Drive.com.au: Engine arm wrestle... - Ford Forums - Mustang Forum, Ford Trucks, Ford Focus and Ford Cars

MintEAFalcon · 09-29-2002, 20:32

Another interesting article...

Here tis: http://www.drive.com.au/news/article...X2OM3AP6D.html

ls1vx · 09-29-2002, 21:31

Quote:

Originally posted by gtx-laser
great read!

"even with 235kW the V8 still has less power than Ford's turbo six"

"The born-again Ford engine has strong torque, developing 450Nm at 2000rpm which it holds through to 4500rpm, giving tremendous mid-range performance. The Gen III has 465Nm of torque, but it isn't developed until 4000rpm" - mmm turbo!!

"unlike the Holden, it has a sequential-style shift"

"Commodore is a better manual 'box although it is not without fault and is way over-geared: sixth has the engine ticking over at only about 1500rpm at 110km/h. This is fine during flat road running, but the driver needs to drop down two gears to obtain acceleration or performance for overtaking or hill-climbing"

"Ford has done a generally fine job in reworking the Falcon, both mechanically and in the appearance of the XR6 and many casual observers reckoned it looked smarter than the S or even the SS"

"But between the corners the Ford is a bullet, and the Ford turbo engine received nothing but praise. It is smooth and feels more and more powerful as the revs rise"

"If economy in muscle cars is your thing, during Sunday Drive's extended test the XR Turbo was significantly more economical than both the V8 and the V6 Holdens when being driven hard"

"However, during some hard mountain work the consumption of the SS Commodore increased to15.3 litres/100km, while the Falcon XR Turbo used 13.3 litres/100km in both the manual and automatic versions we had on test"

Its actually a very balanced and well reviewed article about both cars.

AU_guy · 09-29-2002, 21:40

It makes you wonder why they haven't said anything about the crook rear styling of the Holden. I know looks are a personal thing, but the AU got bashed from pillar to post over it, but the rear end treatment on the Holden is just plain gross. Even the rear spoiler that comes on the SV8 looks like the Lancer spoiler!!!

snavy · 09-29-2002, 21:52

whats with all this better handly crap?????

ls1vx · 09-29-2002, 21:53

Quote:

Originally posted by gtx-laser
o sorry i must have hurt ur feelings ;((

*hands u a tissue*

Your ignorance is apparent by your first post, there is no need to send a second or third one to confirm it. hehehehehe

NeoXplod · 09-29-2002, 22:03

At least it was better than their last review on Commie vs Ford...

MintEAFalcon · 09-29-2002, 22:22

Quote:

Originally posted by AU_guy
It makes you wonder why they haven't said anything about the crook rear styling of the Holden. I know looks are a personal thing, but the AU got bashed from pillar to post over it, but the rear end treatment on the Holden is just plain gross. Even the rear spoiler that comes on the SV8 looks like the Lancer spoiler!!!

I suppose the biggest problem is the fact that styling is very subjective. I think its a very well balanced article but the handling thing has got me a little confused. I cant believe one journo is going to say the XR6 Turbo is the best handling car in its class, only to have another say the SS is better?

Hmmm...

T3man · 09-30-2002, 00:46

Yes, well the SS wasn't even as good as the AU so can't imagine what that guy was smoking????

Cobra · 09-30-2002, 01:08

They still think that the Commodores handling is better. Is the Control Blade a dud afterall? What magic has Holden woven into the Commodores wooden steering and obsolete IRS?

Also interesting to note they think the Turbo is quicker with the Auto box. Why's that?

ayman · 09-30-2002, 02:01

so now the XR6 is kicking SS arse! Weird it's coming from drive.com.au

did they mention any times?