Typhoon Vs Clubbie Vs Evo

[maximum_velocity]

just got the latest edition of motor and they did a comparo typhoon vs clubbie vs evo.

it was judged on a points system with 1st recieving 3 points 2nd recieving 2 points and last recieving 1 point

QUARTER MILE

3 points - EVO (0-100, 5.41 - 0-400, 13.84)

2 points - Clubbie (0-100, 5.83 - 0-400, 14.01)

1 points - Typhoon (0-100, 6.4 - 0-400, 14.64)

Street Start

3 points - Clubbie and EVO

2 points - Typhooon

Specs and Interior

3 Points - Typhoon and Clubbie

2 Points - EVO

Hardware

3 points - EVO and Clubbie

2 points - Typhoon

Mountain Pass

3 points - EVO

2 points - Typhoon

1 points - Clubbie

Cruise

3 points - Clubbie

2 points - Typhoon

1 points - EVO

TOTAL

1st - Clubbie (15 points)

2nd - EVO (14 points)

3rd - Typhoon (12 points)

Must just add that this test was conducted on quite a hot day which is why the typhoon suffered badly in the drag racing however this figures are are a long way off compared to what MOTOR has previously achieved in the FPV (0-100, 5.73 - 0-400, 14.01). im not quite sure what it was possible it may have been an off car but then again maybe its just that FPV didnt give the typhoon the credit it deserves after being talked up so highly...

[Guest PSIXR6]

If the Typhoon suffered from the hot weather, the EVO should have aswell. Both of them being turbo carrs. But that time of 14.6 seem s very slow to me...., wouldn't have been all the weathers fault.

~allen

[xr6t ute]

There seems to be a big difference everytime someone tests the typhoon,I agree that it seemed a bit slow too. I guess being a maual, drivers would be a big influence on the times. Could there be a difference from car to car as well, like there is with the xr6T?

[maximum_velocity]

There seems to be a big difference everytime someone tests the typhoon,I agree that it seemed a bit slow too. I guess being a maual, drivers would be a big influence on the times. Could there be a difference from car to car as well, like there is with the xr6T?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

quite possilby, however this is a big difference and in the article the testers didnt say anything about it being an off car or anything. as said earlier the heat would have affected its times but the evo seemed to cope pretty well

[Dr Z]

I posted this below in another forum...please folks, lets stop pretending that the Ford/FPV marketing-hyped F6 is anything more than a slightly tweaked XR6T. That is the reality we have to deal with.

Also, the prevously quoted times of 5.73/14.01 in Motor were not Motor's times, but the times given to them by FPV. Mick Taylor (former Motor Editor) also posted in that other forum today at 12:03pm and he is clearly disappointed at the inability of the F6 to live up to its potential as seen in his quote:

"well boys, it was a stinking hot day, but that's not the point.

the point is that all three cars were acceleration tested on the same piece of road, in identical humidity and in identical ambient. in other words, back to back, just as you'd find it if you took on another car at the lights.

also, all three cars ran the same driver, dean evans - the self-professed (and very probably true) master of acceleration testing.

we are fans of the F6. just disappointed in it, and disappointed in FPV's handling of the whole situation pre-christmas. In fact, we just wish FPV would let the car live free on its own engineering capacity, not reigned in by marketing boffins. then, I reckon, you'd see a car to shout from the hilltops about..."

Below is my post in that forum..

______________________

As much wishful thinking we all want to share about the F6, myself included, this is what we do know about the stock (unmodified) F6 far:

* No one has driven it sub-14 down the quarter, not one journalist or enthusiast we know about. Even if someone miraculously did do a near-perfect launch, it is very clear it is NOT a consistent sub-14 quarter mile car. A sub-14 quarter time COULD happen with a perfect launch though extremely unlikely given that no one has done it yet. Even if someone does, as both Wheels and Motor have shown, it is far more likely to deliver REAL WORLD consistent 14 second times, which as we know, is barely quicker than a stock XR6T.

* As hypnodoc and I have identically said on different forums, the low-down torque delivery and gearing gives the "bumometer" feeling that the F6 is much quicker than an XR6T, but the straight-line performance reality tells a completely different story.

* Looking at an APS dyno run of a stock F6:

APS F6 Typhoon

...the tapered off torque curve...hey FPV, you said the torque curve was flat?... ...confirms the low-mid range torque delivery the "bumometer" feels but FPV's intent on keeping the power down at the top range with lower boost on standard injectors is clearly evident. This is why APS can unleash more delivery down low AND the top end with bigger injectors, less conservative state of tune as well as a freer flowing exhaust to reduce backpressure through higher boosting.

* Given the auto XR6Ts are straight-line performance quicker than their manual transmission counterparts, owing to continuous turbo spooling by constant depression on the loud pedal, it would be expected than once a suitable auto transmission is found for the F6, its straight-line performance times would also improve. Manuals may be more fun to drive, but the autos have shown to be consistently straight-line performance quicker for XR6T's and their modified variants, F6 included.

In essence, FPV has seriously "dumbed down" the top-end performance capability of the F6 which is why it does not deliver the straight-line performance times everyone is hoping to see. Rather than wishfully believing it SHOULD be quicker, lets just accept the reality that in its current state of FPV tune it isnt, but if you want it to go quicker see APS.

Safe and happy driving...Dr Z.

[hypnodoc]

* As hypnodoc and I have identically said on different forums, the low-down torque delivery and gearing gives the "bumometer" feeling that the F6 is much quicker than an XR6T, but the straight-line performance reality tells a completely different story.

* Given the auto XR6Ts are straight-line performance quicker than their manual transmission counterparts, owing to continuous turbo spooling by constant depression on the loud pedal, it would be expected than once a suitable auto transmission is found for the F6, its straight-line performance times would also improve. Manuals may be more fun to drive, but the autos have shown to be consistently straight-line performance quicker for XR6T's and their modified variants, F6 included.

In essence, FPV has seriously "dumbed down" the top-end performance capability of the F6 which is why it does not deliver the straight-line performance times everyone is hoping to see. Rather than wishfully believing it SHOULD be quicker, lets just accept the reality that in its current state of FPV tune it isnt, but if you want it to go quicker see APS.

Safe and happy driving...Dr Z.

Hey Dr Z, you are 100% correct IMHO and anybody who buys a Typhoon with the intention of having a rocket while leaving it in STOCK form is in for a big disappointment. Reality is they are just a tarted up T that doesn't even go as fast as a T, the torque is decieving though. With the tiny injectors and the boost falling off a cliff at 4000 rpm what more could one expect. Even though I was silly enough to buy one I hope FPV suffer for what has become a debacle beyond belief and I'm sure with the Motor Mag report they will. I took mine into a wheel balance place this morning (waste of another 2 hours) and the bloke looked real perplexed and said, that cars been here before and all the tyres are out of round so the wheels can't be balanced correctly, its too far out of tolerance. So I have been driving the crap tin around for 5-6 weeks with a crook balance which now it turns out is the tyres still have a rattle in the front end, a scratched spare, and a claytons performance car.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[FPV 521]

There seems to be a big difference everytime someone tests the typhoon,I agree that it seemed a bit slow too. I guess being a maual, drivers would be a big influence on the times. Could there be a difference from car to car as well, like there is with the xr6T?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yeah it does seem that it depends who is testing the car. I get more out of seeing what guys on this site are finding out about them from driving the cars.

Some reviewers can be idiots. The AU Falcon copped a lot of critisism but the XRs and TEs were pretty good cars.

The AU copped so much flack about the way it looked and some reviwers couldnt get past that fact and see how good the car was underneath so sometimes I dont pay to much attention to what they write. What better way to review a car than drive it yourself?

It will be tough now as the reviewers have had notheing but goods things to say about all of the BAs in the past and when a new version is released they would be expecting good improvments. In fact so do I.

[Guest 123xr]

motor magazine is dodgy. According to them the xr6t is quicker than a typhoon. And an Xr6t ute is 5kg heavier than an xr8 ute.

Now I dont see how that's possible if anyone can tell me it would great!

[tquarrell]

Personally, I'd love to see FPV make a limited run of non restricted, no excuses all out 4.0l turbo's. The excuse that a turbo six shouldn't be quicker than they're v8 is crap, they are so close now (in detuned form) it doesn't matter. Anyone interested in straight line performance buy's a turbo or chev powered Late model camira anyway, so why try and and make your v8's out to be something they're not. I hope ford wake up and relise that the 4.0 turbo is they're best chance of swaying buyers of other marques, and that sitting on your hands gets you no where. XR6 IMO should have 270KW, and typhoon should have 330 to 350. Ford seem to happy to match Holden, why not give them something to chase for a change? KW's is the easiest way to steal holden, HSV and other buyers, especially when they're so easy to extract (parts for above KW's would cost SFA, replacing poor parts with good ones). I just hate to see ford producing below they're potential, and making other manufacturers lives' easy.

My 2 cents, hopefully Ford are thinking similarly

[Dr Z]

motor magazine is dodgy. According to them the xr6t is quicker than a typhoon. And an Xr6t ute is 5kg heavier than an xr8 ute.

Now I dont see how that's possible if anyone can tell me it would great!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Short answer: Check out a stock XR6T torque curve on a dyno run..it doesn't fall off a cliff like the F6 torque curve does at top end which clearly demonstrates how FPV's tune of the F6 is CRIPPLED by running standard injectors at lower boosts than it could with bigger injectors.

Long answer: Read the posts of hypnodoc and Dr Z...that's a second opinion from two Doctors who happen to agree with each other.

Safe and happy driving...Dr Z.