSV Redline vs Mustang GT

[JC]

Originally Posted by kazawaki

Not officially timed ,I have had it at trackdays and have hit it hard at times, front straight at broadford under power 3rd gear wheelies and its a short straight but still hitting 200 easy and time to brake before the first corner .I spent the first 4,500 ks in the mountains learning how to ride this bike.Considering I have done 50 plus trackdays and more trackday training and tuition than I can remember 10 at least as well as over 35 years on road bikes I can guarantee you would not leave me behind in a race A because I probably wouldn't bother as I know the outcome.This thing has 3 modes of launch control, 9 modes of traction control, quickshifter which means no clutch needed just hold throttle open and shift electronic steering dampner and a whole lot of other stuff .But hey u just keep on thinking your faster Actual times runs in the states 1/4 mile 8 seconds

You missed the point. I did not claim to be faster than your bike. There are plenty of bikes that zip off faster than I can, but vice versa is also true.

I have done 1/4 mile in 12.1, but you can't say you have done 1/4 mile in 8 seconds because you haven't. That's my point (don't claim what is possible, only what you have done)

[mcnews]

I get where you are coming from JC. But seriously, bikes are so fast. In 1999 at Ravenswood I did 11.9 on one wheel, the whole time, on a standard ZX-9R through the traps at 192. And seriously I was just playing, sat it up on the back wheel from launch then played the throttle control game through the gears at full tilt wheelstand for fun. They banned me of course, lol. Was amusing all the same. Before that I never did any run outside of a 10 when I wasn't just playing games.

Any standard sportsbike now will run 10s all day with any dreamer at the controls. It only takes skill to get in the 9s, but 10s you would be hard pressed to ride so slow to not get a 10. And they are ridiculously reliable, get stupidly good fuel economy etc. And you could do 100 ten second quarter miles without them feeling worn or worse for wear.

That all said, cars doing 11s are still mighty, mighty impressive. And cars feel faster for sure. I do 230km/h + wheelstands on motorcycles before bothering to put the front wheel down, doing 230 in the GT is borderline frightening, doing that on a motorcycle I feel as though I could make a sandwich at the same time....

Crazy as that sounds, it is how it feels, but on the flip side, like I say, a 10 second bike feels meh, a 10 second car feels totally bat **** crazy.

[Dave R]

Originally Posted by lgpking22

dont argue with adrenaline hes a holden fan boy what he will be when they shut down no idea but until then dont argue

I own an awful lot of new Fords to be a Holden fanboy. Now play nice, we don't want your new account getting banned too

Originally Posted by shaness8

Is it a workshop owner car?

their cars seem to go better than customer cars

Customer car I believe.

[arronm]

Originally Posted by mcnews

I get where you are coming from JC. But seriously, bikes are so fast. In 1999 at Ravenswood I did 11.9 on one wheel, the whole time, on a standard ZX-9R through the traps at 192. And seriously I was just playing, sat it up on the back wheel from launch then played the throttle control game through the gears at full tilt wheelstand for fun. They banned me of course, lol. Was amusing all the same. Before that I never did any run outside of a 10 when I wasn't just playing games.

Any standard sportsbike now will run 10s all day with any dreamer at the controls. It only takes skill to get in the 9s, but 10s you would be hard pressed to ride so slow to not get a 10. And they are ridiculously reliable, get stupidly good fuel economy etc. And you could do 100 ten second quarter miles without them feeling worn or worse for wear.

That all said, cars doing 11s are still mighty, mighty impressive. And cars feel faster for sure. I do 230km/h + wheelstands on motorcycles before bothering to put the front wheel down, doing 230 in the GT is borderline frightening, doing that on a motorcycle I feel as though I could make a sandwich at the same time....

Crazy as that sounds, it is how it feels, but on the flip side, like I say, a 10 second bike feels meh, a 10 second car feels totally bat **** crazy.

I was at one of the last meets at ravenswood before it closed on my 2000 ZX-9. My mate was on his gsxr1100. there was hardly anyone there. We just had run after run after run. After getting a time of 10.4 at 141mph I got bored. Probably had already done 30 passes. then started doing 400m wheel stands. I expected to get kicked out or at least spoken to but they didnt care.

Was awesome crossing the line at over 200ks on the back wheel and running in the 11 or 12s. Did that for about a dozen runs, got bored and went home.

Just looked at the slips. date was 22/10/2000. Marlows auto parts lane.


But I do agree with Trev. Some street cars are fast, but bikes a really fast.

[Giant Cranium]

Originally Posted by lgpking22

dont argue with adrenaline hes a holden fan boy what he will be when they shut down no idea but until then dont argue

yeh he aint no holden fanboy.

from memory since 09 he has had 2 fg xr6's, fg turbo, fg2 turbo, fgx turbo, whilst also owning a vf ss.

if you read his posts he is very pragmatic and all comments good and bad on both cars are from ownership perspectives of both marques

[kazawaki]

Originally Posted by JC

You missed the point. I did not claim to be faster than your bike. There are plenty of bikes that zip off faster than I can, but vice versa is also true.

I have done 1/4 mile in 12.1, but you can't say you have done 1/4 mile in 8 seconds because you haven't. That's my point (don't claim what is possible, only what you have done)

Ok here is something i have done Broadford road track 1.01 sec

[JC]

Originally Posted by kazawaki

Ok here is something i have done Broadford road track 1.01 sec

Not too shabby at all. Only a touch over 4 seconds off the lap record. If I could get that close to Wakefield's track record for a car, I'd be very happy!

Back to topic of fords vs holdens, apparently an XR6 Sprint ran a 12.99 at heathcote last night on a slippery surface. Look foward to more heathcote times from today.

http://www.fordforums.com.au/showthr...72#post5690572

[castellan]

I am interested in the times up to 1000m as that's what these cars are about, what's the point of only 0 - 100KM/H and 1/4 mile times.
Time them from 0 - 60KM/H 70 80 ect up to 260KM/H and we will see the truth in the pudding for all to see as there can be a hell of the difference after the 1/4 mile times.

[JC]

Originally Posted by castellan

I am interested in the times up to 1000m as that's what these cars are about, what's the point of only 0 - 100KM/H and 1/4 mile times.
Time them from 0 - 60KM/H 70 80 ect up to 260KM/H and we will see the truth in the pudding for all to see as there can be a hell of the difference after the 1/4 mile times.

Aren't ours limited to 240? I think HSVs are limited to 255. So not much point doing a 1000m run unless you have had the speed limiter removed.

[Rsmedley1234]

[QUOTE=castellan;5690802]I am interested in the times up to 1000m as that's what these cars are about, what's the point of only 0 - 100KM/H and 1/4 mile times.
Time them from 0 - 60KM/H 70 80 ect up to 260KM/H and we will see the truth in the pudding for all to see as there can be a hell of the difference after the 1/4 mile times

[arronm]

I think XRs are 230 and FPV 250, thats if you still have the speed limiter

[rjk74]

Originally Posted by JC

Not too shabby at all. Only a touch over 4 seconds off the lap record. If I could get that close to Wakefield's track record for a car, I'd be very happy!

Back to topic of fords vs holdens, apparently an XR6 Sprint ran a 12.99 at heathcote last night on a slippery surface. Look foward to more heathcote times from today.

http://www.fordforums.com.au/showthr...72#post5690572

The fella with the XR6 Sprint needs to buy a tatts ticket, sadly the Cortina next to him didnt fair to well hopefully she's fixable.

[JC]

Was that Whoosha in the cort?

[Dave R]

Originally Posted by Giant Cranium

yeh he aint no holden fanboy.

from memory since 09 he has had 2 fg xr6's, fg turbo, fg2 turbo, fgx turbo, whilst also owning a vf ss.

if you read his posts he is very pragmatic and all comments good and bad on both cars are from ownership perspectives of both marques

Thankyou kind sir. I’ve got an XR6 Sprint on order which should be interesting, slightly higher comp pistons & bigger turbo should gain it the top end rush (which the standard XR6T currently lacks) without being quite as doughy down low as the F6. Anyone who’s owned an F6 and a Sprint I’d be interested to hear your impressions.

Also my daily/tow car is now a VFII SS black edition, so now having had both VF varieties it's amusing watching these magazines lose their minds about the LS3 as if it's a monster. Imagine an L77 with better low end- I present you the LS3. Really not a quantum leap when stock, Holden have given them a very soft tune, perhaps because they needed to be Euro 5 compliant for 2017 (which is why we won't see any NA LS3s from HSV beyond this year, they're not compliant).

[2242100]

Originally Posted by Adrenaline

Thankyou kind sir. I’ve got an XR6 Sprint on order which should be interesting, slightly higher comp pistons & bigger turbo should gain it the top end rush (which the standard XR6T currently lacks) without being quite as doughy down low as the F6. Anyone who’s owned an F6 and a Sprint I’d be interested to hear your impressions.

Also my daily/tow car is now a VFII SS black edition, so now having had both VF varieties it's amusing watching these magazines lose their minds about the LS3 as if it's a monster. Imagine an L77 with better low end- I present you the LS3. Really not a quantum leap when stock, Holden have given them a very soft tune, perhaps because they needed to be Euro 5 compliant for 2017 (which is why we won't see any NA LS3s from HSV beyond this year, they're not compliant).

Given the Turbo Sprints result at the Heathcote drag meeting (and assuming it's not tuned) it's looking to me like they've got very good top end performance and are good for about 186 km/h at 400 metres (ie. as long as they're not heat soaked from continual back to back runs which I think often happens with Magazine testers trying to get a good launch on slippery surfaces).

[Dave R]

Originally Posted by 2242100

Given the Turbo Sprints result at the Heathcote drag meeting (and assuming it's not tuned) it's looking to me like they've got very good top end performance and are good for about 186 km/h at 400 metres (ie. as long as they're not heat soaked from continual back to back runs which I think often happens with Magazine testers trying to get a good launch on slippery surfaces).

That's actually very impressive. I'm used to getting 106-109mph out of stock XR6Ts which has still been good enough for multiple runs at 12.7. If Sprints are doing 115+ I expect we'll be seeing some very low 12s in the right conditions.

[2242100]

Originally Posted by Adrenaline

That's actually very impressive. I'm used to getting 106-109mph out of stock XR6Ts which has still been good enough for multiple runs at 12.7. If Sprints are doing 115+ I expect we'll be seeing some very low 12s in the right conditions.

They should get low 12's but I'm thinking they might be a bit limited in very high grip situations in 1st gear compared to the old Turbo's and F6's that get their full overboost in 1st (vs a 550 Nm limit for the Sprint).

But they're obviously faster after 1st gear and more often than not the XR6 T's and F6's can't fully use all their 1st gear grunt in the real world anyway.
According to Ford the Turbo Sprint gets the highest overboost in 2nd and 3rd gears and I guess that's really where it's most useful in everyday situations.

[castellan]

Originally Posted by JC

Aren't ours limited to 240? I think HSVs are limited to 255. So not much point doing a 1000m run unless you have had the speed limiter removed.

Such test, like they do in Germany are called full test, no matter what and it just points out that at the point of the speed limiter cutting in that she points this out as a fact for all to see.

I don't see why I should put good money down on a mag to have a half baked test.

Remember the old EB Falcon test or XR6 vs XR8 people believed that the XR6 was just as fast as the XR8 but the fact is that past the 400m the XR8 hosed off the XR6.
So you had people coming up to me with my XR8 and pointing out to me that did you know that the XR6 is just as fast as the XR8, as if I was a fool for getting the V8 and I had to point out that they were in fact just a mislead moron due to the backward test of hopeless 3rd rate mags they read.

The XR6 was a horror harsh engine to drive hard and the XR8 engine was smooth and much better to drive, not to mention that the XR6 engine freed up in about 2,000KM but the XR8 engine took about 10,000KM to free up, not to mention the tricks you can do to make it perform better.

I an sick of half baked motoring test, you know they will say stupid things about a car and not point out what can be done to correct such a problem, like simple advise that a bit more neg camber will fix such a problem of understeer and such like info.

[Tray]

Originally Posted by castellan

Such test, like they do in Germany are called full test, no matter what and it just points out that at the point of the speed limiter cutting in that she points this out as a fact for all to see.

I don't see why I should put good money down on a mag to have a half baked test.

Remember the old EB Falcon test or XR6 vs XR8 people believed that the XR6 was just as fast as the XR8 but the fact is that past the 400m the XR8 hosed off the XR6.
So you had people coming up to me with my XR8 and pointing out to me that did you know that the XR6 is just as fast as the XR8, as if I was a fool for getting the V8 and I had to point out that they were in fact just a mislead moron due to the backward test of hopeless 3rd rate mags they read.

The XR6 was a horror harsh engine to drive hard and the XR8 engine was smooth and much better to drive, not to mention that the XR6 engine freed up in about 2,000KM but the XR8 engine took about 10,000KM to free up, not to mention the tricks you can do to make it perform better.

I an sick of half baked motoring test, you know they will say stupid things about a car and not point out what can be done to correct such a problem, like simple advise that a bit more neg camber will fix such a problem of understeer and such like info.

do you know the max speed of an EB 6 and 8? I actually reckon that on mods they'd both work on par $ for $ kW for kW... Until the 8 adds more cubes

[mik]

Originally Posted by arronm

The journos that drag the cars have at least some experience.

If they cant get the cars off the line the average punter has no chance.

i dont think experience always comes into it , skill is what comes into it , i have seen uncoordinated blokes driving trucks for 30 odd years that still cant change gears properly to this day .

[toohey myster]

Got to love the cover fast fords tackle stonking redline ls3 surely they jest. Interesting to see the times from the mustang, motor have run the mustang vs the redline on a couple of occasions and the redline ran a long last now its faster.

[arronm]

Originally Posted by mik

i dont think experience always comes into it , skill is what comes into it , i have seen uncoordinated blokes driving trucks for 30 odd years that still cant change gears properly to this day .

Skill comes from experience. Usually the more you do something the better you become at it. It takes along time to learn to be able to drive or ride fast well. Most people think they can, but it's the first split second decision that seperates the two

[mcnews]

Originally Posted by mik

i dont think experience always comes into it , skill is what comes into it , i have seen uncoordinated blokes driving trucks for 30 odd years that still cant change gears properly to this day .

I know a few of the car journos, as I am a bike journo. And I can tell you any of those guys with the experience they have are probably in the top 1 percentile of driver skill, and of course when it comes to experience, well it is even more exclusive.

If any of you blokes think these guys are hopeless then get your hand off it.

I have done a few FPV drive days (the occasion when I myself bought my 3 new FPVs) when new FPV owners hit the track for the first time, and to be honest the skill level is borderline frightening. I am generally agog at how crap most of the buyers of our cars are at driving.

So sorry, when I see, the abuse car journos get from people that have NFI, I say question yourself first. I reckon the worst car journo in existence would run rings around 99 per cent of the people on this forum, in any test, on any track, in any conditions. Well from what I have seen from FPV drive days that's my two cents.

[castellan]

Originally Posted by mcnews

I know a few of the car journos, as I am a bike journo. And I can tell you any of those guys with the experience they have are probably in the top 1 percentile of driver skill, and of course when it comes to experience, well it is even more exclusive.

If any of you blokes think these guys are hopeless then get your hand off it.

I have done a few FPV drive days (the occasion when I myself bought my 3 new FPVs) when new FPV owners hit the track for the first time, and to be honest the skill level is borderline frightening. I am generally agog at how crap most of the buyers of our cars are at driving.

So sorry, when I see, the abuse car journos get from people that have NFI, I say question yourself first. I reckon the worst car journo in existence would run rings around 99 per cent of the people on this forum, in any test, on any track, in any conditions. Well from what I have seen from FPV drive days that's my two cents.

I would say you are correct as I have seen them people on such drive days and was totally shocked at how lacking there skill was. (just totally hopeless)

I my self and a few mates I know do bag the hell out of some of the crap we have read or seen on TV and we have a big laugh about such trash or get very angered over such crap.

Sure a test maybe aimed at attracting a type of audience who have bugger all interest truly in cars at all.

I my self like to know everything completely and sure most people are not that interested in looking into such as I am, I may be some what like Lt Columbo was once accused of in the story of candidate for crime, I'd even look for faults in the old Testament.
But that's how it goes when your into such investergation of things, it's every detail must be accounted for and sure that does bug some people.

[Windsor220]

Journos would definitely be skilled. Getting cars off the line though is something that can be difficult to even the best driver. Look at professional race car drivers that do it regularly. They still stuff it up from time to time. Journos also drive many different models so probably just use a generic technique instead of one that suits the car they are driving.

[2242100]

Originally Posted by Windsor220

Journos would definitely be skilled. Getting cars off the line though is something that can be difficult to even the best driver. Look at professional race car drivers that do it regularly. They still stuff it up from time to time. Journos also drive many different models so probably just use a generic technique instead of one that suits the car they are driving.

There are some very skilled Journo drivers and I believe most are good drivers, but I think the main problem with the blown Fords is that unless there is a very high grip surface (which is usually not the case) or a fair bit of load in the back of the car, no driver can make use of the 1st gear grunt that these cars have.

In the case of the XR8 Sprint tested by Motor in the June issue, they tested the Sprint and the Clubsport R8 LSA with only around a 1/4 tank fuel load.

To the Clubsport's credit it coped and gave a great (4.48 and 12.55) result, but the Ford could only manage a 5.07/13.14 result. They just couldn't put the power down and although they suggested hardened tyres as a possible cause, I think (that on anything other than a very high grip surface) running that car with only a 1/4 fuel load would pretty much be a recipe for failure, regardless of how good the driver is.

On the other hand a full tank and some weight in the boot should make a big difference. Sure as I've mentioned in earlier posts, weight will reduce best potential performance, but if you look at calculators, it seems not by very much (apparently around 1 tenth 1/4 time for every 45 kg's with cars around this weight and power, according to the Wallace Racing 1/4 mile calculator).
And it's quite easy to lose up to 1/2 a second from wheelspin at the start under poor conditions, which will logically mean a 1/2 second loss to 100 and close to that amount over the 1/4. However on the other hand (going by the Wallace calculations), you could apparently add around 180 kg's or more before the car would lose that amount of time from the load added to the back of the car (which I'd say would no doubt make a no wheelspin launch possible).

Of course it's hardly practical to add that much, but I'm thinking that something like a full tank and say around 20 kg's in the boot (total 60 kg increase and only a potential 1.3 tenth 1/4 time loss) might have made a big difference and yielder a much better actual real world result for the XR8 in the conditions that Motor had.

I've found that a 60 kg load variation makes a very big difference to the way my stock XR6 T can launch.

I know that Motor has had concerns that adding weight can open up a can of worms (how do they decide how much weight to add for each car?) but it would have been be good if they had at least tested the Ford with a full tank and also tested both cars with 3 passengers on board.

Under those conditions I suspect both the XR8 and the HSV would have been much closer and readers would be better informed.

[arronm]

Moral of the story. Only race with a full tank and fresh tyres. All other times pretend to be tuning the radio. Oh and definitely make sure overboost is working. We don't want to have to come up with 3 excuses

[shaness8]

Get the sprints at Calder cut a 1.8 60ft low 12's should be achievable on street tyres

I got a 1.85 60ft on 25k Dunlops at 35 psi with no wheel spin

They prep the track and tyres stick to the surface unlike Heathcote

[Iggle Piggle]

Used to wonder what people were on about when they would say a Commodore or HSV won a drag race due to its "better sorted chassis" - I could see how that might play a big part in lapping a track or punting along a good twisty road, but for straight line thought it was more the "better package" argument (as in suspension and tyres).

So guess all that stuff Holden did chasing better weight distribution, like moving the battery to the boot, pays off in a straight line too...and is of even more advantage in real world conditions with limited traction and whatever amount of fuel and load in the boot.

[2242100]

Originally Posted by arronm

Moral of the story. Only race with a full tank and fresh tyres. All other times pretend to be tuning the radio. Oh and definitely make sure overboost is working. We don't want to have to come up with 3 excuses

As I said, it's to the HSV's credit that it could handle the conditions, and by contrast the Falcon couldn't, that's clear for all to see. There are no excuses, the HSV was simply much better at getting the power down on the same track at the same time.
But some people blame the journo's driving ability for the problem, and I'm sure that's not really the issue.

But also, can the blown Fords really do better with a load on board as I've been suggesting? Well I think the following 4.56 second 0-100 km/h time that my stock untuned XR6 T Auto achieved certainly points towards that, and it was achieved with standard tyres and a full fuel load, plus some weight in the boot, under less power friendly air conditions than Motor had.

0-10.................0.28 sec...............0.46 metres
0-20.................0.64.....................1.97
0-30.................1.03.....................4.71
0-40.................1.41.....................8.41
0-50.................1.81....................13.38
0-60.................2.24....................20.03

0-70.................2.77....................29.52
0-80.................3.38....................42.13
0-90.................3.96....................55.89
0-100 km/h.......4.56 seconds........71.67 metres

That was just over 1/2 a second better than Motors XR8 Sprint time. However if my car only had the 1/4 fuel load that they had, I'm sure that it couldn't have got anywhere near the 4.56 time, unless of course it was on an extremely high grip surface.

So to sum up, the Holden was clearly better, it coped and the XR8 couldn't under the test conditions.
But cars generally spend most of their time with more than a 1/4 fuel load on board and under these conditions there is reason to believe that the Sprint and HSV should be closer.
And the journo's driving ability isn't the problem.