GT-F vs GTS LSA

[LoudPipes]

Aussies love an underdog. Go the GT F

Seriously this talk of what is the best engine design is destined to spend eternity going around and around in circles.
You could easy add more to the mix.
Why do Euros use Turbos instead of Superchargers to meet Euro Emissions and still make big power?
How does Mercedes-Benz make over 600Nm of torque from an N/A 6.2litre where others need forced induction?
Maybe it’s just different manufacturers with different engine setups that all equal good job.
This is a silly argument in my opinion.

[flooded one]

Originally Posted by Adrenaline

You made some pretty far-out claims in the other thread and I corrected you, what's the big deal? You can revisit it via PM if you like. And I also have a Ford logo as my DP if you didn't notice, to demonstrate I'm not one-sided, I appreciate both brands in this era of imports taking over. Perhaps you aren't aware, I have a VF AND an FG in the same driveway- explains both pics.

And no, pushrod engines aren't going away any time soon. The second largest automaker in the world is still very much committed to the OHV V8- and good on them. But again, why are we arguing about pushrods? It's such a lame thing to fight about.

And remember the GTS will lose more through its driveline, the figures are about right. Regarding fuel economy and efficiency, we're car enthusiasts, leave the economy runs to the Prius. At the end of the day (pushrod motor or not) the GTS is the quickest ever Aussie muscle car. Should it be compared to the GTF? I don't think so. But unfortunately all people want to see is HSV's best vs FPV's best- even if the GTF should really be compared to an R8.

or is it??? we haven't seen the auto GTS have a chop at the auto GT-F yet and Drive has spent a **** load of time behind the wheel of the GTS. its not exactly like they've spent much time in the GT-F

[b0son]

Originally Posted by Adrenaline

And remember the GTS will lose more through its driveline,

why is that? bigger diff/tailshaft/etc?

[Dave R]

Originally Posted by wildrider

or is it??? we haven't seen the auto GTS have a chop at the auto GT-F yet and Drive has spent a **** load of time behind the wheel of the GTS. its not exactly like they've spent much time in the GT-F

There's an auto GTF tester floating around isn't there? They should get them both to WSID and do a proper run like they did with the SS and XR6T. I reckon it would be pretty close, but what makes me lean towards GTS at this point is the MPH it's been pulling. The Dunlops aren't as good as the Continentals either. 80-120 would be interesting to compare.

Originally Posted by b0son

why is that? bigger diff/tailshaft/etc?

Yeah, the GTS is running a heavier-duty driveline. Plus, peak power only tells part of the story.

[1TUFFUTE]

Originally Posted by Adrenaline

You made some pretty far-out claims in the other thread and I corrected you, what's the big deal? You can revisit it via PM if you like. And I also have a Ford logo as my DP if you didn't notice, to demonstrate I'm not one-sided, I appreciate both brands in this era of imports taking over. Perhaps you aren't aware, I have a VF AND an FG in the same driveway- explains both pics.

And no, pushrod engines aren't going away any time soon. The second largest automaker in the world is still very much committed to the OHV V8- and good on them. But again, why are we arguing about pushrods? It's such a lame thing to fight about.

And remember the GTS will lose more through its driveline, the figures are about right. Regarding fuel economy and efficiency, we're car enthusiasts, leave the economy runs to the Prius. At the end of the day (pushrod motor or not) the GTS is the quickest ever Aussie muscle car. Should it be compared to the GTF? I don't think so. But unfortunately all people want to see is HSV's best vs FPV's best- even if the GTF should really be compared to an R8.

No ones fighting, it's called a debate.
And the topic is GTF vs GTS LSA. And just because a company is "committed" to an engine type, doesn't mean it's the best in class....or even good for that matter. All the leading mainstream performance cars in the world are being downsized to smaller more efficient FI motors. I think that says a lot when companies like bmw or merc, some of who were staunch anti FI, are now on the band wagon and achieving far greater things.
And I wouldn't dismiss fuel economy so easy....it's probably the biggest force leading to the whole industry movement.it may not be the most important thing to v8 or performance buyers......but it's naive to think it's still not right up there as very important.

And as for these far out claims you mention.....your so far off the mark you didn't refute one thing with facts. Everything I said was true......just because it sounds biased because I'm a passionate ford guy......doesn't mean it's false. I pleaded for your superior intellect to correct me but you reflected all requests till u got the thread closed. So please.....don't fight.....debate! Use that MBA of yours

[1TUFFUTE]

Originally Posted by LoudPipes

[SIZE=3]Aussies love an underdog. Go the GT F[/
How does Mercedes-Benz make over 600Nm of torque from an N/A 6.2litre where others need forced induction?

The GTS makes 740nm out of a 6.2 sc go figure.

[1TUFFUTE]

Originally Posted by b0son

why is that? bigger diff/tailshaft/etc?

I've always wondered that actually. On a dyno surely there's Jack all load on the driveline, compared to the road when the driveline is actually torqued up moving a heavy car off the line with tyres under grip load.
On a dyno it's brought up to speed and it's a rolling road. Surely there's no where near as much loss as they'd be in the real world?

[flooded one]

Originally Posted by Adrenaline

There's an auto GTF tester floating around isn't there? They should get them both to WSID and do a proper run like they did with the SS and XR6T. I reckon it would be pretty close, but what makes me lean towards GTS at this point is the MPH it's been pulling. The Dunlops aren't as good as the Continentals either. 80-120 would be interesting to compare.

they should. I think its pretty pointless comparing the manual GT-F to the auto GTS. I myself would be interested in the 80-120km/h. around a race track the GTS would win hands down. Its in a start line i'm interested in with both. when wheels got the 0-100km/h of 4.5 sec with the R-spec that was with the manual so I think its very possible for a GT-F auto could quite possibly match the GTS auto

[flooded one]

Originally Posted by 1TUFFUTE

I've always wondered that actually. On a dyno surely there's Jack all load on the driveline, compared to the road when the driveline is actually torqued up moving a heavy car off the line with tyres under grip load.
On a dyno it's brought up to speed and it's a rolling road. Surely there's no where near as much loss as they'd be in the real world?

pretty sure the GTS got all the beefed up driveline etc could be wrong might be why???

[1TUFFUTE]

Originally Posted by wildrider

pretty sure the GTS got all the beefed up driveline etc could be wrong might be why???

Sorry I may have confused it a bit......I went a tad off topic. I was referring to high powered cars and the losses people talk abouthrough the driveline. I was thinking that surely these losses aren't the same on a dyno as when on an ACTUALL road with real loads. Or am I thinking about it wrong

[40RDT]

Originally Posted by Adrenaline

There's an auto GTF tester floating around isn't there? They should get them both to WSID and do a proper run like they did with the SS and XR6T. I reckon it would be pretty close, but what makes me lean towards GTS at this point is the MPH it's been pulling. The Dunlops aren't as good as the Continentals either. 80-120 would be interesting to compare.



Yeah, the GTS is running a heavier-duty driveline. Plus, peak power only tells part of the story.

20 inch wheels prob wouldnt help either

[LoudPipes]

Originally Posted by 1TUFFUTE

The GTS makes 740nm out of a 6.2 sc go figure.

Some of the turbocharged Mercs are limited at 1000Nm so as not to break their driveline.

[Dave R]

Originally Posted by wildrider

they should. I think its pretty pointless comparing the manual GT-F to the auto GTS. I myself would be interested in the 80-120km/h. around a race track the GTS would win hands down. Its in a start line i'm interested in with both. when wheels got the 0-100km/h of 4.5 sec with the R-spec that was with the manual so I think its very possible for a GT-F auto could quite possibly match the GTS auto

Best scenario would be two private owners with run-in cars. Any GTF you test at the moment is going to be tight.

Originally Posted by 1TUFFUTE

No ones fighting, it's called a debate.
And the topic is GTF vs GTS LSA. And just because a company is "committed" to an engine type, doesn't mean it's the best in class....or even good for that matter. All the leading mainstream performance cars in the world are being downsized to smaller more efficient FI motors. I think that says a lot when companies like bmw or merc, some of who were staunch anti FI, are now on the band wagon and achieving far greater things.
And I wouldn't dismiss fuel economy so easy....it's probably the biggest force leading to the whole industry movement.it may not be the most important thing to v8 or performance buyers......but it's naive to think it's still not right up there as very important.

And as for these far out claims you mention.....your so far off the mark you didn't refute one thing with facts. Everything I said was true......just because it sounds biased because I'm a passionate ford guy......doesn't mean it's false. I pleaded for your superior intellect to correct me but you reflected all requests till u got the thread closed. So please.....don't fight.....debate! Use that MBA of yours

Haha, the LS motors certainly aren't best in class (since Ford released the 5.0), but the point people have been trying to make is they certainly aren't a bad way to power a car! GM knows their craft when it comes to OHV V8s, and we won't be seeing the last of them any time soon. As far as their application in Commodores in our little corner of the world, I actually used to scoff at them a bit- huge displacement V8 getting eaten up by the Ford turbos. The amount of worked V8 Commodores I mauled with my mildly tickled FG turbo was sheer comedy. But after living with one, you do appreciate it. I think we can get a bit greedy, most people drive little 1.5l hatchbacks and half the time we're splitting hairs over whose V8 is x tenths faster to 100. We should be happy we have them at all (which won't be for long).

Regarding GTS vs GTF, as I've said a few times, I don't think it matters at the end of the day. They're both at the top of their game. There will be a whole bunch of people saying the LSA is better and a whole bunch saying the Miami is better. All that matters is that their owners enjoy them. The GTF owners shouldn't be taking GTS comparisons to heart, it's not a fair match up. And you are right- economy is a huge deal globally- but thankfully it hasn't affected our niche sedan market, which isn't long for this world anyway. Just look at what fuel economy standards have done to the new M3- they went from a V8 to a twin turbo I6 and the reviews have actually criticised the motor for not being as sharp as the old V8. I personally hope GM & Chrysler keep making their old school V8s as long as possible.

[goldxrdamo]

Originally Posted by 40RDT

Whats wrong with a pushrod engine? 6.2L capacity with a superchared and intercooler sounds like a pretty good combo that would make some serious torque with minimal mods.

Where there hell are people getting $500 tunes from? It costs more than $500 for just the flash tuner...

I already had my flash tuner from a previous car so it costs $462 at RDP to go from 367rwhp to 485 rwhp in my gs ute. The GTS get stuff all from just a tune. There's nothing wrong with pushrod V8s but it is extremely old technology compared to the 5.0

[XBGTFGGTP]

Originally Posted by 40RDT

Bit of a joke imo when you consider people are paying 85k on road and in some cases even more you would expect FPV to put their best seats available in it. The GTP seats are awesome imo, evertyime I jump in my fg xr6t I feel like I really need to find a pair for it haha

Have you had the GTP seats? I did in my GTP as a daily driver and they were comfortable but a right pain in the ***. Ok if you ain't in and out all day long or as a weekend warrior but for ease to live with daily the GT seats become the better option.

[40RDT]

Originally Posted by XBGTFGGTP

Have you had the GTP seats? I did in my GTP as a daily driver and they were comfortable but a right pain in the ***. Ok if you ain't in and out all day long or as a weekend warrior but for ease to live with daily the GT seats become the better option.

Yeah my Super Pursuit has them

[XBGTFGGTP]

Originally Posted by wildrider

and remember a few years ago with the introduction of that horrible 3L V6 into the VE range?? they where claiming that you could drive up to 900km on a tank highway?? my old AU forte sedan could do that and it had a smaller fuel tank then it by 5 litres. I remember some journos saying that no Australian car could do that before. only to be hounded by owners of 6 cylinder Falcons pre BA stating that what I already found out for myself

Typical Holden marketing crap.!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[XBGTFGGTP]

Originally Posted by HULK_I6T

The VF GTS LSA will likely be more collectible than the fg GT 351

As good as the fg is, it's just too similar to a regular GT. Ford just didn't do the car justice. No good pulling out the dark argent paint tin for a lick of paint over the wheels, a sticker pack and a ecu tickle and call it the most collectible falcon ever??

The VF GTS has the LSA, no other commodore/hsv has this. It's not gonna be cheap for someone to build up a replica. It's also the fastest Aussie made car, etc etc.

In my opinion, True collectible cars need something mechanical, some extra hardware over the normal run of the mill model. Even the t series had the stroker motor and other hardware changes.

Outside of Brock specials, what other HIV Holden's gave really held there value? Can't see a GTS holding either as the car ain't hot the heritage of the GTF

[40RDT]

Originally Posted by XBGTFGGTP

Outside of Brock specials, what other HIV Holden's gave really held there value? Can't see a GTS holding either as the car ain't hot the heritage of the GTF

Same as FPV probably, little to none. VS GTS-R and the W427 are probably the only HSV's that I could think of that would still get good money. VN and VL Group A's are still worth good money also

[dragons90]

Originally Posted by 40RDT

Generally as newer models are released the better the cars get and wtf is transient overboost and what does it have to do with the GTS outperforming and getting better reviews than the GTF?

And yes the GTS has better hardware than the FPV, bigger brakes, stronger driveline, better suspension etc etc but everyone on here already knows that. As for dyno kw numbers I wouldnt get too hung up on those, performance times are a better gauge of real world performance. And you do realise that the GTF is just an expensive falcon too yeah lmao

The Ford Falcon GT-F feels more secure on the road and handles better.

The HSV GTS (with magnetic particles in the suspension, the same type used by Ferrari) feels wobbly on bumpy roads. And the (electric) power steering isn't as sharp as the Ford's hydraulic set-up.

So much for there great suspension.

[graphicgoose]

Originally Posted by dragons90

The Ford Falcon GT-F feels more secure on the road and handles better.

The HSV GTS (with magnetic particles in the suspension, the same type used by Ferrari) feels wobbly on bumpy roads. And the (electric) power steering isn't as sharp as the Ford's hydraulic set-up.

So much for there great suspension.

Exactly this. I think they should strap the same tyres to both cars and give them a crack around a circuit. Huge difference between the Ford's Dunflops and the Continentals on the GTS. Brett from Shockworks mentioned that they were testing 295 rear tyres (no doubt Dunlops) on the GT's while he was testing for the GT Black and he said the 0-100kph times dropped a fair bit (didn't give me a time or anything though). It did however introduce understeer as a result of the rear end having too much grip and pushing on through corners, hence 275's to maintain handling balance. So the only true comparison I feel would be to give them the same tyres and either both auto/manual gearboxes. Make it a level playing field in those two areas and then see what they can do.

[HEMI POWER]

Originally Posted by XBGTFGGTP

Outside of Brock specials, what other HIV Holden's gave really held there value? Can't see a GTS holding either as the car ain't hot the heritage of the GTF

The GTF will undoubtely hold some value but in saying this it will never be like its old brothers.Reason why because in the 70's the GT's owned the market.They were the HSV of today that extra cubic inch was all about bragging rights and it also won the public..Something these later GT's never had over there rivals.

[goldxrdamo]

The VF GTS will only be worth something until the VF2 GTS comes out and then the VF3.

[BOOSTEDGAZ]

With regards to the ever going conversation regarding the GTP seats I have had both, my current ride is a FG 335 GT previous to that I had a BF GTP. Both seats have there advantages / disadvantages but the biggest problem with the GTP seats is getting in and getting out without wearing the side bolsters. If the seats were a lot lower in the car they would be better, but due to the high seating position in all the falcons (and I am not a big guy 176cm tall 98kg) the side bolsters end up worn and crushed over time. Although the GT seats may not look the part compared to the GTP they are a lot more practical and hold you in almost as well.
I will admit I wouldn't mind getting a set of GTP seats for my FG if I could mount them far lower in the car as even the GT seats are too high as has been pointed out regularly in reviews etc.
I think it would have been a nice option for the GTF but do not see it as a cross against it so to speak - if you were going to buy the GTF as a collectors piece and not drive it then yes they would be good but if you intend to drive the car even semi regularly they will end up worn and crushed and they are difficult to get in and out of until you master the knack for it so to speak and then there is the problem of your passengers wearing the bolsters out also if they are not careful - look at any older GTP and you will generally see exactly what I mean. If you are a bigger person then it is even harder not to wear them out.

[XP6]

Just get over it will you guys... sick of this bs bickering its pointless and proves SFA.

[Rodge]

Originally Posted by XP6

Just get over it will you guys... sick of this bs bickering its pointless and proves SFA.

Great and last debate about two motoring icon's.

[QUOTE=XBGTFGGTP]

Originally Posted by Rodge

to do.

I think you've missed the point. Technology, (performance and convienience) makes average / good drivers feel better about themselves and a car making people feel better about themselves is a good thing, helps justify the price tag and the fuel bill.

Originally Posted by 40RDT

Bit of a joke imo when you consider people are paying 85k on road and in some cases even more you would expect FPV to put their best seats available in it. The GTP seats are awesome imo, evertyime I jump in my fg xr6t I feel like I really need to find a pair for it haha

There's a simple twisting of the torso routine that makes getting in and out of GT-P seats easy enough. I don't understand why people havn't worked that out. Much cheaper to fit the made in Asia standard Ford seats than GT-P seats and its quite obvious that's all Ford cared about.

Originally Posted by 40RDT

I think the VF GTS will hold its value well, at this stage it looks like it will be the best local made performance car ever.

Totally agree.

Originally Posted by 40RDT

Yeah both the LSA and the Miami V8 are both good engines in my book. The extra 1.2L capacity of the LSA makes it a torque monster

So many people claiming they make the same power at the treads convieniently overlook the massive torque difference (740nm vs 570 nm's is a huge difference) and that's before we start talking about the torque reduction programming in the PCM and TCM of the FPV to help the under-spec driveline hold together.

80-120 times are where its at for real world on-road performance IMO.
Autocar N.Z. has a best for a SC FPV of 2.51 seconds, (matches a Jaguar XFR) and the GTS of 2.29 seconds, (matches a BMW M5 and a Mercedes-Benz E63S). This speaks for itself really as its clear the BMW M5 and MB E63S are in a higher performacne leaguye than a SC Jaguar XFR...although I still love the Jag cause they look so damm stylish.

[BHDOGS]

I really wish Holden would choose one factor at what makes a better car first it was quarter mile then it was track times now it's 80-120 it's basically whateva the olden is a little better at at the time lucky they've never been ahead in looks or six cyclinder engines or anything really and I'm stilly waiting for a reply hsv made that car ford made the gtf you can't compare a factory built car to an aftermarket bolted together one simple and with that the discussion is won

[HULK_I6T]

Originally Posted by 1TUFFUTE

You could get the crate motor direct from the states bingo....your ss is now a GTS lsa.
And I think your short changing the GTF 351 by a fair margin.
And I don't see people prepared to pay way over the rrp for a GTS....rather they are cheap as chips now apparently.
The GTF351 has gone to some people far far above the rrp. And how much will the badged cars ford held back for sale by auction sell for? They could go for big numbers. Don't see people clambering for a GTS like that!

A crate motor in an ss? There goes $20k... then you need the rest of the driveline lol..to get GT-f performance buy the new model xr8 and it might even have it stock, worst case a mild ecu upgrade and your done.

people paid overs for GT-F, many bought it before they even knew the specs, ford really pulled the wool over corking out the 351 badge. The GT-F buyers have GT-HO values etched into their heads... in 10 years if a GT-F fetches $70k they will be lucky, but as you say many paid over that to start with. This smells of what happened back in 1999 with holden fans, sold the last hsv with holden stroker 5.7 and appealed to the enthusiasts, then the next year the holden released the ls1 available in a commodore executive at half price which destroyed the hsv. (Think fh xr8)

the GTS LSA is also a regular model (as was the xy gt-ho). I bet there are more hsv buyers out there than fpv too when supply dries up

again the GT-F is a great car, id love one personally but compared to the regukar gt335 and f6 it just doesnt offer much more to be hailed a collectible.

[BOOSTEDGAZ]

Flame suit on !!

As said before this could be the last chance for the new car HSV Vs FPV discussion.....that said this is FORD FORUMS so lets remember that and enjoy talking about the GTF instead of putting it down and complaining.
If you love the GTS there is a HSV forum I am sure you can find and if you have already copped out and bought a Chrysler I am sure there is a forum you can find to join also, mean while let the real blue blooded Ford fans enjoy what will be the greatest GT ever!!
I myself will only ever buy Ford but that is just me, I don't care if the GTS has more flashy crap and is 10mins faster I would still buy the GT over it any day!!

Go the GTF and congrats to those who have secured one.

Flame suit off!!

[Auslandau]

Originally Posted by XP6

Just get over it will you guys... sick of this bs bickering its pointless and proves SFA.

Yep. Could just close down the forums and discuss what shampoo we use in our hair ..... But then that would end in bickering as well wouldn't it

It's the internet! Either Discuss, debate whatever, or walk away from computer as that what we do here on the World Wide Web