Ford Forums banner

the weight issue again

3K views 8 replies 8 participants last post by  TurboDOHC 
#1 ·
Motor mag: weight issue again

sorry guys, but not sure if this has been posted before. couldn't find it anywhere.

just wondering if anyone else has noticed in the lastest Motor Mag that they include the claimed and wet weight of all 9 cars tested.
i'm sure by now we're all aware of holdens dodgy method at weighting their cars, and this was show with almost every holden car having a higher wet weight (the correct one as far as i'm concerned) than the claimed weight.
On the other hand, all the Fords had a lower weight. Which brought the fords and holdens a lot closer than i thought.
but what was the biggest surprise was the wet weight of the XR8. Ford claims it at 1795kg i think, but they got a wet weight of only 1707kg. thought it was a miss-print, but even the rear/front split weights add up to 1707kg. sure'll this can't be right. if so, then why does the ford lag as far as it does behind the lower powered SS in performance terms.
anyway, just my 2c.

BTW, the times of the GT are improving with every article i read. if it's true that they're best with 20thou on the clock, i'm sure we'll see close to 5.6sec times soon at the rate they're decreasing.
 
See less See more
#3 ·
Motor Mag have only done times on the XR8 once back in March. Than they Copy and Paste. They dont even bother doing times.Wheels did a compar on a SS and XR8 and a Clubsport . XR8 0-100 =6.2 SS 0- 100 =6.4 XR8 o-400m= 14.4 SS 0-400m = 14.5. They were tested on the same day.
 
#4 ·
Yeah i was looking at the power and weight comparisons, and that the XR8 had a better power to weight ratio than the SS but still ran a slower 1/4 mile. I know gearing plays a part in it but i thought it woulda been a bit closer.
 
#8 ·
I saw an article in either the Age or Australian newspaper motoring sections recently where they said that the weight of the Holdens was not correct. Apparently Holden have been posting the tare weigh of their cars and stating that this was the kerb weight. (Tare = car weight without fluids, i.e. full tank of petrol, water, oil, etc.).

Ford have been publishing kerb weights which includes alll of the above fluids. Apparently Ford management were livid at the perception that the BA was porky in comparison to the Dunnydoor.

Holden have apparently admitted the error, claiming that it was a honest mistake and that the correct figures would be posted soon.

At the end of the day the Falcon is only approximately around a 100 kgs heavier.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top