August 2016 Wheels Mag - Sprints now faster than SS-V Redline - Page 2

Express · 08-07-2016, 05:59 PM

Around and around in circles we go, the only point of difference is a minor change in thread names.

To compare the output of these engines you’d need the stock varieties to be tuned to the extent of their safe limits then see what they offer.

As it is the current engines are tuned to suit the factory requirements and an easy example of that is the tune for the LS3 in the SS is less than the tune in the HSV is less than the tune GM supplies as crate engines.

I’m not saying the N/A LS3 will win but at least you’d know where the engines actually do stand.

I won’t even mention GM’s forced induction on a LS3, oh I have.

lucas2 · 08-07-2016, 07:27 PM

I was referring to power per kg of engine weight.

SSV - 1.52 kw/kg of engine weight
XR6S - 1.63 kw/kg of engine weight
XR8S - 1.44 kw/kg of engine weight

*Note - these are rough calculations and I'm only trying to put the physical size of the LS3 into perspective for those that harp on about displacement advantages.

duaned · 08-07-2016, 11:57 PM

Does it indicate what grade fuel were in the tanks of the test cars?

**M&Ms** · 09-07-2016, 12:31 AM

Track was Sydney Dragway. Temps were 18° for the SS, 20° for the XR6, 22°C for the XR8. Same driver for all three cars (Nathan Ponchard).

No mention of tyres or fuel, but the column says required fuel is 98 for all three, so can assume that's what has been used.

No mention of km on the Fords, but the article mentions the SS has 13,500km. So fully run in (and if my theory is true, Holdens lose power as they rack up the kays, not like the Fords ).

Interesting the SS has the most incorrect indicated speed at 100, was actually only doing 95, whereas the XR6 and XR8 were doing 98 and 99 respectively. I guess it means all those YouTube videos of the SS redline doing 0-100 should really be adding about 0.3 secs or so to their stopwatches!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wretched

Not as much in it as I would have thought.

Ok so can we confirm the following?

Track? Was it Calder as this apparently favors the Falcon
What were the age of tyres fitted to the Falcons?
How many KM had each car done?
How much fuel was in each car? Falcons need 3/4 tank.
How many runs did they do and what was the length of time between them? Falcon needs a breather between each.
Track temperature?

**M&Ms** · 09-07-2016, 12:34 AM

Then you turn the pages and see the SS laps Eastern Creek over 4 seconds faster, with Russell Ingall and Mark Skaife at the helm. So clearly the better chassis there.

rancidpunx · 09-07-2016, 08:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by M&Ms

Then you turn the pages and see the SS laps Eastern Creek over 4 seconds faster, with Russell Ingall and Mark Skaife at the helm. So clearly the better chassis there.

Dont open that can of worms

mick74GT · 09-07-2016, 09:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rsmedley1234

Apparently the only way to get under 5 in a Redline is 1) have perfect conditions; 2) gun drivers; & 3) Flat shift into 2nd.
Guess they had all 3

Not sure why you are so surprised people have been getting those times and better out of LS3 HSVs for years

**Dave R** · 09-07-2016, 10:40 AM

4.9 seems about right for the SS.

This is a 6.2L SS Black Edition (ie slightly lighter than a Redline & with 245 18s), flat road where I test all my cars (in Mexico of course), slightly up hill if anything but not enough to make a difference. The 245s don't enjoy a WOT launch as you'll see. Apart from that it doesn't suffer from traction issues, whereas even as an auto the standard XR8 will turn the tyres in 2nd. GPS speed indicated @ 100 in this particular car is 97. Correct for ~3km/h and it's around the 4.8/4.9 mark comfortably. Not Earth shattering but certainly stronger than the 6.0L. I will test the Sprint in the same spot once I get it.