Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

The MPS will have more traction off the line, and the Commodore V8s run the world's widest gear ratios.

Standing kilometre the Commodore will smash the MPS, but quarter mile I reckon it'll be close.

Love to see some actual dragstrip numbers though.

The mazda 6 has recorded mid 14 sec passes and 0-100 6.4 seconds.Not exactly a slouch by anymeans and would show alot of LS1 commodores a bit of cheek down the 1/4.

i saw about 3 LS1 commys run 14.8 to 15.6 sec 1/4 last night at willowbank.

The mazda 3 mps is supposed to run 0-100 in 6 flat.Imagine an edited cpu,exhaust,cia and air pod with a tickle of some boost and retuned would see a lot of modded LS1 guys running scared :)

  • Replies 70
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

its weird how it gains 200kg over the luxury sports hatch auto 6.... must like that sound deadener alot

You're right. It must be sound deadener.

Because the driveshaft, rear diff, rear tail shafts etc probably wouldn't add any extra weight, and the turbocharger and its associated plumbing are made of ultra-light materials that wouldn't register a blip on the scales. :P

Its in the rear diff and shafts as you said.If you think they dont weigh much,take a look at the Ford control blade IRS in the falcon.Thats what made the falcon so heavy and will make the new VE commy platform another 200 kg heavier than the last model.

My 2 cents

The mazda 6 has recorded mid 14 sec passes and 0-100 6.4 seconds.Not exactly a slouch by anymeans and would show alot of LS1 commodores a bit of cheek down the 1/4.

i saw about 3 LS1 commys run 14.8 to 15.6 sec 1/4 last night at willowbank.

The mazda 3 mps is supposed to run 0-100 in 6 flat.Imagine an edited cpu,exhaust,cia and air pod with a tickle of some boost and retuned would see a lot of modded LS1 guys running scared :P

I'm afraid the only places quoting mid 14's are 'guessing' there is no actual 'test' that I've been able to find as yet. The 6.5 second claim is a factory one too.

same weight and 70kw not to mention 130nm of torque shy of the basic V8 comodore on offer, it would keep up in someones dreams.

I would gladly take money on a bet on how much quicker the new commo' would be if I were to take both over the standing 1/4mile. It's simple math.

This car is a 1639kg 'barge' it needs lots more than 190kw and a gay amount of torque to make it quick.

OR take 200kgs out of it.

Its in the rear diff and shafts as you said.If you think they dont weigh much,take a look at the Ford control blade IRS in the falcon.Thats what made the falcon so heavy and will make the new VE commy platform another 200 kg heavier than the last model.

The 4WD Porsche 996 weighs about 150kg more than its 2WD counterpart. And given how anal Porsche is about weight, they probably would have gotten it as light as they could have afforded in a $250,000 car.....

How about the Mazda 3 MPS Turbo Front Wheel Driven.

http://www.drive.com.au/editorial/article.aspx?id=11169

http://www.channel4.com/4car/gallery/spysh.../3-mps/mps.html

2.3L Turbo Engine from the Mazda 6 MPS with a Mazda 3 shell less the AWD.

184kw@fly (detuned) 380Nm Of Torque

Price from $40,000.

0-100km/h in 6.1sec

i reckon with a FMIC, Exhaust, Pod and a bit of boost and tuning this thing will be a little monster!

i around 1300kg (a bit heavy but still 180kw STANDARD trim!) haha

I'm afraid the only places quoting mid 14's are 'guessing' there is no actual 'test' that I've been able to find as yet. The 6.5 second claim is a factory one too.

same weight and 70kw not to mention 130nm of torque shy of the basic V8 comodore on offer, it would keep up in someones dreams.

I would gladly take money on a bet on how much quicker the new commo' would be if I were to take both over the standing 1/4mile. It's simple math.

This car is a 1639kg 'barge' it needs lots more than 190kw and a gay amount of torque to make it quick.

OR take 200kgs out of it.

Remember its AWD so it can launch alot harder than a stock commy.Not saying a commy wouldnt beat it but the 60 foot time will tell you who gets out of the hole first.

So has anyone actually driven one of the 3L 6cyl libs yet?

Yeah I have.

Been lookin for somethin to lease, and narrowed it to 4 cars to drive. 06 STi, Evo IV, Liberty STi, Liberty 3.0 R Spec B. I'm not into anything euro. And I wouldn't consider an MPS, they're too obviously based on a front-wheel-drive. The whole 4WD settup seems like tryin to p*ss around a corner to me!

I drove all except the Evo, which to be honest I went off when I sat in it and looked around it. No doubt a great car, and would be my preference for a targa car or something, but at my age I'm lookin for a little "feel good" factor when you sit in and drive the car. I've been through the whole "stiffly suspended and difficult to live with stage". They really are a tarted up shopping trolley - quality wise.

New STi was fantastic, especially compared to my last STi experience (an '02 STi Bug-eye) - handling much nicer (less under), and good (not great, especially compared to RB26) torque spread. Very hard to put up with the immature carpet and trim treatment though, not to mention the insipid body kit.

I ruled out the GT by STi fairly quickly, it's fairly obvious that these will be re-released soon as a 2.5l (with a six speed?), and I didn't want to be stuck with an orphan come trade-in time.

I liked the 3.0R most, great engine sound, great 'box, crisp throttle response, really nice interior, awesome quality stereo, clean looks (I'd go a black wagon), good ride/handling compromise, just a nice car. Not that fast, but respectable. But compared to turbo cars, no real opportunity to step up the power when you want to.

So, for me, I'd still go the 3.0R, I'm just struggling to come to grips with spending $55k when it looks virtually the same as the neighbors 2.0 base model. Talk about keepin up with the Jones'es!

Oh, and sorry about rambling too!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Yes that’s what im trying to decide. Should I do stock gtt box or enclosed or open pod. 
    • Also, I note OP is in Melbourne, which begs the question... are you aware of how illegal your car will be with a turbo, and intercooler and any sort of filter change? I don't know how you can get past the "2 intake mods" "rule" that seems to exist in Vic. Fully engineered might or might not get you there.
    • If you have a turbo... then the ducting holes I used to feed the pod are not available because your intercooler likely uses them. If you have an intercooler, your IAT's are going to be goverened by how good your intercooler setup is. I'm yet to really see anyone check IAT with a snorkel/boxed pod/proper CAI versus and unshielded pod. It would be interesting! But I suspect that the differences would not be so noticeable as if you were N/A as the intercooler is where the air is being cooled.. and out in front where the FMIC would be is a pretty good spot for it.. When I was turbo I pushed the stock GTT box as far as I could and made some pretty good power out of it, and noticed on the street I never made the same power/boost. Then I did a before and after run with a pod filter versus the box and picked up about 9PSI from the same boost duty cycle and about 50KW instantly. I never ran the stock box again, and recently removed it for my N/A setup. The box is restrictive to a degree - Even with the V8 setup I noticed I picked up power by removing the box completely, so punching holes from the bottom of it to get air from the passenger guard *helps* but the most effective one in my case was simply having the ducts, a pod, and no box around it. In my experience, *more* air was better than cold air. The air (with ducts) will be cooled off as you start moving, and especially if you start moving fast (a race track). It actually moves around quite a bit as you can see.  
    • Well you could certainly buy or build an enclosure for a pod in that corner of the bay. It is absolutely vital that there is a nice big opening to let cold air in to it from the front or underside, otherwise it will just pull air in around the edges from the bay, and if that air is hot, you gain nothing from enclosing the pod. There is lots of good evidence around (including on here, see posts by @Kinkstaah for example) showing that pods pulling hot air from the bay is only a problem when you're static or slow in traffic, and that as soon as you get the car up and moving the air being grabbed by the pod cools down. Although that will obviously vary from car to car, whether there is a flow of cold air to the pod or if it all has to come through the radiator area, etc etc. Obviously, the whole exercise requires as much thought as anything else does. Doing the lazy thing will often end up being the dumb thing. The stock GTT airbox has a cold air snorkel to feed it from over the radiator. Shows that Nissan were thinking. The GT airbox is upside down compared to the turbo one, yeah? Inlet at the bottom, AFM/exit on the lid? That might make it harder to route the turbo inlet pipe using the GT airbox than a turbo one. That would probably be the main reason I'd consider not using it, not that it is too small and restrictive. I'm looking at a photo of one now and the inlet opening seems nice and large. Also seems to have the same type of snorkel that the turbo one has. Maybe all that's required is to make a less restrictive snorkel/cold air inlet, perhaps by punching down through the guard like I did.
    • Also seen this as an option 
×
×
  • Create New...