New V6 for Commodore?

[08ESE]

Where do you get your info? GM have used direct injection on this V6 range to reduce fuel consumption rather than AFM.

As for the XR8.... combined fuel economy is 14.0L/100km versus 12.9L/100km for the SS. Not bad for a car with a 10% larger engine and old fashioned OHV

caradvice.com.au done a test using afm ss and xr8. xr8 won every test except for braking distance, and economy, which in 100kms, it lost by .2L (edit... .03L )

they done dyno, 1/4 mile, braking, economy etc tests.

pretty sure there was no bias involved.


•Ford Falcon XR8
◦9.82-litres/100km.
◦235.0kW – at the wheels. 288.8kW – at the flywheel.
◦6.54-seconds 0-100km/h.
◦14.72-seconds @ 163.89km/h.
◦39.75m 100-0km/h.


•Holden Commodore SS (AFM)
◦9.79-litres/100km.
◦204.5kW – at the wheels. 252.4kW – at the flywheel.
◦6.74-seconds 0-100km/h.
◦14.80-seconds @ 161.38km/h.
◦38.79m 100-0km/h



http://www.caradvice.com.au/30255/fo...final-verdict/

[08ESE]

Source? I thought the XR8 was considerably slower than the SS (and XR6T for that matter).

probably true without the AFM on the SS

[Sathanas]

caradvice.com.au done a massive test using afm ss and xr8. xr8 won every test except for braking distance, and economy, which in 100kms, it lost by .2L (edit... .03L )

they done dyno, 1/4 mile, braking, economy etc tests.

pretty sure there was no bias involved.


•Ford Falcon XR8
◦9.82-litres/100km.
◦235.0kW – at the wheels. 288.8kW – at the flywheel.
◦6.54-seconds 0-100km/h.
◦14.72-seconds @ 163.89km/h.
◦39.75m 100-0km/h.


•Holden Commodore SS (AFM)
◦9.79-litres/100km.
◦204.5kW – at the wheels. 252.4kW – at the flywheel.
◦6.74-seconds 0-100km/h.
◦14.80-seconds @ 161.38km/h.
◦38.79m 100-0km/h



http://www.caradvice.com.au/30255/fo...final-verdict/

Fuck didn't think AFM would munt the car that much. 14.8 seconds down the quarter? Wasn't there a test which had the Tarago doing that? And the XT Falcon as well

[MZ21]

Interesting so have the SS performance figures come down thanks to AFM?

[08ESE]

didnt they offically drop a few KW when afm came in too?

[Sathanas]

didnt they offically drop a few KW when afm came in too?

Dropped from 270 to 260. Guessing there is a way to fuck it off with a tune. Wonder what would be needed to rip the hardware bit out though. Guessing L99 is the L98 with AFM? Any other differences?

[CussCuss]

caradvice.com.au done a test using afm ss and xr8. xr8 won every test except for braking distance, and economy, which in 100kms, it lost by .2L (edit... .03L )

they done dyno, 1/4 mile, braking, economy etc tests.

pretty sure there was no bias involved.


•Ford Falcon XR8
◦9.82-litres/100km.
◦235.0kW – at the wheels. 288.8kW – at the flywheel.
◦6.54-seconds 0-100km/h.
◦14.72-seconds @ 163.89km/h.
◦39.75m 100-0km/h.


•Holden Commodore SS (AFM)
◦9.79-litres/100km.
◦204.5kW – at the wheels. 252.4kW – at the flywheel.
◦6.74-seconds 0-100km/h.
◦14.80-seconds @ 161.38km/h.
◦38.79m 100-0km/h



http://www.caradvice.com.au/30255/fo...final-verdict/

235rwkw and a 14.7??!?!?1

maybe they should get someone other than their grannies to drive

[TonyJZX]

a 6.0 litre commode doing 14.8 at 100mph is pretty LOL too

[ironhorse]

they are just figures off dodgy wannabe a car journo websites , not gospel .

[2JZR31]

Wow my R31 shitted all over yours in economy. I actually used a log book too. Stock 87 GX manual with cat back and advanced timing and hole in the air box lid. Ran 15.9. Almost always in the 9s driving from Redcliffe to the city in non peak hour. I got into the low 8s on a hwy trip. It got even better when I fitted extractors.

My 2JZ one with 4.11s, 4000rpm converter, stock ECU and bigger injectors got 10.2 on the PF cruise and that included a lot of high speed driving and gassing it. City driving is in the 12s.

yeah average figures i have had for rb30 are below,

and i don't drive miss daisy, they are reasonable on the freeway due to the chassis weight, especially if you give them tall gearing, like the vl, r31 revs higher then the vl equivalent due to short diff ratios and eats more fuel in freeway conditions. (needs a 6 speed)

shouldn't be able to compare to todays engines however, they are sohc, low compression ratio, basic engine management and injection modes, no variable cam timing, basic autos etc

honestly, govt fuel figures are mostly bullshit in real world, but good for comparison when new only, i watched the motoring show yesterday, they reviewed a prius with govt figure of 4.6l/100, they then tested the car in the city and showed a figure of 7.0l/100, wtf? they then said look at this awesome figure 7.0l/100, are you kidding, you just said half hour ago it is rated at 4.6l/100. i have a mates swift from 20 years ago that will pull 7l/100, pffft.

combustion engine, your never going to get it using bugger all fuel, they just aren't that efficient, 30% energy into coolant, another 30% out the exhaust, 8% fricitonal losses etc.


rb30e in r31 with extractors, exhaust, extra timing, 5 speed =
12.5-13.5 around town (8.9-10.5 freeway)

rb30et in r31 with exhaust, standard boost, extra timing =
13.5-15.0 around town

rb30det in r31 with exhaust, twin cam, 7psi, 5 speed, =
11.5-13.5 around town (11.0 freeway, needs less revs/different gearing, should be able to do high 7's)

rb30e in r31, bog stock with auto =
14.5-15.0 around town (11.0 freeway)

rb30e in vl with extractors, exhaust, extra timing, 5 speed =
(8.9-10 freeway)

rb30et in vl, exhaust, fmic, timing, 5 speed =
13.5-15.0 around town (freeway, 10.0-10.5 a/c on)