You would think Expensive Daewoo would have done something to counter the "T" in their all new VZ line up given they have had 2 years to do it. Reckon the "T" will remain supreme for quite a few years to come - especially now with the 6 speeder being released in the markII. It will be interesting to see what effect the new gear box will have on 0-100 and 1/4 mile times - roll on October!!!!!

more gears mean more gear changes dont they ??? higher ratios...

btw....... the majoritiy of the drag runners are SSS

That reminds me.

70% of XR6Ts are autos. Expensive Daewoo V8s still run their same old 4spd auto with some minor improvements apparently. So basically all they get now is electronic throttle and 5kW more in the SS & SV8. A marginal improvement.

Neither the VZ nor the BA mkII are major leaps forward.

When you have a really close look at the VZ range I think they have got the features in the wrong models to really hurt Ford any more then VY did.

I would have expected stability control to come in with BA2 but it’s limited in the Expensive Daewoo range anyway.

I will wait till I see the two side by side, but I think Expensive Daewoo may have actually stuffed up the progress made with VY2 SS and let the XR8 back in.

Can't help feeling the same way. Everything I've read about the VZ (not from Holden) has taken same wind out of its sails and these new features are very scarcely positioned across the range.

I think the VZ and the BA MkII will now be closer than ever in terms of performance with Expensive Daewoo allowing the XR8 back into the SS ‘s picture due to the minor changes only while Ford have finally got there act together with the gearbox, suspension, 18" and gearing. The SS regardless of its minor improvements is not proving to be any faster with times to date recorded at 13.99 for 400m run.

IMO the XR6T with its 6 speed and 3.7's will simply run away further from both XR and SS V8's. For the volume sellers, the XT SSS auto will hold it's own due to Expensive Daewoo opting to up the price, but use with the lesser 175kw V6 and mate it to that terrible 4 speed auto.

To be honest, the only place I see ford hurting maybe with the XR6 (N/A) and Fairmont sales. Even at that I'm not so sure as the XR6 is still a beautiful car, just as fast, stylish and more refined based on media reports to date.

The 13.99 run that MOTOR insist on recording as a 0-400m time in their specs at the rear of the mag, really gets under my skin.

The SS did actually record that time.

The driver was Jonathon Hawley/Dave Morley (I'm pretty sure...Mickey T help me out here)

It was (and is) a one of time and has NOT been replicated, even by GM Test drivers.

The time is a real time.....the driver just got an awesome start/gearchange/revs so the time shown is actually a true time, BUT it is not a consistent or repeatable time.

I have never heard of a time like that being recorded again.

So in effect.

An SS Late model camira can record a 13.99 time for the 0-400m in the right conditions, so the time being recorded is the truth however it is not a real worl time and as such, the SS time should be more in the way of an individual time for the latest test shown.

One thing that needs to be looked at is the Falcon and Commodores gearing.

Plonky, you said about the Late model camira that "STILL CARRYING THE SAME WEIGHT, THUS WITH THE INCERASE IN POWER, THE CAR HAS A VERY NICE POWER TO WEIGHT RATIO".

Albeit it true, the Late model camira has much shorter gearing than the Falcon - ESPECIALY first gear. If you had identical gearsets, the Falcon would maul the Late model camira 0-100 even WITH the weight disadvantage due to the big torque the Falcon produces. Ford dont need to make the first gear any shorter at the moment as it would hurt fuel economy and its not like the Commodore (V6) is quicker than the Barra 182 or even the AU models! (157kW) So why would they??

If you want a Ford with more performance, buy a performance model - that's how they sell cars and make money.

Ross

PS. I am only refering to the 6 cylinder variants of the Falcon and the Commodore, and not the V8's.

The SV6 has been ran 0-100 time in 6.9sec that was from a pilot 3 car.

Aussieman, I have no doubt it ran a 6.9, but what I wrote above, was saying that IF they were geared identically, the XT would maul it.

Ross

Aussieman, I have no doubt it ran a 6.9, but what I wrote above, was saying that IF they were geared identically, the XT would maul it.

Ross

I'm not sure about that, Less weight would be close very close.

As if you wouldn't chose a clubbie over a GT. Im not saying id ever buy a clubbie(I would never buy a commodore). But what I am saying is id never buy a GT, what a disapointment in both 400m and 0-100, its just nothing short of embarresing that the GT would have its ass completely wiped buy all of holdens V8 range. FORD you need to do something about this, how bout another 40kw or a big weight reduction....

Have you actually driven a Clubsport and then driven a GT?, you will find the GT feels much quicker than the Clubsport and gruntier too.

I'm not sure about that, Less weight would be close very close

The XT would probably "maul" a sv6, theres not that much weight between them.

The 13.99 run that MOTOR insist on recording as a 0-400m time in their specs at the rear of the mag, really gets under my skin

Apparently the VZ SS is running the same as the VY2 SS because of its different gear ratios.

Have you actually driven a Clubsport and then driven a GT?, you will find the GT feels much quicker than the Clubsport and gruntier too.

You really don't belive that do you.? the feeling might be fright lol

The XT would probably "maul" a sv6, theres not that much weight between them..

XT might bet a Exec but a SV6 NO WAY.

Most ford I6's would beat a 175alloytech. But the 190alloytech that's a differn't story.