Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hi all,

For those who don't buy Motor magazine I have provided some reasonably interesting info below in relation to their recent test of Ford and Holden's toughest.

Car kW(wheels)

HSV GTS (manual) 245.2 @ 5,700

HSV R8 (auto) 243.9 @ 5,500

SS Comm (manual) 236.2 @ 5,500

SS V Comm (auto) 232.0 @ 5,500

FPV Force 8 (auto) 229.2 @ 5,900

FPV Force 6 (auto) 229.2 @ 6,200

Falcon XR6T (auto) 195.1 @ 5,700

In July 2003 Motor had a similar test. The results were as follows:

Car kW (wheels)

Caprice (auto) 5.7ltr 158

Falcon XR8 (manual) 193

Monaro CV8 (manual) 189

SS Commodore (manual) 182

Commodor SV8 (manual) 178

GTS Coupe (manual) 222

HSV Clubbie 5.7ltr (manual) 196

FPV Falcon GT (manual) 225

XR6T (manual) 185

Interesting comparison. You can make as much or as little as you like out of the results. There are many factors that effect the figures and I understand the different dynos produce different results.

There are some significant differences and a few minor movements over this 4 year time period.

In relation to say the SS Commodore when tested in 2003 the quoted figure by Holden at the flywheel was 235kw where as the current power is 270kw at the flywheel. This is an increase of 14.9%. The figure at the wheels has increased from 182kw to 236kw. This is an increase of 29.7%.

All in all this may be an accurate or inaccurate comparison and we will never know.

Cheerio

  • Replies 54
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Hey Ronin,

For the recent test it was the Swinburne TAFE, Victoria, Dyno Dynamic AWD dynamometer, 16 deg C ambient temp.

The 2003 test was also sone on a Dyno Dynamics dynamometer however with a group called C&V.

One last comment, I'm impressed by some of the power figures. No wonder their quick in a straight line. It would take a reasonably well modded and tuned Skyline GTST to outrund the Aussie contingent. And I say this not because I am a Ford or Holden fan but because I think it is a fact. Am I wrong in thinking that that a standard GTR would be outrun by most of these cars? Not trying to start a war, just curious.

Edited by Smurf
they may have more power at the wheels...but its all about power/weight ratio...

yep, power to weight is the winner.

belive that an R8 is around 1800kgs, giving 7.38kg/rwkw

if a stock GTR is 1450kgs, then to match a 7kg/rwkw, the GTR will have to make 207rwkw.

I reckon a stock GTR will make around 180rwkw, so with an exhaust it will be close.

plus don't forget rear wheel vs 4wd - will the R8 get the power to the ground efficiently as the GTR?

all so many variables.

I find it odd that you would mention that a stock GTR only puts out about 180rwkw. I have a kinda old HPI magazine, which was a GTR special edition mag, In their they mention that most GTR's put out 195-200+ rwkw.. who should i believe?

but the new GTR will just bitch slap them back into the kitchen.

GTR is an AWD car most Aussie vehicles are RWD, a GT-T or GTST would be a more valid comparison.

A GT-T with a highflow turbo is enough to bitch slap even the all mighty HSV GTS back into the kitchen :D

Here's a point of reference for future comparison. Lap times around Calder park from the same bunch of cars were:

HSV GTS (manual)1:10.96

HSV R8 (auto) 1:09.90

SS Comm (manual) 1:11.01

SS V Comm (auto) 1:10.80

FPV Force 8 (auto) 1:11.93

FPV Force 6 (auto) 1:10.06

Falcon XR6T (auto) 1:20.20

Points to note, times are not in order. Also I think there was a misprint for the XR6T, I think it should have been 1:12.20.

Are there an sub GTR's (i.e. GTS25T) that can top the R8's time. if so what mods did they have. Is there anyone who has raced at Calder in a stock GTR.

Cheers

Will

Here's a point of reference for future comparison. Lap times around Calder park from the same bunch of cars were:

HSV GTS (manual)1:10.96

HSV R8 (auto) 1:09.90

SS Comm (manual) 1:11.01

SS V Comm (auto) 1:10.80

FPV Force 8 (auto) 1:11.93

FPV Force 6 (auto) 1:10.06

Falcon XR6T (auto) 1:20.20

Points to note, times are not in order. Also I think there was a misprint for the XR6T, I think it should have been 1:12.20.

Are there an sub GTR's (i.e. GTS25T) that can top the R8's time. if so what mods did they have. Is there anyone who has raced at Calder in a stock GTR.

Cheers

Will

These cars all are very heavy...with no 4 wheel drive.

An Evo...WRX...or gtr32/33/34 will all beat those times in standard clothes.

Technology is always improving..but our Aus. cars are also getting heavy.

Please do not compare these cars to a GTR.

GTST/GTT may be a better comparison..rear wheel drive.

A stock gtr does..or did...13.4s 1/4 mile

I believe all the above cars are 13.7s and above..most around 15s..LOL.

I have no idea what you are after....do you want to buy a gtr, and just want to know if they are better at the track?

YES YES YES......they are race breed...and band from v8Aus racing because they were to good...lol

So forget the dyno. results..they mean nothing...take a ride...you will feel the power.

Please do not compare these cars to a GTR.

GTST/GTT may be a better comparison..rear wheel drive.

A stock gtr does..or did...13.4s 1/4 mile

I believe all the above cars are 13.7s and above..most around 15s..LOL.

I have no idea what you are after....do you want to buy a gtr, and just want to know if they are better at the track?

It was more out of interest than trying to source a definitive answer as to which car is better, the answer to that question lies in the eye of the beholder of course.

Just in relation to your comment, you are saying that I shouldn't compare a GTR to the cars in the list however one of your reasons for this is the quarter of a mile time. This is surely only one form of comparison.

It is interesting that you state the quarter mile as a worthy method of comparison when your signature states that performance can only be measured from 0 - 1,000 metres, which leads me to my next question, where do you think they would all stand after the 1,000 metre mark. The GTR would get the jump no doubt and would most likely make it to 400 or 500 metres first though the torque may allow the others to catch up.

Once again I am not trying to really acheive anything, just providing info for those who are interested and also making some mild comparisons.

So does anyone have Calder times?

Here's a point of reference for future comparison. Lap times around Calder park from the same bunch of cars were:

HSV GTS (manual)1:10.96

HSV R8 (auto) 1:09.90

SS Comm (manual) 1:11.01

SS V Comm (auto) 1:10.80

FPV Force 8 (auto) 1:11.93

FPV Force 6 (auto) 1:10.06

Falcon XR6T (auto) 1:20.20

Points to note, times are not in order. Also I think there was a misprint for the XR6T, I think it should have been 1:12.20.

Cheers

Will

those times look pretty good from what ive seen of calder times

shows you that a 6 can beat a 8 - the force 6 was quicker than the GTS

i think that also shows the awesomeness of the ZF 6 speed auto - better ratios and quicker shifting in the ZF then in the GM 6sp manual

here is the formula vee record: 1:11.9963 set in 1995 (not sure what configuration)

according to here: http://www.hsv.com.au/racing/tracks/calder.htm

the record for v8 supercars was 56.14 in a 96 vr commo by lowndes

yep, power to weight is the winner.

belive that an R8 is around 1800kgs, giving 7.38kg/rwkw

if a stock GTR is 1450kgs, then to match a 7kg/rwkw, the GTR will have to make 207rwkw.

I reckon a stock GTR will make around 180rwkw, so with an exhaust it will be close.

plus don't forget rear wheel vs 4wd - will the R8 get the power to the ground efficiently as the GTR?

all so many variables.

meh who cares, different cars for different uses, seems kinda stupid to me if u buy a GTR and all ur worried about is how fast it will go in a straight line.

Are there an sub GTR's (i.e. GTS25T) that can top the R8's time. if so what mods did they have. Is there anyone who has raced at Calder in a stock GTR.

I think i was running 1.08's in my stockish GTR, street tyres etc... But i'm sure someone with more driving skills than me would of gone much faster.

There are a few gtst/gtt's running quicker times than that, but modded....

For laptimes around different tracks, including calder, check.

http://www.skylinesaustralia.com/forums/in...showtopic=46199

Calder isn't really a great circuit track to compare, somewhere like Sandown would of been better...

Still some impressive figures out of stock taxi's there....

i think that also shows the awesomeness of the ZF 6 speed auto - better ratios and quicker shifting in the ZF then in the GM 6sp manual

I'm pretty sure that GM and Ford are both using the ZF 6 speed now, just with different ratio's and shifter set ups.

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

    • Welcome to Skyline ownership. Yes, it is entirely possible parts websites get things wrong. There's a whole world of inaccuracies out there when it comes to R34 stuff (and probably 33 and 32). Lots of things that are 'just bolt on, entirely interchangable' aren't. Even between S1 and S2 R34's. Yes they have a GTT item supposedly being 296mm. This is incorrect. I would call whoever you got them from and return them and let them know the GTT actually uses 310mm rotors. Depending on where you got them from your experience and success will obviously vary.
    • Hi...a bit a "development" on the brakes. I spoke to the guys where i get brakes from...and they are saying that 296mm EBC are for R34 GT-T. I then went to their site: https://www.ebcbrakes.com/vehicle/uk-row/NISSAN/Skyline (R34)/ and search for my car(R34 GT 1998 - it has GTT brakes) and it show me this USR1229 number and they are rly 296mm rotors... So now iam rly confused... The rotors i have now on the car are 310mm asi shown... So where is the problem? Does the whole EBC got it wrong or my calipers are just...idk know what?  
    • Oh What the hell, I used to get a "are you sure you want to reply, this thread is XX months old" message. Maybe a software update remove that. My bad.
    • This is a recipe for disaster* Note: Disaster is relative. The thing that often gets lost in threads like this is what is considered acceptable poke and compromise between what one person considers 'good' looks and what someone else does. The quoted specs would sit absurdly outside the guards with the spacers mentioned and need  REALLY thin tyres and a LOT of camber AND rolling the guards to fit. Some people love this. Some people consider this a ruined car. One thing is for certain though, rolling the guards is pretty much mandatory for any 'good' fitment (of either variety). It is often the difference between any fitment remotely close to the guards. "Not to mention the rears were like a mm from hitting the coilovers." I have a question though - This spec is VERY close to what I was planning to buy relative to the inboard suspension - I have an offset measuring tool on the way to confirm it. When you say "like a mm" do you mean literally 1mm? Or 2mm? Cause that's enough clearance for me in the rear :p I actually found the more limiting factor ISNT the coilover but the actual suspension arms. Did you take a look at how close those were?
    • @GTSBoy yeah sorry i know thery are known for colors bud those DBA are too in colors 🙂 Green will be good enough for me  
×
×
  • Create New...