Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 68
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

The BA I Falcon XR6T weighs 1700kg. It makes same rear-wheel kW as 260kW XR8. I know cause i was there when it happened on a true-reading dyno.

XR6T is a beaut family car but if you're gunna compare cars, make it a Skyline GT Passage (or equivalent 4 door Skyline). Remember, the Aussie cars are Grand Tourers (that's what GT stands for, y'see?) not sports coupes, sports cars or supercars.

If you insist on this pretty useless debate, remember the Ford has a new car warranty, insurability, dealer servicing and parts, and the most important thing: new car smell. LOL

I had a drag with one on the weekend, i have two other witnesses who were in my car so no bs here.... the guy had two passengers in his aswell, and from 60 to about 180km/hr there was no difference between the ol' HR31 and the XR6T... before that drag i would have actually voted for the FORD over an r33 maybe but definetly not an r34. So if your talkin standard then go the R34 for sure.... doesnt the dude that owns turbo tune have like 310rwkw tho?

Originally posted by Sonic

The BA I Falcon XR6T weighs 1700kg. It makes same rear-wheel kW as 260kW XR8. I know cause i was there when it happened on a true-reading dyno.

XR6T is a beaut family car but if you're gunna compare cars, make it a Skyline GT Passage (or equivalent 4 door Skyline). Remember, the Aussie cars are Grand Tourers (that's what GT stands for, y'see?) not sports coupes, sports cars or supercars.

If you insist on this pretty useless debate, remember the Ford has a new car warranty, insurability, dealer servicing and parts, and the most important thing: new car smell. LOL

Now see, if the Falcon weighed 1550-1600kgs, it`d be time to go for a test drive I think...

The BA II will be about that, maybe less as there's a host of "weight loss" going on at ford, but their aim is to "Shed weight, but not lose any phatness" that was a quote from Geoff Polites that a colleague heard...

They're using:

Aluminium suspension components

Aluminium panels (guards/bonnet/boot) on heavier models (XRs, Fairmonts)

Lighter, forged wheels as an option

sorry people but the xr6 turbo is definatly the better car...

It may not have the look or style or the R34, but it makes up for it in the fact that they handle extreemly well (you'd never guess that they weigh so much), they are very quick (one magazine recorded 0-100 in 5.9 and 0-400 in 13.8), they have plenty of room, therefore a more practical car, and would be far more comfortable than a skyline on a long trip.

I own an R33 and i get to drive XR6Ts alot, so i know.

Everyone should stop being so biased, open your mind

Originally posted by sumfatchin

sorry people but the xr6 turbo is definatly the better car...

"Thats just like...

you know...

...your opinion man."

(The Dude, The Big Lebowski - 1997):rofl:

hear hear!

A Nissan owner (like myself) with the BALLS to admit an inferior brand of car actually beats a certain model. :rofl:

And YES the skylines look better.. they are even a more classy car.. and when it comes to the crunch I don't think I could ever drive a Ford, for image reasons.. but I have respect for something like the XR6T.

Originally posted by pentae

2fardown: What does your old man think of your car in comparison?

He is actually looking at buying a 180sx or R33 as a weekender......So you could say he likes both a lot.....Mid life crisis I'm thinking.

As soon as it hits 3,000kms (apparent run in time for them) up goes the boost.

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

    • Could be. Could also be that they sit around broken more. To be fair, you almost never see one driving around. I see more R chassis GTRs than the Renault ones.
    • Yeah. Nah. This is why I said My bold for my double emphasis. We're not talking about cars tuned to the edge of det here. We're talking about normal cars. Flame propagation speed and the amount of energy required to ignite the fuel are not significant factors when running at 1500-4000 rpm, and medium to light loads, like nearly every car on the road (except twin cab utes which are driven at 6k and 100% load all the time). There is no shortage of ignition energy available in any petrol engine. If there was, we'd all be in deep shit. The calorific value, on a volume basis, is significantly different, between 98 and 91, and that turns up immediately in consumption numbers. You can see the signal easily if you control for the other variables well enough, and/or collect enough stats. As to not seeing any benefit - we had a couple of EF and EL Falcons in the company fleet back in the late 90s and early 2000s. The EEC IV ECU in those things was particularly good at adding in timing as soon as knock headroom improved, which typically came from putting in some 95 or 98. The responsiveness and power improved noticeably, and the fuel consumption dropped considerably, just from going to 95. Less delta from there to 98 - almost not noticeable, compared to the big differences seen between 91 and 95. Way back in the day, when supermarkets first started selling fuel from their own stations, I did thousands of km in FNQ in a small Toyota. I can't remember if it was a Starlet or an early Yaris. Anyway - the supermarket servos were bringing in cheap fuel from Indonesia, and the other servos were still using locally refined gear. The fuel consumption was typically at least 5%, often as much as 8% worse on the Indo shit, presumably because they had a lot more oxygenated component in the brew, and were probably barely meeting the octane spec. Around the same time or maybe a bit later (like 25 years ago), I could tell the difference between Shell 98 and BP 98, and typically preferred to only use Shell then because the Skyline ran so much better on it. Years later I found the realtionship between them had swapped, as a consequence of yet more refinery closures. So I've only used BP 98 since. Although, I must say that I could not fault the odd tank of United 98 that I've run. It's probably the same stuff. It is also very important to remember that these findings are often dependent on region. With most of the refineries in Oz now dead, there's less variability in local stuff, and he majority of our fuels are not even refined here any more anyway. It probably depends more on which SE Asian refinery is currently cheapest to operate.
    • You don't have an R34 service manual for the body do you? Have found plenty for the engine and drivetrain but nothing else
    • If they can dyno them, get them dyno'd, make sure they're not leaking, and if they look okay on the dyno and are performing relatively well, put them in the car.   If they're leaking oil etc, and you feel so inclined, open them up yourself and see what you can do to fix it. The main thing you're trying to do is replace the parts that perish, like seals. You're not attempting to change the valving. You might even be able to find somewhere that has the Tein parts/rebuild kit if you dig hard.
    • Can you also make sure the invoices on the box (And none exist in the boxes) are below our import duty limits... I jest, there's nothing I need to actually purchase and order in. (Unless you can find me a rear diff carrier, brand new, for stupidly cheap, that is for a Toyota Landcruiser, HZJ105R GXL, 2000 year model...)  
×
×
  • Create New...