Gen F HSV GTS Review, 0-100 in 4.4s

[Rodge]

Normally i'd agree with you Trev and from personal experience we both know our cars don't really start getting seriously affected by air until 200 k.p.h. plus so theoretically it shouldn't be any different for the GTS but two different magazines have done the testing showing two very similar results...

The German's spend big money on wind tunnell testing / aerodynamic efficiency and stability testing at German autobahn speeds and you can see it paying big dividends in the 0-200 speeds compared too the GTS and Jaguar XFR-S. Also noticed this in my weekend with the BMW 750i M Sport...rock solid and uncannily stable at 200 k.p.h. (private road testing of course ).

[fgpsi]

Why on earth would they test the manual vs 3 autos ?

[Blue Roo]

I think you could be on the money there Rodge. As you've said the GTS's Aerodynamics are awful, compared to the E63S. It's like comparing a brick to a bullet.

[1TUFFUTE]

Anyone have numbers for the American cars with this engine? That should show weather it's aero or the engine not designed for higher speeds?

And it's funny how you'd expect all these forced induction cars to go slower in Aussie summer heat.....yet the GTS was the only one to go slower(80-120 acceleration times) then the nz cool air times. All the others either matched or beat there times in hotter climate

[Bent8]

Originally Posted by Rodge

I dunno Trev, I think we might have uncovered a little flaw in the GTS's armour. It seems from an aerodynamic perspective the GTS stops a heck of a lot of air because I just dug out Wheels September 2013 testing where they compared the GTS with the E63S

Quarter Mile
E63S 12.2 seconds @ 195 K.p.h.
GTS 12.8 @ 183 k.p.h.

0-200 k.p.h.
E63 12.7
GTS 15.1

Another 2.3 seconds to put on another 17 k.p.h.

This was also a manual so it would appear there's definitly a gear change required somewhere in the late 180 - late 190 k.p.h. range but aside from that it appears the GTS has pretty awful aerodynamics.

The GTS manual can hit 235kph at the top of 4th gear (observe below)

88/132/181/235/294/374

That's longer gearing than the Merc's 7-speed auto which tops out at 218kph in 4th so I'd blame the slow manual shifts for those 0-200kph times.

[smoo]

Originally Posted by 1TUFFUTE

And it's funny how you'd expect all these forced induction cars to go slower in Aussie summer heat.....yet the GTS was the only one to go slower(80-120 acceleration times) then the nz cool air times. All the others either matched or beat there times in hotter climate

I don't believe it has anything to do with the climate and forced induction, when I was a young teen I'd buy Wheels, Motor and NZ Autocar and the kiwi rag generally ran quicker times.

As for the GTS 188 to 200 geez I'm pretty sure the 260kw Caprice rental I had did it quicker. Maybe a journo from wheels was driving it

http://youtube.com/watch?v=Jqyf1IDH_5Q

[XR Martin]

At 180kmh there is huge amount of wind resistance, so when you back off the throttle at that speed to change into 4th you will lose quite a bit of momentum.
I imagine most people would also take it easy going from the top of third into forth, you wouldnt want to hit second accidently...

[Benny]

If I was doing the test I would have flat shifted 3rd to 4th.

[gaz084]

I had a look at one of these at auto tech last week...impressive car to say the least 390mm rotors on the front 363 on the back,but the best part of it was the console display. It had whole range of maps and gauges,boost,suspension settings electronically controlled like the tein units,g-force reader with a display of the car showing where the g-forces are present. And what you reach wether it be at the track or drag racing.

It also had an accurate reading on what power and tourqe was at what rpm and a maximum overal wich was 400rwkw as it was just tuned 0-400 timer and a whole bunch of other stuff....no more need for gauges mounted on the dash this thing had it all.

[timetaker]

Originally Posted by XR6 Martin

GTS is the only manual too, so there was probably a gear change just before 200kmh

In the Mag.why does it say that the GTS is a 6 speed automatic in the description specs?

[tezxr8man]

Originally Posted by Rodge

Never had a reason to doubt their times before and they've been around for a heck of a long time...one of the few mags that test properly with vbox timing gear. Its colder here and that could easily account for 0.25 seconds in itself.

Interestingly in the January 2014 edition they beat Audi's factory stated time for the RS6, (Audi claim 3.9 seconds for their AWD RS6) also by 0.25 seconds, the best they got was a 3.65 seconds and they specially mentioned the cooler dry weather so that blows any conspiracy theory out the window in my opinion. Worth noting that in repeated subsequent testing the best they got from the RS6 was 3.8 seconds so there's what you can get as a one-off in ideal cool dry conditioons and what's repeatable in average conditions is something slightly different.

what were their times for the R-Spec??

[Rodge]

Originally Posted by tezxr8man

what were their times for the R-Spec??

Only 10 made their way across the Tasman and all were sold really quick so to the best of my knowledge N.Z. Autocar never got a chance to test the R Spec.

Originally Posted by 1TUFFUTE

Anyone have numbers for the American cars with this engine? That should show weather it's aero or the engine not designed for higher speeds?

And it's funny how you'd expect all these forced induction cars to go slower in Aussie summer heat.....yet the GTS was the only one to go slower(80-120 acceleration times) then the nz cool air times. All the others either matched or beat there times in hotter climate

Yeah I noticed that too mate and find that one difficult to figure out ? especially the 80-120 time for the BMW M5 which at under 2.00 seconds by the Aussie mag seems like a pretty remarkable claim
Don't get me wrong, I reckon the M5 is a fantastic bit of kit and probably what I'd pick out of that lot if money was no object. OTOH, any way you slice and dice this thing the GTS has the performance to match the best of the Euro's and probably the brakes and handling too....

N.Z. Autocar tests data for FPV's / Fords.

80 - 120 kph
1.97 BMW M5
2.19 Audi RS6
2.31 Merc E63S
2.51 FPV GT
2.51 Jag XFR-S
2.60 HSV GTS
2.64 FPV F6
2.88 Ford G6ET

[1TUFFUTE]

Originally Posted by Rodge

Only 10 made their way across the Tasman and all were sold really quick so to the best of my knowledge N.Z. Autocar never got a chance to test the R Spec.




Yeah I noticed that too mate and find that one difficult to figure out ? especially the 80-120 time for the BMW M5 which at under 2.00 seconds by the Aussie mag seems like a pretty remarkable claim
Don't get me wrong, I reckon the M5 is a fantastic bit of kit and probably what I'd pick out of that lot if money was no object. OTOH, any way you slice and dice this thing the GTS has the performance to match the best of the Euro's and probably the brakes and handling too....

N.Z. Autocar tests data for FPV's / Fords.

Wheels or motor(forget which one) have a 2.61 for a g6et 80-120.
Thought u may remember that....it was in a thread years ago when I think you were shopping for g6et or F6. (I read all the threads on G6eT)

[1TUFFUTE]

Originally Posted by smoo

I don't believe it has anything to do with the climate and forced induction, when I was a young teen I'd buy Wheels, Motor and NZ Autocar and the kiwi rag generally ran quicker times.

As for the GTS 188 to 200 geez I'm pretty sure the 260kw Caprice rental I had did it quicker. Maybe a journo from wheels was driving it

http://youtube.com/watch?v=Jqyf1IDH_5Q

If your right...then everything I ever read/thought about forced induction, cool air,cai,intercoolers and so on is plain wrong
And nz is notoriously cooler then Australia, so I'd suggest that's why since you've been a kid cars have been quicker over there!

[XR Martin]

80-120kmh test isnt floor the throttle at 80kmh and time it until it gets to 120.
Its floor it at 70 or less, wait until it hits 80kmh then start the stopwatch.

[Rodge]

Originally Posted by 1TUFFUTE

Wheels or motor(forget which one) have a 2.61 for a g6et 80-120.
Thought u may remember that....it was in a thread years ago when I think you were shopping for g6et or F6. (I read all the threads on G6eT)

No question about it mate, the turbo falcon's offer outrageously good bang for buck

[Rodge]

Originally Posted by XR6 Martin

80-120kmh test isnt floor the throttle at 80kmh and time it until it gets to 120.
Its floor it at 70 or less, wait until it hits 80kmh then start the stopwatch.

Maybe N.Z. Autocar test differently, (just stomp on the accelerator at 80 k.p.h.), that might explain their slightly slower times than the Aussie testing.
I can't think of any other reason why N.Z. testing for rolling acceleration would be slower than the Motor magazine testing especailly seeing as we do get a lot cooler weather. e.g. Hight of summer today and it was fine but only 24 degrees in Auckland.

[40RDT]

Originally Posted by Rodge

Only 10 made their way across the Tasman and all were sold really quick so to the best of my knowledge N.Z. Autocar never got a chance to test the R Spec.




Yeah I noticed that too mate and find that one difficult to figure out ? especially the 80-120 time for the BMW M5 which at under 2.00 seconds by the Aussie mag seems like a pretty remarkable claim
Don't get me wrong, I reckon the M5 is a fantastic bit of kit and probably what I'd pick out of that lot if money was no object. OTOH, any way you slice and dice this thing the GTS has the performance to match the best of the Euro's and probably the brakes and handling too....

N.Z. Autocar tests data for FPV's / Fords.

I would have loved to see the GTS go head to head with the euro's in the comparison around a track aswell, im pretty sure the GTS already beat an AMG E63S few months back. Overall the GTS seems like very good value considering all the other cars are well over twice the price.

[smoo]

Originally Posted by 1TUFFUTE

If your right...then everything I ever read/thought about forced induction, cool air,cai,intercoolers and so on is plain wrong
And nz is notoriously cooler then Australia, so I'd suggest that's why since you've been a kid cars have been quicker over there!

Although it was getting off topic, I was referring to where the Kiwi mag would (generally) run quicker times than Motor on all types of vehicles, hence why I don't believe their time difference have anything to do with FI or the weather - for 4-5 months of the year Vic/NSW is in no way significantly hotter than where NZ Autocar is based anyway. Apart from the NZ VF GTS time being an auto and the Motor a manual, maybe the difference did come down to climate. But on all the others test equipment, techniques/methods, road surface and drivers most likely play a bigger part than a few degrees in temp.

[1TUFFUTE]

Originally Posted by smoo

Although it was getting off topic, I was referring to where the Kiwi mag would (generally) run quicker times than Motor on all types of vehicles, hence why I don't believe their time difference have anything to do with FI or the weather - for 4-5 months of the year Vic/NSW is in no way significantly hotter than where NZ Autocar is based anyway. Apart from the NZ VF GTS time being an auto and the Motor a manual, maybe the difference did come down to climate. But on all the others test equipment, techniques/methods, road surface and drivers most likely play a bigger part than a few degrees in temp.

Oh I see, my bad!
Also I suppose....temp effects more then just the air going in the front.....it effects the tyres, track, the air and so on. But your right, crappy technique or a bad prepped drag strip are more likely to effect times the most!

[Cobra]

Holy smokes that Audi is quick! What an an absolute jet! Imagine that engine in a 500kg lighter body, like an R8 for example. It'd be bye bye Nissan GTR/911 Turbo!

[Tough Ford]

Lets not forget minus our redicioulos taxes these E63's and so on would probably come in around $120-$140k tops, and if we had tuners who could really open these things up, 10's and low 2's in the 80-120 comparo like gts would be a snack, I know what I would get. Lets forget factory times we know what we really want.
Also we have to remember for modified gts's these engines have been around for at least a couple of years in the states, some of you here are so suprised at what the gts is capable of, it has every gadget under the sun, so FPV's old tech holds its own in good company considering tests we're never really conducted in ideal conditions apart from the mid 12's it run once with Motor Mag.
GM has always had unlimited funds to work with so creating a car like it and then bailing out and rorting the tax payer in the states and here by selling cars at a loss is probably a reason I would not buy one (if I could stetch it and the fact that I bleed blue) but if it was not for the above I would consider it, for all of us yes our Ford Falcons and Holden's are Australian icons but Ford america and GM have really screwed us over and that's why we will never see an Australian V8 performance car again.
I think subsidies are required to some point but our previous government's have stopped any opportunities that may have been with irresponsible credit card like spending.
# End rant.

[Tough Ford]

How much heavier is the R spec compared to gts?

[Cobra]

Originally Posted by fgpsi

How anyone could say that this does not look good or is a joke of a design etc baffles me. The e1 was the last hsv I liked as when the e2 came out they went over the top. This one is just right. I'm not a fan of the other VF hsv's, I just like the GTS.

image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image
image

I totally agree mate, I think that it's a fantastic looking car. Everything about it is an amazing achievement. I remember the feeling of disillusionment in late '99 when the VTII GTS came out. It was a world beater which very few 4 door sedans could match. Compare it at the time to what Ford/Tickford's best available offering was, and there was daylight between the two.

Fast forward 14 years and the FG GT R-spec is a far cry from leaving the same gap between itself and the VF GTS compared to what an auto only 220kw TS50 gave up in comparison to a VTII GTS. But nonetheless, the VF GTS, like its predecessor when it was released 14 years prior, is taking the fight up to the Euro's.

I recall back in the AU days, Tickford's MD David Flint saying the following: "We're not going to build cars which will make your nose bleed". Don't get me wrong, the F6 and supercharged GT are fantastic cars and very good value for money. But they aren't world beaters in either performance or being feature packed. The comments were however in my opinion, symbolic of the attitude that second best will suffice.

I'll always be a Ford man, but history will always remember Holden/HSV as the Aussie car company who dared to dream big, and who did in fact build cars that were a lot closer to 'making your nose bleed' than anything Ford/Tickford/FPV ever produced.

[1TUFFUTE]

Originally Posted by Cobra

I totally agree mate, I think that it's a fantastic looking car. Everything about it is an amazing achievement. I remember the feeling of disillusionment in late '99 when the VTII GTS came out. It was a world beater which very few 4 door sedans could match. Compare it at the time to what Ford/Tickford's best available offering was, and there was daylight between the two.

Fast forward 14 years and the FG GT R-spec is a far cry from leaving the same gap between itself and the VF GTS compared to what an auto only 220kw TS50 gave up in comparison to a VTII GTS. But nonetheless, the VF GTS, like its predecessor when it was released 14 years prior, is taking the fight up to the Euro's.

I recall back in the AU days, Tickford's MD David Flint saying the following: "We're not going to build cars which will make your nose bleed". Don't get me wrong, the F6 and supercharged GT are fantastic cars and very good value for money. But they aren't world beaters in either performance or being feature packed. The comments were however in my opinion, symbolic of the attitude that second best will suffice.

I'll always be a Ford man, but history will always remember Holden/HSV as the Aussie car company who dared to dream big, and who did in fact build cars that were a lot closer to 'making your nose bleed' than anything Ford/Tickford/FPV ever produced.

No offense but your looking at it almost from a sore looser point of view. Your picking out moments in history that suit your comments. Your vt GTS holds nothing to when our turbo falcons were actually considered the best performance sedans in the WORLD under 100k. And it was ALL Aussie. No American tax payer engine in there my friend.
And this GTS like some have recognized is not only a very niche car, selling very few at a large price.....it certainly isn't available to the masses.......ford has had far better performance cars for over ten years now in turbo six or sc 5.0 form that are cheap and available to the masses. Just look at the millions of examples of ford guys spending chump change and getting their factory car all of a sudden 400+rwkws!
Holden will be remembered by a few die hards, for the American powered GTS.......the masses will remember the blackmail,lieing and screwing of the public and their employees. The cheap Asian rebadged imports, far inferior models in every category, the massive high import content in its 'Australian' cars and it's blatant spending money left right and centre when their future was in limbo.
This awesome GTS is a blip on the radar in what's nothing more then another American blunder, but his time on our soil.
So yours and others comments may suggest Holden won this little battle with the awesome vf GTS, but in truth they've lost the war.

[MAGPIE]

Originally Posted by 1TUFFUTE

No offense but your looking at it almost from a sore looser point of view. Your picking out moments in history that suit your comments. Your vt GTS holds nothing to when our turbo falcons were actually considered the best performance sedans in the WORLD under 100k. And it was ALL Aussie. No American tax payer engine in there my friend.
And this GTS like some have recognized is not only a very niche car, selling very few at a large price.....it certainly isn't available to the masses.......ford has had far better performance cars for over ten years now in turbo six or sc 5.0 form that are cheap and available to the masses. Just look at the millions of examples of ford guys spending chump change and getting their factory car all of a sudden 400+rwkws!
Holden will be remembered by a few die hards, for the American powered GTS.......the masses will remember the blackmail,lieing and screwing of the public and their employees. The cheap Asian rebadged imports, far inferior models in every category, the massive high import content in its 'Australian' cars and it's blatant spending money left right and centre when their future was in limbo.
This awesome GTS is a blip on the radar in what's nothing more then another American blunder, but his time on our soil.
So yours and others comments may suggest Holden won this little battle with the awesome vf GTS, but in truth they've lost the war.

No offence but I think your the one looking at it from a "sore loser" point of view.

Falcon and Commodore are dead (or soon to be) as we know it, Commodore has gone out on a high. The Falcon looks as though (we can't be 100% certain) that it's going out with a whimper... unfortunately.

Millions of examples

[Auslandau]

Originally Posted by MAGPIE

No offence but I think your the one looking at it from a "sore loser" point of view.

Falcon and Commodore are dead (or soon to be) as we know it, Commodore has gone out on a high. The Falcon looks as though (we can't be 100% certain) that it's going out with a whimper... unfortunately.

Millions of examples

I don't know about that really. While the GTS is what it is ..... the FPV335 is ballistic and owning one has been the best driving experience I have had in any new car I have owned for the past 30 years. The fact that the price was where I could afford one .... well that is just a bonus because if it was GTS money, no way could I experience it.

You enjoying your new GTS????? Love to hear your opinion on it No use having a car that the majority can only dream about, while even the GT or GS may be expensive compared to std Falcon, the GTS is IMO another bracket where Euro's belong.

I call that going out in with an absolute bang and I absolutely thank FORD (FPV) for the experience and if that is it, so be it

[MAGPIE]

Originally Posted by Auslandau

I don't know about that really. While the GTS is what it is ..... the FPV335 is ballistic and owning one has been the best driving experience I have had in any new car I have owned for the past 30 years. The fact that the price was where I could afford one .... well that is just a bonus because if it was GTS money, no way could I experience it.

You enjoying your new GTS????? Love to hear your opinion on it No use having a car that the majority can only dream about, while even the GT or GS may be expensive compared to std Falcon, the GTS is IMO another bracket where Euro's belong.

I call that going out in with an absolute bang and I absolutely thank FORD (FPV) for the experience and if that is it, so be it

I'm pleased for you, really I am.

Looking at my "whimper" comment that is perhaps a bit harsh and has come across the wrong way.

I dislike all things GM especially HSV but just feel Ford should have sent the Falcon out with a even bigger bang.

The GT335 has nothing to be ashamed of, but Falcon is going to die as the underling to the Commodore as much as it pains me to say it.

[BHDOGS]

yup holden lost the war big time there brand dies in the **** and is discontinued like a piece of trash while the mighty ford badge lives on long and proud with mustang power.

[Iggle Piggle]

Originally Posted by BHDOGS

yup holden lost the war big time there brand dies in the **** and is discontinued like a piece of trash while the mighty ford badge lives on long and proud with mustang power.

Seriously dude - all bullshit and loyalties aside...THERE ARE NO WINNERS!!!!