How do you rate the GT-F vs GTS?

[Alan D Segal]

Seems like the general consensus on the interwebs - bar the hysterical rants of those who are waaaaay over the Ford or Holden side - is:

- GTS has Australia's most powerful engine
- GT-F is Australia's most powerful car at the rear wheels on transient overboost/when not self-retarding
- GTS is Australia's fastest car in a straight line, but not by a massive amount
- GTS is Australia's fastest car by a fair margin when corners are involved
- With the GTS's driveline, coolers and brakes that margin would likely get bigger with every lap.

The GT-F is not a dyno queen because it is a brilliant performance car in its own right - and a brilliant send off for the venerable GT name badge.

It offers about 95% of the real-world performance that the GTS does, but for only 90% of the price (if you don't pay the inflated prices some people are asking for them).

But the dyno is the only battle it really wins against the GTS, which while more expensive does stand up better against other similar-sized performance sedans.

So what is the general consensus here? Are we in a position to present an Australian Ford Forums perspective on the final GT vs GTS debate?

[Chopped]

Both shall be remembered fondly.

I have a sneaky suspicion there will be a limited edition GTS-R as the HSV send off....

FGX XR8 is going to be the best bang for your buck for ever I think

[Alan D Segal]

Depends on how much the XR8 really costs I guess. But if it is such a good deal how come there aren't more GSs getting around? Weren't they just an attempt at a 'bang for buck' grab?

[Smoke Pursuit]

GTF should be quicker down the quarter mile, if TESTED in the same conditions.

[Alan D Segal]

Originally Posted by DASH GT

GTF should be quicker down the quarter mile, if TESTED in the same conditions.

But it hasn't been yet and the tests that have been done say it isn't.

[Smoke Pursuit]

Originally Posted by Alan D Segal

But it hasn't been yet and the tests that have been done say it isn't.

But the tests haven't been done at the same time, with the same conditions. Not by wheels anyhow.

[Whitey-AMG]

Originally Posted by DASH GT

But the tests haven't been done at the same time, with the same conditions. Not by wheels anyhow.

It will be close. Will come down to driver error. All things being equal though, you have to be realistic, GTS will be the quicker car point to point. It has heaps more power under the curve , especially with roll on acceleration it will pull away. This was all discussed in the other thread..
Anyways.......
End of the day, if you're a blue blood , GTF is a good send off for the GT badge. No shame.

[HULK_I6T]

Both are nice cars...

If it was my money I'd buy the HSV GTS over the GT-F hands down.

Whilst the GT-F is nice, its the look of the FG that lets it down..

The HSV has real road presense, looks the biz, aggressive, has all the gizmos as well as the brutal performance.. It has a far wider appreciation amongst non ford/holden people than the GT-F.

The GT-F looks too much like a XR6... Non ford people wouldnt pick a GT-F out of a line of plane jane XR6s.

The average man would appreciate a GTS more than the GT-F

[2242100]

Originally Posted by DASH GT

GTF should be quicker down the quarter mile, if TESTED in the same conditions.

Jesse Taylor the editor of Evo Magazine did test them in the same conditions.

[Alan D Segal]

Originally Posted by 2242100

Jesse Taylor the editor of Evo Magazine did test them in the same conditions.

Yes the numbers I saw indicate that both cars with manual gearboxes were within two tenths of a second over 400m... but the GTS was the winner.

[Smoke Pursuit]

Originally Posted by Alan D Segal

Yes the numbers I saw indicate that both cars with manual gearboxes were within two tenths of a second over 400m... but the GTS was the winner.

Yes manual gearboxes. We all know the Ford manual is not as quick as the Auto.

I would rather see an Auto comparison.

We have seen standard GTs run better times then 12.6

Read this thread here.

http://www.fordforums.com.au/showthread.php?t=11328022

[Alan D Segal]

Originally Posted by DASH GT

Yes manual gearboxes. We all know the Ford manual is not as quick as the Auto.

I would rather see an Auto comparison.

I'd expect the HSV manual isn't as quick as the auto either.

We have seen standard GTs run better times then 12.6 - but would they have done it under those conditions?

When the test is done with two autos at the same track on the same day with the same drivers tell us the results! Until then I'm sorry but I can't agree with you that:

Originally Posted by DASH GT

GTF should be quicker down the quarter mile, if TESTED in the same conditions.

[Sorted]

Originally Posted by DASH GT

GTF should be quicker down the quarter mile, if TESTED in the same conditions.

And Auto vs Auto

[Nova 8]

I think they are both dead in the water, just enjoy the final days....

[Rodge]

Add to the Op's synopsis:
GTS makes more power and considerably more torque in the low and mid range.

Torque is what's really important when you're done talking.

[Alan D Segal]

Rodge - are there major gear and final drive ratio differences between the two that might make the on-dyno torque gap not as large in real conditions?

Edit:

Originally Posted by DASH GT

But the tests haven't been done at the same time, with the same conditions. Not by wheels anyhow.

I'd still prefer to compare the cars based on tests that have been done now, rather than speculating as to what might happen in your scenario. Once the tests are done (by anyone) post 'em up!

[Smoke Pursuit]

Originally Posted by Alan D Segal

Rodge - are there major gear and final drive ratios between the two that might make the torque gap not as large?

Edit:


I'd still prefer to compare the cars based on tests that have been done now, rather than speculating as to what might happen in your scenario. Once the tests are done (by anyone) post 'em up!

Well your wasting YOUR time..

The only way to compare is to take them to a track, on the same day, and run them four times next to each other, swapping drivers over.

[Smoke Pursuit]

Originally Posted by Rodge

Add to the Op's synopsis:
GTS makes more power and considerably more torque in the low and mid range.

Torque is what's really important when you're done talking.

Good thing is they both outgun a 300c SRT8...

[Rodge]

Originally Posted by DASH GT

Good thing is they both outgun a 300c SRT8...

GT-F is nothing but a very mildly tweeked SC R Spec and if you care to review Motor magazine February 2013 edition you'll see how the R Spec couldn't even account for an SRT8 on the track...what hope against a GTS

[XBGTFGGTP]

Originally Posted by Rodge

GT-F is nothing but a very mildly tweeked SC R Spec and if you care to review Motor magazine February 2013 edition you'll see how the R Spec couldn't even account for an SRT8 on the track...what hope against a GTS

I'll be happy to put my GTF up against your 300C on the track Rodge when it arrives. As it's only a overpriced R-Spec it should be a even match.

[rancidpunx]

Originally Posted by XBGTFGGTP

I'll be happy to put my GTF up against your 300C on the track Rodge when it arrives. As it's only a overpriced R-Spec it should be a even match.

Ah the old Motor Magazine SRT8 again Rodge . No worries against a 300c in a straight line, the one at the drags last week was nearly a second slower with his best time. I would like to see another track comparison as i'm not convinced.

[Rodge]

Originally Posted by XBGTFGGTP

I'll be happy to put my GTF up against your 300C on the track Rodge when it arrives. As it's only a overpriced R-Spec it should be a even match.

Sounds like good fun to me

[AGS302]

Originally Posted by Rodge

Add to the Op's synopsis:
GTS makes more power and considerably more torque in the low and mid range.

Torque is what's really important when you're done talking.

Torque is a force. Horsepower is the work being done by that force over time.
Higher horsepower means more is getting done. Torque doesn't even matter at that point. The car with more horsepower will win if the cars are evenly matched and have the correct gearing for their respective power curves.
Torque is fun to drive with, and is cool to brag about, but horsepower indicates how much work can actually be accomplished with that force.

[Whitey-AMG]

Originally Posted by AGS302

Torque is a force. Horsepower is the work being done by that force over time.
Higher horsepower means more is getting done. Torque doesn't even matter at that point. The car with more horsepower will win if the cars are evenly matched and have the correct gearing for their respective power curves.
Torque is fun to drive with, and is cool to brag about, but horsepower indicates how much work can actually be accomplished with that force.

Its why you need to look at what's "under the curve"
When you see both power graphs side by side - you'll see that the GTS has the higher potential in both Torque and HP where they intersect. Based on that - you could safely conclude that all other things being relatively equal - the GTS would be the quicker car. Its not what we wanted to see or hear - but its fact. But again - there's no shame here as the GTS has a larger engine , it is intercooled as well - so the result would be repeatable.

[mik]

Originally Posted by Rodge

Add to the Op's synopsis:
GTS makes more power and considerably more torque in the low and mid range.

Torque is what's really important when you're done talking.

Not really......... with the amount of power these cars are both making getting all that power from the rear wheels to the ground is the most important.

[Nova 8]

What might happen is HSV releases the series II with an extra 30kw at the wheels and take the dyno crown and seal the 1/4 mile doubts as well.

[2242100]

Originally Posted by Alan D Segal

Seems like the general consensus on the interwebs - bar the hysterical rants of those who are waaaaay over the Ford or Holden side - is:

- GTS has Australia's most powerful engine
- GT-F is Australia's most powerful car at the rear wheels on transient overboost/when not self-retarding
- GTS is Australia's fastest car in a straight line, but not by a massive amount
- GTS is Australia's fastest car by a fair margin when corners are involved
- With the GTS's driveline, coolers and brakes that margin would likely get bigger with every lap.

The GT-F is not a dyno queen because it is a brilliant performance car in its own right - and a brilliant send off for the venerable GT name badge.

It offers about 95% of the real-world performance that the GTS does, but for only 90% of the price (if you don't pay the inflated prices some people are asking for them).

But the dyno is the only battle it really wins against the GTS, which while more expensive does stand up better against other similar-sized performance sedans.

So what is the general consensus here? Are we in a position to present an Australian Ford Forums perspective on the final GT vs GTS debate?

Pretty well summed up I think, although I'd be inclined to replace the word "brilliant" with the words "very good".

[Nova 8]

Can you imagine the collective sigh of disappointment from the mods when they see yet another GTF vs GTS thread.

[LoudPipes]

Cut & Paste the comments from the decimated thread and you'll have most of the views ready made.

Any way we'll probably never know as most of the GT F's will never be allowed out of their garages.

[Whitey-AMG]

Originally Posted by Nova 8

Can you imagine the collective sigh of disappointment from the mods when they see yet another GTF vs GTS thread.

Another thread , why not.
If there's no trolling , let it rip.
Ain't long before there are no more opportunities to discuss this topic.