Final FPV sparks kilowatt controversy (GT-F vs GTS)

fgpsi · 09-07-2014, 05:07 PM

Quote:

FORD’S most powerful FPV-badged sedan has bogged down in controversy after a Wheels test to benchmark the car maker’s claims fell short of official expectations.
Ford today called on Wheels to hold back on publishing the results of its independent dynamometer test, which was conducted under controlled conditions late last week that confirmed the rival HSV GTS as the kilowatt king of Australia.
However, it is the results of the test – which show the 5.0-litre FPV GT-F down on where Ford expects it to be – that has now sparked a separate, ultimate showdown between it and the 6.2-litre HSV GTS.
For the record, the HSV GTS recorded 330kW at the rear wheels. The FPV GT-F topped out at 311kW.
HSV claims 430kW of peak power for the GTS. Ford officially states the GT-F's peak power is 351kW, yet its engineers freely admit that the engine can produce "about 15 percent" more in favourable conditions via what it calls “transient overboost”, suggesting a true engine output of about 404kW.
Wheels has been asked to pitch the two cars against each other in a repeat showdown early next week on the same dyno used to confirm the production GT-F’s 351 kilowatts of power at the engine.
Under the rules of the re-test, both Ford and Holden will be allowed to have an engineer on hand to ensure each of the supercharged V8s records its best possible result.
Ford Australia communications and public affairs director Wes Sherwood said Ford does not agree with the result, with internal tests showing the GT-F producing “pretty close” to 351kW at the rear wheels.
“We prefer not to go on the record with this (dyno result),” Mr Sherwood said.
“We were hoping to manage this as just a discussion about our request to consider what we thought was a pretty significant discrepancy and just provide an agreement on whether you would consider retesting or not,” he said.
“That you get something like that on the record is not something that we want to do.”
The original Wheels test was carried out at VCM Automotive in Melbourne’s north, which uses the same type of dyno bench as the one used to establish Ford’s official performance figure for the GT-F.
Wheels' exclusive results show that the cars are much closer than the two manufacturers' official claims suggest, with VCM owner Mario Pancione adamant that the results are an accurate reading of each car’s true performance, despite Ford’s concerns.
Mr Pancione said his company has dyno-tested 30 HSV GTS models since the car’s launch last year, as well as “at least” 20 FPV GT models.
“The results (of the Wheels test) were right on the money,” he said.
“Good luck to them (Ford) if that’s what they think, but I can only deal with the facts and I’m confident the test we completed was correct.
“I’d love to have Ford come back out and we’ll test the car right in front of them.”
A Ford engineer told Wheels that results can also vary widely depending on test conditions such as whether the vehicle is strapped down on the bench appropriately, with losses from the driveline – resulting in the different figures at the flyweel and at the rear wheels – falling by as much as 15 percent.
A teaser video of the dyno test posted late last week drew criticism from viewers that the GTS was not tied down properly, and could potentially alter the outcome. However, the video was of the HSV’s initial calibration run on the unit, and the straps were tightened for the run that produced the result.
“It (driveline power loss) is not a fixed number that you can quote and say ‘this is what the number is, this is what it will do at the rear wheels’,” the engineer said.
He said it is possible to see variations in the loss at the rear wheels, “but not at the level that we’ve seen under your conditions”.
“I would expect a 335kW car that is heat-soaked ... or a GT-F that is heat-soaked and has fuel issues to do your number.”

http://www.wheelsmag.com.au/news/140...t-controversy/

rancidpunx · 09-07-2014, 05:14 PM

The Holden shop that did the testing https://www.facebook.com/autotechnique.melbourne

Stefan · 09-07-2014, 05:22 PM

What's the point of this dyno queen crap? The winner is the first over the line.

And now Ford claim 351kw at the wheels? WTF, when did that happen.

This is just rubbish fodder so forums can discuss pointless dyno figures for pages and pages.

burnz · 09-07-2014, 05:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rancidpunx

The Holden shop that did the testing https://www.facebook.com/autotechnique.melbourne

what make you think its a holden shop?
with holden, ford, bmw, merc, chev....
cars plastered all over the place in the link you provided..

**kypez** · 09-07-2014, 05:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by burnz

what make you think its a holden shop?
with holden, ford, bmw, merc, chev....
cars plastered all over the place in the link you provided..

well, you must have better eyes than I do. Besides the Mustang, most of the cars were Holdens and their specials (supercharger kits) are all for Holdens...

I'd say its a Holden shop

GTPete · 09-07-2014, 05:31 PM

Get the two cars to Autotech and do it once properly.

mcnews · 09-07-2014, 05:36 PM

Perfect clickbait, Wheels would be loving it.

galaxy xr8 · 09-07-2014, 05:36 PM

Do we really need two thread’s about this topic when it is being discussed in the other thread.

Wretched · 09-07-2014, 05:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by burnz

what make you think its a holden shop?
with holden, ford, bmw, merc, chev....
cars plastered all over the place in the link you provided..

http://www.autotechnique.com.au/

Says it is a Holden performance centre.
Not that I see the issue though. I couldn't see them fudging the figures.
all this bias talk is getting a little old and childish.

**fordomatic** · 09-07-2014, 05:38 PM

Since when did ford decide it was 351rwkw? 311 sounds about right to me

prydey · 09-07-2014, 05:47 PM

in another test, GTF went 348 v GTS @ 339!

seems ford engineers do know what they are on about.

http://www.motoring.com.au/news/spor...-hsv-gts-44638

Dr Smith · 09-07-2014, 05:47 PM

I think the post by "George" at the bottom sums it up,

Quote:

ford makes more than advertised while HSV claim max possible.

Dr Smith · 09-07-2014, 05:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by burnz

what make you think its a holden shop?
with holden, ford, bmw, merc, chev....
cars plastered all over the place in the link you provided..

Their own site, lol...

stavros68 · 09-07-2014, 05:52 PM

Prepare for an Internet meltdown. The dyno figures are in and it's official, Ford Performance Vehicles' GT F out-powers the Holden Special Vehicles GTS.

The forums have been raging since Ford unveiled the last ever FPV, the GT F. Although it claims 351kW, the FPV engineers said then and there that the supercharged V8 Falcon was good for more. And clearly they weren't telling fibs…

Holden Special Vehicles GTS was launched in 2013 and on the spec sheet significantly out powers the Falcon with 430kW vs 351kW.

But now we've settled the argument. Or at the very least ignited a new one.

Same day, same dyno, same conditions... And the figures are in.

Ford Performance Vehicles GT F
348.6kW at the rear wheels
721Nm at the rear wheels

Holden Special Vehicles GTS
339.6kW at the rear wheels
751Nm at the rear wheels

And yes, we are as dumbstruck as anyone.

Let the comments begin... And stay tuned for more on our Ultimate Aussie Muscle Car shootout.

DanielXR8 · 10-07-2014, 09:31 AM

Which one is the winner? The Falcon for ending production first or the Commodore for closing down production last?

About as relevant as the kilowatt nonsense.

**Polyal** · 10-07-2014, 09:49 AM

In the case Daniel it is a pretty interesting point, both are ending so its fair. Otherwise you can go down the road of who has recorded the larger losses etc...and thats accountant talk so its boring.

There needs to be some repetitive 1/4 runs, auto vs auto to try and weed out as much of the human factor as possible.

**MercurySilver** · 10-07-2014, 03:44 PM

sad isnt it
rival fans arguing over a few killa wasps
real sadness is both cars wont be produced ever again in our country

mik · 10-07-2014, 04:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MercurySilver

sad isnt it
rival fans arguing over a few killa wasps
real sadness is both cars wont be produced ever again in our country

all true mate, but by the same token, we would hate to see an ending to these great cars with faulty data and to shall we say find one to be called shrinking violet when we know by imperical data from past experience this has not been the case , lets face it ..... there are those with agendas and those that have been known to coin a phrase ....... guild the lily, and with respect to ford oz, power out puts this has been shown time and time again ford power figures have been nine out of ten times either on the mark or well understated.

mcnews · 10-07-2014, 05:10 PM

It is great clickbait fodder for the mags concerned, they will be rubbing their hands with glee. Good to see Ford get some balls and come out swinging against Wheels bias, should have done it ages ago.

Wretched · 10-07-2014, 05:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stavros68

Prepare for an Internet meltdown. The dyno figures are in and it's official, Ford Performance Vehicles' GT F out-powers the Holden Special Vehicles GTS.

The forums have been raging since Ford unveiled the last ever FPV, the GT F. Although it claims 351kW, the FPV engineers said then and there that the supercharged V8 Falcon was good for more. And clearly they weren't telling fibs…

Holden Special Vehicles GTS was launched in 2013 and on the spec sheet significantly out powers the Falcon with 430kW vs 351kW.

But now we've settled the argument. Or at the very least ignited a new one.

Same day, same dyno, same conditions... And the figures are in.

Ford Performance Vehicles GT F
348.6kW at the rear wheels
721Nm at the rear wheels

Holden Special Vehicles GTS
339.6kW at the rear wheels
751Nm at the rear wheels

And yes, we are as dumbstruck as anyone.

Let the comments begin... And stay tuned for more on our Ultimate Aussie Muscle Car shootout.

Or to play the devil's advocate...
Are Ford massaging their press cars (you know cause Holden do it all the time

)?

Dr Smith · 10-07-2014, 06:26 PM

Frankly I don't care which car has the greatest power output, just want results achieved without any error. Ford may not have had enough money to do as much as they would have liked on the body/interior etc.., but they obviously know what this engine should produce day in, day out and the fact they have taken action to re-test indicates to me those that have one on order are very, very lucky buyers. I think the engineers and marketers have finally decided whatever the badge says, it's not going to let the GT legacy end with it's true capabilities ruined by this. It may have come right at the end but I do applaud their actions.

futura · 10-07-2014, 07:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fordomatic

Since when did ford decide it was 351rwkw? 311 sounds about right to me

Didn't you get the Ford memo?

Why does 311 sound right to you?

Everyone knows that the FPV Miami makes a lot more power than advertised, closer to rwkws. Sounds to me that you need to do some of your own homework.

futura · 10-07-2014, 07:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wretched

Or to play the devil's advocate...
Are Ford massaging their press cars (you know cause Holden do it all the time

)?

I think we all can agree that we can all do without the devils advocate.

If anyone one is messaging their press cars is certainly not Ford.

Rodge · 10-07-2014, 07:35 PM

Funny that the manual press car GT-F 001 got nearly 40 rwkw's more than the non press car auto GT-F 014.

GASWAGON · 10-07-2014, 07:36 PM

For god's sakes the GT-F is 1.2 litres less capacity and it is still ahead of the GTS in kw's.

The proof is in the pudding!

futura · 10-07-2014, 07:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rancidpunx

The Holden shop that did the testing https://www.facebook.com/autotechnique.melbourne

Autotechnique name sounds like a copycat of Autotech engineering up here in Sydney. Only if autotechnique knew how to use the dyno properly.

Someone please send them some dyno operation manuals.

prydey · 10-07-2014, 07:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rodge

Funny that the manual press car GT-F 001 got nearly 40 rwkw's more than the non press car auto GT-F 014.

really?

where's the link to the manual car being on the dyno?

car 1 and 14 will later be auctioned off. press cars? hardly.

both dyno results were with the same car.

futura · 10-07-2014, 07:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rodge

Funny that the manual press car GT-F 001 got nearly 40 rwkw's more than the non press car auto GT-F 014.

What are talking about Rodge? Where have you got these rwkw figures from? For your information GTF-014 is a press car too. Ones manual (GTF001) and auto (GTF014).

Best Leave it to the experts.

**BLU-220** · 10-07-2014, 07:56 PM

wait until Chris from Bluepower does his magic on one of the GT-F's then we'll see if the autotechinque's GTS can catch it

cheers Dean

Wretched · 10-07-2014, 09:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by futura

I think we all can agree that we can all do without the devils advocate.

If anyone one is messaging their press cars is certainly not Ford.

Why is that? We cannot discuss the possibility? Taboo is it?

You're 100% certain they wouldn't do that? You'd wager your house on it?
I am not saying they are or have but I certainly wouldn't bet against it.
Powerful and fast car, may be some good PR? Sell a few more? After all they're a business, there to make money and wouldn't the first to do such a thing.

I mean really what harm does it do? It impresses the feeble minded who look into figures from dynos that have questionable accuracy, that make mountains out of molehills and scream to the hilltops of blatant bias of any organisation or individual that report outputs outside of guesstimated figures by some keyboard warrior who could barely even read the figures.

In the end the people that buy the car wouldn't even know if their car was 10 - 30 kw down or up. A majority of customers buy the car to drive each day to and from work with an average speed of 60 - 65 km/h, acceleration figures far higher than what the vehicle can really do.

Funny how so many here don't care that the Falcon has been slower in the past, less advanced, etc, that their choice of purchase was they liked the car in the first place. So really all this bickering is for nothing, the people that would lay down their hard earned would have done it if the car produced 300kw, 350 or even 400kw.