Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 54
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

From drive.com.au

Link

And here's why

***

But the company could not meet the projected $215,000 price target. Sources suggest the on-sale figure would have been in the region of $300,000 for the project to have been viable.

***

if they made if for 215K it would have been a bargain, if you look at the cost of all the parts on the car, gearbox, brakes, engine, dry sump setup etc you would not be able to buy a monaro and mod it with a extra 100k and get a car with half the extras this thing had, it would have been a weapon on the street.

It would be like nissan relasing a 9sec R34 GTR for 200K, not possible.

hahaha, suck shit i say. and damn straight they should lose the bathurst title, i can't believe they were allowed to race it even tho it wasn't even a "production car" yet, that means any man and his dog could enter his prototype come production car. F*ck should give the pommies a call and tell em to enter the Zonda, just bullshit that they're gonna make 100 of them. Altho, Zonda is stupidly quick and handles like a go-kart, don't know how it do around the mountain. And the funny thing is, it's hella cheap too. Twin motorbike engines, rev to like 50,000,000 rpm... crazy.

So the ford diff, harrop suspension, le mans engine, that all just for the 24hr car? or was that in the road car as well?? If it was, ford prob crack the sads and said f*ck it, make ur own f*cking diff! HSV would be like...ah... we can't do this by ourselves? someone else makes us parts? pls??? :bahaha: losers

Originally posted by Clint32

if they made if for 215K it would have been a bargain, if you look at the cost of all the parts on the car, gearbox, brakes, engine, dry sump setup etc you would not be able to buy a monaro and mod it with a extra 100k and get a car with half the extras this thing had, it would have been a weapon on the street.

It would be like nissan relasing a 9sec R34 GTR for 200K, not possible.

yeh and with all that shit added it was a high 11 seconds car, which i beleive is still pathetic.. People who would of actually brought those cars must of been off their head, if they want a fast monaro they can get a CV8 @ 50k and spend a 40k on it and have good brakes and do 10 or even less seconds.

Mid 2004, Ford Aus is bringing out the legendary GT-HO with 375kw a supercharged 5.4ltr engine.. So it looks like the game is over for Holden :bahaha:

A car like the 427 is not designed to pull of fantastic 1/4 mile time. If that's the case then the Mclarens F1 is an even bigger waste of money. They are built for circuit racing, not put down impressive 1/4 mile times.

This is good news I reckon. In an attempt to make a mockery out of some world class manufacturers like Porsche and Ferrari, Holden bent the rules and produced a purpose built race car that was almost up to the pace of the HRT V8 supercars. Holden would have known that this car would never have made it into production. They have cheated everybody and deserve to have the trophy taken away from them....

I believe that Holden had alot do do with the organising and the funding of the 24 hour race at Bathurst last year.. Hmmmm. This could have somethin to do with it.

And is it true that Lamborgini didnt compete in the race cos they knew that Holden were cheating? I heard this on the news.

I say we all do up 50 of our cars to look the same, and then enter a 9sec GTR claiming that we all bought the same production car.... ok fine... I'm goin back to sleep

too much GT3 for you bunch... lets see if we can get suzuki to enter their pikes peak escudo.... mmm 390kw stock twin V6 engine goodness with more wings than a riced up civic hatch.

Contrary to some of the overwhelming bias in this thread, in a little disapointed that it didn't make production. It would've been one hell of a car... maybe Holden/HSV can make something in the middle of the HSV GTS and Concept HRT 427, for the road.

The overwhelming bias is from CAMS, not us here.

They banned the GTR because it was just too good for the local pushrod boys. Then they bend over backwards to allow an illegal non existent supposed production car to win.

There is no way you can call a mega dollar one off prototype a production car, No way.

The whole thing is a bloody joke.

yeah, 24hr is not production car race, there are 6categories, with group 1 being FIA N-GT and "invited cars". Leaves it pretty open....

Nations Cup, however, does require production based cars. HSV were not the only company putting low volume race cars into the international gt category, the ferrari is a race special as is the porsche carerra cup car.

Honestly, I'm surprised that HSV canned this if it really was just for cost reasons. If youve got 50 orders @200,000 years before its available, you WOULD be able to eventually sell 50@300,000. And as already pointed out, this model was purely PR, never to make a great profit.

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

    • For once a good news  It needed to be adjusted by that one nut and it is ok  At least something was easy But thank you very much for help. But a small issue is now(gearbox) that when the car is stationary you can hear "clinking" from gearbox so some of the bearing is 100% not that happy... It goes away once you push clutch so it is 100% gearbox. Just if you know...what that bearing could be? It sounding like "spun bearing" but it is louder.
    • Yeah, that's fine**. But the numbers you came up with are just wrong. Try it for yourself. Put in any voltage from the possible range and see what result you get. You get nonsense. ** When I say "fine", I mean, it's still shit. The very simple linear formula (slope & intercept) is shit for a sensor with a non-linear response. This is the curve, from your data above. Look at the CURVE! It's only really linear between about 30 and 90 °C. And if you used only that range to define a curve, it would be great. But you would go more and more wrong as you went to higher temps. And that is why the slope & intercept found when you use 50 and 150 as the end points is so bad halfway between those points. The real curve is a long way below the linear curve which just zips straight between the end points, like this one. You could probably use the same slope and a lower intercept, to move that straight line down, and spread the error out. But you would 5-10°C off in a lot of places. You'd need to say what temperature range you really wanted to be most right - say, 100 to 130, and plop the line closest to teh real curve in that region, which would make it quite wrong down at the lower temperatures. Let me just say that HPTuners are not being realistic in only allowing for a simple linear curve. 
    • I feel I should re-iterate. The above picture is the only option available in the software and the blurb from HP Tuners I quoted earlier is the only way to add data to it and that's the description they offer as to how to figure it out. The only fields available is the blank box after (Input/ ) and the box right before = Output. Those are the only numbers that can be entered.
    • No, your formula is arse backwards. Mine is totally different to yours, and is the one I said was bang on at 50 and 150. I'll put your data into Excel (actually it already is, chart it and fit a linear fit to it, aiming to make it evenly wrong across the whole span. But not now. Other things to do first.
    • God damnit. The only option I actually have in the software is the one that is screenshotted. I am glad that I at least got it right... for those two points. Would it actually change anything if I chose/used 80C and 120C as the two points instead? My brain wants to imagine the formula put into HPtuners would be the same equation, otherwise none of this makes sense to me, unless: 1) The formula you put into VCM Scanner/HPTuners is always linear 2) The two points/input pairs are only arbitrary to choose (as the documentation implies) IF the actual scaling of the sensor is linear. then 3) If the scaling is not linear, the two points you choose matter a great deal, because the formula will draw a line between those two points only.
×
×
  • Create New...