Greatest FPV Ever ?

[Rodge]

Originally Posted by DJR-351

Sorry mate, but are you asking peoples opinion or just trying to convince them that your opinion is the right one....

Just having a bit of fun at HSV's expense, doubt many on here, (if any) have actually driven the HSV W427, so helping to sperate fact from fiction, (HSV's B.S. marketing machine), seemed like fun and I thought some punters might enjoy the links especially the last one

[HEMI POWER]

Originally Posted by DJM83

Case in point, we cant even agree what a muscle car is.
Yeah thats your opinion, your entitled to it whilst i disagree doesnt make me right either.

Muscle car was basically the cars build for a purpose in the 60's and 70's anything after this era is basically a hi tech (modern) perrformance car.
I had to vote for the HSV, on this one it has it all,big donk,big brakes raw appeal and just because it's a HSV doesn't mean it's not a good package.

[SpoolMan]

Originally Posted by FreddyDUZ747

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JxG0v...eature=related

Nearly 119mph on 20" rims stock as rock.

That one was found to be tuned by C&V Performance, has been written about on here and LS1 forum..

Originally Posted by Stav

A modified one lol

Fair point but this was stock officer ..lol..yelrotflm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=twGtV...ature=related:

[FreddyDUZ747]

Originally Posted by Rodge

Just having a bit of fun at HSV's expense, doubt many on here, (if any) have actually driven the HSV W427, so helping to sperate fact from fiction, (HSV's B.S. marketing machine), seemed like fun and I thought some punters might enjoy the links especially the last one

Rodge,119mph and the weight of the W427=Quoted figures by Holden/HSV

Make that 113.6mph.Still makes claimed figures.

Who has realised its running 20's and a 3.7 diff.

[HEMI POWER]

GAME OVER

http://www.fordforums.com.au/showthr...13#post3805213

[FreddyDUZ747]

Originally Posted by SpoolMan

That one was found to be tuned by C&V Performance, has been written about on here and LS1 forum..



Fair point but this was stock officer ..lol..yelrotflm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=twGtV...ature=related:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hTa4S...eature=related

Look at the dates of the runs/drags.The vehicle was modified as you said.

[galaxy xr8]

Originally Posted by Rodge

Just having a bit of fun at HSV's expense, doubt many on here, (if any) have actually driven the HSV W427, so helping to sperate fact from fiction, (HSV's B.S. marketing machine), seemed like fun and I thought some punters might enjoy the links especially the last one

Have you yourself driven a W427 ?.

[Rodge]

Originally Posted by FreddyDUZ747

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JxG0v...eature=related

Nearly 119mph on 20" rims stock as rock.Its def putting out more than what Rodge has conveniently posted or are we all taking dynos for the true horsepower indicator.These arent featherweights either.

Rodge,what did the 427 do to you lol.

nothing mate, I just enjoy a good debate but I didn't conviently select those you-tube clips as you suggest they were the first I came across.

Happy for anyone to post links to support their viewpoint, its all good fun

No I havn't driven a W427, I understand there were actually ten allocated to N.Z. priced at $210,000 here not sure how many, if any, actually sold, never seen one but would like too, especially now I have the SC GT-P.
Driven my mates Nissan GTR which he got new for just on $150,000 and a 375 KW XFR Jaguar, could have had the demo Jag for $150,000, discounted by a whopping $60,000 for a 2011 plated vehicle which made it a good buy. Jag's a real class act, wife wasn't happy with the costs involved in buying and ruinning two euro's.

[galaxy xr8]

Then how can you yourself try and decipher the fact's about the W427 and dismay it when you havn't experienced it.
Your word is hard to take around here when you bagged out the new S/C FPV so much when it was just recently new on the scene and had nothing but praise for your F6, how your tune has changed !!!!.
Until you have actually driven a W427, leave the fact's and fiction till then.
The way a vehicle drives on the racetrack/street is more involved then just straight outline drag strip speed or even for a dyno queen result which the W427 was not built for.

[SSD-85]

Originally Posted by gtxb67

i seriously doubt that muscle cars were designed to be cheap. back in the sixties they just dropped a massive engine into a basic car. the cost was low, because it was stripped of most things that were considered luxuries to keep the weight low and therefore make it faster


if cost was a factor then the phase 3 was not a muscle car. it was over $5000 at a time when a house and land package could be had for $13,000. the same house that was $13,000 is probably valued at around $500,000 now, so the w427 looks cheap in comparison

Id bet a Ferrari, Jag or Porsche at the time wasnt $5000.....

So yes, as far as performance/cost ratio went, it was cheap. Which was always the idea behind a muscle car; Power for average joe-blue-collar.

EDIT: I should probably mention the HO was built only to meet homologation requirements at the time (like most US cousins for NASCAR). So the non-HO GT & its US counterparts would probably be more applicable to the genre. SO yes, in a way the HO wasnt a muscle car, so to speak.

[Rodge]

Originally Posted by galaxy xr8

Then how can you yourself try and decipher the fact's about the W427 and dismay it when you havn't experienced it.
Your word is hard to take around here when you bagged out the new S/C FPV so much when it was just recently new on the scene and had nothing but praise for your F6, how your tune has changed !!!!.
Until you have actually driven a W427, leave the fact's and fiction till then.
The way a vehicle drives on the racetrack/street is more involved then just straight outline drag strip speed or even for a dyno queen result which the W427 was not built for.

Dude, chill out I was just giving the W427 a good kicking for a bit of a laugh.
Regarding you questioning my cred, perhaps you missed this review...at least I've tried to decipher the differences between the F6 and SC cars which isn't easy to do but I had the courage to give it a go, have you ?

F6 v GT-P Owners Review

I'd like to think having owned a couple of F6's and had two track days at Hampton Downs racetrack and a half day test drive of a dealers GT I have some sort of handle on the differences between these two brilliant cars but the truth is whilst I can certainly review the F6's attributes at some length I'm really only scratching the surface with the new SC engine as I've only done 330 km's in my GT-P so this is really only indicative intitial thoughts regarding my GT-P and feedback on their respective track performance, so I hope that's of some value to people considering the merits of these two brilliant cars.

F6 - Strengths

Slightly less weight 1812 kg's with full tank Autocar N.Z. (27kg's less than GT)
Boost arrives earlier with max 565nm torque @ 1950 r.p.m. (2,200 r.p.m. for SC engine)
Searing mid range punch, effortless part throttle torque delivery due to its long stroke engine, relative fuel efficiency, especially Euro 3 versions which were rated at only 12.1 litres per 100km's combined, explosive acceleration with a dramatic transition between on and off boost making it both an extremly exciting car to drive whilst also being very challanging to drive quickly and lighter front end making it slightly more nimble through the tight stuff.

F6 Room for improvement - Unstable idle on start-up, relativly unsupportive XR6 seats with very modest bolster support on the seat cushion or back, concerns regarding transmission shunt at low speed.

Background and comment on F6 ownership experience
My first F6 was a bright Neo blue BF2 Typhoon purchased brand new in January 2007. I was immediatly smitten with its good looks, outstanding handling, performance and brakes and so began a three year love affair with "bluey". BF2's have the 270KW 550nm engine making 9 p.s.i. of boost and they had a reasonable degree of turbo lag which was subsequently significantly reduced in the FG F6 models. No DSC was fitted back then so it was all on you to control the beast which I found very exciting. There is some suggestion that these cars have superior torque delivery in the 2,000-4,250 range compared to FG F6's and personally I subscribe to this theory, its was turbine smoothe, jet like flat line torque that seemed to really lock into the ZF box and was delivered in a manner that suggested there was little if any intervention from the electronic power control module.

Power delivery in standard tune in the BF2 model goes a bit flat from 4,700 r.p.m. or thereabouts, which is obviously easily fixed with a re-tune.

Bluey also had some other attributes sadly absent from FG F6's and most noteable amoung them are the wider and much more supportive seats, (BF2'a have very firm special bolsters on the seat cushion and back and more realsitic real feel suede inserts), and a proper sports steering wheel.
Its obvious there has been a cost cutting programme wround the interior of the Typhoon between BF2 and Fg F6's models with F6's now having what would appear to be standard XR6 Seats tarted up with cheap and very obviously fake suede fabric on the so called bolsters.
Bluey performed totally flawlessly through the three years I owned her and in many ways I still miss that car.

I first drove an FG F6 shortly after the Dash press car EMB218 arrived in N.Z. I think it was May 2008. To be honest I was really surprised at the performance increase over my BF2 Typhoon. Its well known that Typhoon and F6 power figures have been ultra conservativly stated for some time and whilst I thought that Bluey was making more than 270kw's it was abundently clear that the press car was making far more than the official 310 Kw's. Frankly I put the differecne between bluey and the press car at around 100 kw's at the rear wheels. There were a number of rumours circulating, (not on this site), at the time of that press car, and speculation that it had a "special tune" that Ford N.Z. ran it on race fuel and so on, not sure about the latter but it had a special tune allright, there's little doubt about that now.

This press car went on to achieve a best time of 0-100 of 4.82 seconds and 80-120 of 2.64 seconds running BP Ultimate in Autocar N.Z.'s hands but that 4.82 second time was in the reverse direction on Meremere's ultra sommth dragstrip and the best time they recorded on normal roads was 4.99 seconds. Other magazine testing shows a best of 5.00 seconds for the sedan so I thin its safe to say the very best is 5.00 seconds and 2.64 seconds for the rolling acceleration 80-120 k.p.h. time.

In February 2010 I finally decided to make the move to a FG F6, noticeable improvements over the BF2 were a stronger top end performance slightly better handling with the new front end steering set-up, DSC to back me up in case I messed up and that's about it. Detracting somewhat were the signifcantly inferior seats, lack of proper chunky sports steering wheel and I wasn't as keen on the colour (Viper) chosen because it was a demonstrator and i got $10,000 off the RRP.
As time went on I became addicted to the ballistic rush on the new F6, its almost manic power delivery and searing mid range and top end are all heady stuff, but was muted by probems which may be peculiar to my model but included, rough idle on start-up, having to wait a full 2 minutes after start to get a stable and happy idling engine was always a pain the ****, jerky ZF box when coming to close to a standstill, which is another common problem with these cars and the lack of bolster support was ever present when blasting through the tight and twisty stuff, so there were down-sides to the new FG F6 and the seats in particular ****ed me off, which brings me to the SC GT-P.

SC GT-P - Strengths

More Power - There's no question these new SC engines make huge top end power, regular dyno reports of circa 310rwkw's can't all be wrong and arn't in my opinion. My track day experiences lead me to believe the SC cars are indeed making circa 30 -40 rwkw's more than an F6 at the top end.

More sound - Its truly wonderfully addictive stuff, the sound of the supercharger whine and the bombastic explosive sound of the V8 as the bi-modul exhaust opens up over 3800 r.p.m., (for someone who's never had a Ford V8 before), is truly addictive and totally compelling stuff.

More control - The V8 goes about delivering its power in a more linear and more easily controlled manner, it doesn't climb all over you with a parabolic powerr delivery that's hard to modulate mid corner, its far, far easier to drive quickly than an F6. The biggest problem with driving an F6 car quickly which is both increbily exciting and difficult is that of power modulation through and exciting corners.

Lets unpack this a bit becuase this is the biggest difference between these two cars.
The F6 is similar to a light switch, its either on boost or off and these little in the middle and trying to get mid levels of boost and modulating the almost manic power delivery is difficult. Suppose you're mid-corner in a long sweeping corner, you washed off the correct amount of speped on entry, but find youself really struggling to maintain the correect speed through the corner, so you apply more throttle, suddenly the boost grabs on and you're in trouble. On the other hand power modulation in the new V8 is soooo easy, it doesn't seem to want to boost unless you give firm instructions and therein lies the main difference bwteen driving the cars, the boost is all over you in the F6 and its there when asked for in the SC.

My over-riding impression after the first track day with the SC cars Ford N.Z. put on was how incredibly easy these SC cars are to drive fast, followed by where's the boost explosion feeling so they didn't intially feel as fast as my F6.

This was followed up by an opportunity I had in February for a half day drive of a dealer principals GT where I really worked the tiptronic out in the back country and really explored the SC cars wonderful 4,000 r.p.m.-redline performance capability, fantastic stuff blasting from one corner to the nest maintaing high revs, no turbo lag or on-boost off boost issues to deal with the SC engine feels like driving a big naturally aspirated 8.0 litre free revving engine.

Better Seats - GT-P seats are just brilliant, highly supportive, heaps of lumbar support on the seat cushion and back, the perforated leather is soft and supple.

Six Pot Brembo's - Love em, can be optioned into F6 but at signifcant and surprisingly high extra cost.

Finally I love the new GT-P rims, bigger rear spoiler, side stripes and just having the inscription Boss 335 on the side makes me feel good.

GT-P Weaknesses
Some extra fuel consumption over an F6 - nothing much else to report at this stage. Slightly heavier weight of the GT-P seems to be well managed by the new suspension settings, perhaps not quite as nimble as an F6 through the corners but this is truly "splitting hairs" stuff because it feels well "planted" perhaps aided by a lower centre of gravity in the engine department due to the V configuration.

Car feels slightly better balanced overall and I note the front rear weight distribution of the SC cars is slightly more even on the V8 compared to the F6 according to Autocar N.Z. at 53.5/46.5 as compared to 54.7/45.3 for the F6.

So how do they drive and how do they compare on the road
F6 feels really really quick due to its manic all over you power transition.
SC feels less dramatic but isn't any slower.
Everyone has their own favourite methodology by which they measure whether one car is faster than another, for some its there 0-100 km's stats after all that's basically the maximum speed allowable by law so that's what really counts right ? not for me. For others its their quarter mile times, that's the average performance speed of the car over the quarter so the quicker the time the better right ? not necessarily....

For me the best objective measure I use is real world acceleration and in my opinion best real world rolling acceration, (that blast you ask from your beast as you power from one exciting corner to another) is best measure by the time exposed to danger or the 80-120 k.p.h. testa s its more commonly known.

Funnily enough on this meausre both FPV cars have HSV completly shot to bits with most reports of HSV times for the 80-120 in the low to mid 3 second range and when you consider that it takes legendary beats like the twin turbo over 400KW Audi RS6 2.58 seconds and the 375KW Jaguar XFR 2.50 seconds to get into the mid 2 second range it puts the alomost supercar rolling acceleration of the FPV cars into perspective at 2.64 seconds for the F6 running BP98 Ultimate and 2.51 seconds for the SC GT running Shell 95 Octane into perspective.

There's no question that both FPV cars offer extreordinary bang for your buck, okay they're missing some of the latest electroic gadgety, I'm not for a moment going to pretend otherwise, but for the money they both offer exceptional performacne and we are very fortunate indeed to have access to vehicles of these abilities for the price we do.

For me personally i've come to realise the benifets of having a more linear power and torque delivery, (I don't care what FPV say in their marketing speel, the SC cars have a more linear torque delivery than an F6), the bombastic sound and extreme top end power are there whenever the occassion permitts it, a meaty mid-range is always on hand and low end performacne is also fine.

2.51 seconds rolling acceleration for the 80-120 time speaks for itself, (probably even more astonishing times are achievable on BP98 Octane with a well run-in engine) and with no turbo lag to juggle, the bombastic sound, addictive supercharger whine and proper supportive seats I'm smitten with my new beast.

F6 is still one heck of a car though, and really exciting to drive there's no question about that whatsoever. If the guy who bought "bluey" off me is reading this and wants to sell her back, I'd be happy to have her back provided I could keep my GT-P so I'd make room in the garage and my finances somehow to make this happen, (that probably says best how I feel about the F6).

Sorry about the grammer and spelling mistakes, I havn't got the time to edit this much so hopefully it looks allright and you guys get the main gist of it as it comes out.

[galaxy xr8]

I'm not going there Rodge as I am not going to start another debate that we are all sick to death of, there are alot of other post's you have made aswell that clearly show your veiws on what you have tried to tale above but show a different veiw.
I was clearly stating that your credibility is shot and you agree and can admit you were wrong when they have actually experienced a product that they once bagged out.
So instead of bagging the W427, how about you actually drive one 1'st and then you can seperate fact from fiction hey.

[Rodge]

^^ You're entitled to your own opinion, but if you're sick of the debate WTF are you doing on this thread ? I agreed nothing other than its very hard to differentiate the performacne between the F6 and SC GT cars. If an Au driver wants to believe the W427 is the be all and end all of muscle cars that's fine, but perhaps try the FPV's first, performance handling and braking has moved on a long way since AU days.

I believe the above is a balanced and good review of the two cars, you believe what you like dude or put up your own review of any of the above cars if you can...

[DJM83]

Originally Posted by Rodge

^^ You're entitled to your own opinion, but if you're sick of the debate WTF are you doing on this thread ? I agreed nothing other than its very hard to differentiate the performacne between the F6 and SC GT cars. If an Au driver wants to believe the W427 is the be all and end all of muscle cars that's fine, but perhaps try the FPV's first, performance handling and braking has moved on a long way since AU days.

I believe the above is a balanced and good review of the two cars, you believe what you like dude or put up your own review of any of the above cars if you can...

I think we have had enough of this seems everyone's an expert. Or cant handle that an opposition product may be better.