road test porche tarago falcon xt

mik · 24-10-2007, 10:02 PM

i don`t know if this has been posted but anyway here it is a performance comparo Tarago Porche falcon xt ........take note of the standing 400`s.
http://www.drive.com.au/Editorial/Ar...rticleID=44733

toyocharged · 24-10-2007, 10:07 PM

Quote:

The dash to 60ft (18.3m), a guide to initial acceleration, confirmed this. The Porsche got off the line better, hitting 60ft in 2.251sec, compared with 2.314 for the Tarago on its fastest run. The Tarago wasn't helped by the initial wheel-spin as the front wheels struggled to launch it. But by the 330ft (100m)mark, the Tarago was on top and from then on it was no contest. The Toyota clocked a fastest time of 14.993sec, compared with 15.456sec for the Porsche - half a second difference. Terminal speed in the Tarago was 149.61kmh, compared with 141.85kmh for the Porsche.

Byway of comparison, the Tarago was as quick as a 1985 Brock VK Group A SS Commodore at its peak.

Quick for a people mover

Quote:

The Falcon has a huge weight advantage here, more than half a tonne lighter. But the Porsche retains an edge through all-wheel drive, although the rear-drive Falcon should launch better than the front-drive Tarago. The Falcon's quickest time to 60ft is 2.165, about one-tenth better than the Cayenne. By 330ft, it's three-tenths quicker and its fastest time is 14.593secs, almost a second quicker. Terminal speed was 154.32km/h.

Very impressive for a bog stock XT

XR Martin · 24-10-2007, 10:24 PM

The only thing funny is that it took Toyota 25 years to put a decent engine in a Tarago.

Steffo · 24-10-2007, 10:38 PM

I forgot about the Cayenne V6. Initially I was thinking "No new Porsche can lose to a Tarago," except that one....

**Elks** · 24-10-2007, 10:53 PM

What's going on!!!

A Tarago running a 14.9 and a XT 4.0 auto a 14.5

Really shows how far cars have come.

jimmy_c · 24-10-2007, 10:57 PM

Well if you read the article they mention they used the ZF auto. So that makes pretty good sense why the falcon did a bloody 14.5 for a bog stock XT.

Walkinshaw · 25-10-2007, 12:22 AM

times seem awfully quick.....

5.4 GT · 25-10-2007, 01:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by myts

What's going on!!!

A Tarago running a 14.9 and a XT 4.0 auto a 14.5

Really shows how far cars have come.

In the latest wheels the new FPV Cobra in ZF form only did 0 to 100km/h in 6.4s and 14.5s 400m.

XT Power = 190kw 380nm, Weight = 1729, Power-weight ratio = 9.1kg/kw
Cobra Power = 302kw 540nm, Weight = 1855kg, Power-weight ratio = 6.1kg/kw

Somethings up with these times...

FlipXW · 25-10-2007, 01:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaveO_SP

In the latest wheels the new FPV Cobra in ZF form only did 0 to 100km/h in 6.4s and 14.5s 400m.

XT Power = 190kw 380nm, Weight = 1729, Power-weight ratio = 9.1kg/kw
Cobra Power = 302kw 540nm, Weight = 1855kg, Power-weight ratio = 6.1kg/kw

Somethings up with these times...

The XT time does seem quick, however that Cobra time seems very slow.

dallasv8 · 25-10-2007, 01:34 AM

maybe they actually had someone who could drive behind the wheel....they should get that guy to run the cobra

Cooper69S · 25-10-2007, 03:11 AM

14.5 does seem very good for a stock xt. what times are other people doing these days in stock auto 6's? the idea of 14's for a tarago blew me away too - that could embarass a lot of people!!

merlin · 25-10-2007, 09:00 AM

"The dragway's timing equipment is international competition standard, measuring times to 100th of a second, so there was nowhere to hide."

14.5 for a bloody XT. wow.

sfr rob · 25-10-2007, 09:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaveO_SP

In the latest wheels the new FPV Cobra in ZF form only did 0 to 100km/h in 6.4s and 14.5s 400m.

XT Power = 190kw 380nm, Weight = 1729, Power-weight ratio = 9.1kg/kw
Cobra Power = 302kw 540nm, Weight = 1855kg, Power-weight ratio = 6.1kg/kw

Somethings up with these times...

Our little friends at Wheels like to under quote power and quarter mile figures when it comes to the blue oval.
We all know that the new cobra will do 13's without a worry.

**Polyal** · 25-10-2007, 09:08 AM

I would completely disregard those wheels times, they have a history of crap driving. Also different conditions; and by the sounds of it the above article had a massive tail wind..LOL

edit: updated sig..hehe

dallasv8 · 25-10-2007, 11:59 AM

lmao Poyal,nice sig

irlewy86 · 25-10-2007, 12:25 PM

54,000 for a people mover. WTF.

TheSneakiness · 25-10-2007, 12:33 PM

Impressed with the Tarago. 14.99 out of something with seven seats in it isn't something to sneeze at.

prydey · 25-10-2007, 05:11 PM

if a stock xt falcon runs a 14.5 then i'm in the 13's.

an aurion would struggle with a 14 second pass and yet a tarago with who knows how much extra kurb weight runs a 14.9. i can't help em somehow. maybe they read the printout wrong.

maybe they thought they'd take the reaction times off the overall ET.

even if a cobra ran a 13.9 you can't tell me that extra 112kw is only good for .6 of a second.

those times are bogus. you can bag me till you're blue in the face. a tarago will not crack into 14's and i'd be very surprised if a falcon xt did as well.

Disciple · 25-10-2007, 05:15 PM

Aurions are actually quite quick. Much faster than Falcon, Commodore, or Mitsubishi. One of the mags timed a Sportivo Aurion at 14.6 at 156km/h. Try an ATX model which is about 50kgs or so lighter with the same power and a good launch I wouldn't be suprised if it did low 14's.

hy_boi · 25-10-2007, 05:18 PM

As above, also youtube the aurion, theres a vid of one hitting 100 just under 6 seconds..

The new v6 rav4 should be able to turn out a pretty decent time also.

prydey · 25-10-2007, 05:26 PM

i've seen the aurion youtube clips and disagree there as well. yes they seem quick but they do not have a clock running and you can't accurately measure a car by watching a clip.

Disciple · 25-10-2007, 05:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by prydey

i've seen the aurion youtube clips and disagree there as well. yes they seem quick but they do not have a clock running and you can't accurately measure a car by watching a clip.

I've driven a number of Aurions and raced a number in my Ralliart Magna.

prydey · 25-10-2007, 05:46 PM

i'm not denying an aurion is quick. all i'm saying is a tarago will not be less than half a second behind somehow.

Jock260 · 25-10-2007, 05:49 PM

Damn thats quick for Falcons most "basic" falcon available. Where is that 100KW in the GT gone... 0.6 seconds is not worth 20K.

Disciple · 25-10-2007, 05:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by prydey

i'm not denying an aurion is quick. all i'm saying is a tarago will not be less than half a second behind somehow.

Tarago.

Sorry man, I misunderstood what you were saying.

fairBA · 25-10-2007, 06:04 PM

"The Falcon handles like a Porsche"
"The Falcon handles like a Porsche"
"The Falcon handles like a Porsche"
"The Falcon handles like a Porsche"
"The Falcon handles like a Porsche"

merlin · 25-10-2007, 06:07 PM

MOTOR and wheels times aren't measured on a dragstrip though, they are usually done with a VBOX, Gtech or GPS thingys. (MOTOR have admitted a number of times, that their times will be slower than a dragstrip)

Dragstrip times are always faster due to the stickiness of the track and the different way the ET is measured (car rolling through beam).

Rodp · 25-10-2007, 06:46 PM

14.5 for an XT?! Seems very optimistic.

Have to look out for those Tarago's though. Maybe it's time to get the XR8 modded before I'm embarrased with 6 kids in the back. :\

mik · 25-10-2007, 10:34 PM

14.5 seems ok to me for the xt stock au 6`s are in 15 second bracket an xt with more horses and 2 extra cogs would account i reckon, and the tarago co efficient drag is apparently better than a little celica

:

Scott · 25-10-2007, 10:50 PM

Aurion's not quick. Tarago is not quick. XT is not quick. 14.5 is quick though and I struggle to believe it.