F6 310 Versus R8 On Drive.com.au

[TornadoJudd]

doesnt seem to be a big deal on our forums but has 9 pages of replies on the ls1 forums.

[MiKa]

.1 of a second girls cmon...

To quote one of the greatest quotes "It doesnt matter if you win by an inch or a mile, winning is winning"

[wados]

The LS3 is 6.2 litres, not 6.3 (not that it would make a difference)... But the LS3'a are pretty well detuned, to the point they make up to 350 rwkw with just a cam, exhaust, otr and tune. So modified ones should not be a walk-over, unless you've got over that sort of power. Standard, I think they run up about 250 rwkw - so about the same as the new XR6T

Bearing in mind the new LS3 is over 50% bigger in terms of cubes than the 4.0.

Can't wait for someone like Mauz or Geea to get their hands on one, put some sticky tires on the back and have a go at a mid 12 - or a 12.8 from a T. Good times ahead...

I'd be spewing if I just bought a new SS ute....

the problem with the hsv is the gear box, that's why they didnt up the power big time with the new engine, so if you modify I would be vary wary

[CJ_AK]

outstanding

news travels fast............................

http://www.ls1.com.au/forum/showthread.php?t=101248

Those Expensive Daewoo boys are full of excuses!!!

there was never any doubting, Ford/FPV were always going to make the superior machine!!!

[Grudgee]

They both go bloody quick. What've I got to do to the TT to keep up with you bastards. Always bringing out something that little bit quicker....

Edited 23/07/08 10:51 AM by Grudgee

[Mist]

180.4 kph it should be capable of a 12.6

It seems pretty clear that the problem is traction, particularly after reading Pashen's review of his test drive. Better quality tyres might help? Otherwise, what are the maximum width tyres you could put on the back end without changing the rims?

[MrBean]

Hey Guys,

This was my reply over on the Dark Side - there's very little to choose between the 2 test-cars in terms of raw performance - see below.

I still dont get why they insist on comparing a boosted 6 to a V8.

Mmm..interesting question....with a relatively interesting answer.

The R8 uses a naturally aspirated V8 at something close to 6.2L.

The F6 uses a turbo'ed 4L. Now, as a general rule of thumb, a 4l with 14.45 (1 atmosphere) boost will approximately equate to a 8L naturally aspirated V8.

With the approximately 8psi boost the factory F6 is running, it should be fairly close to 6l naturally aspirated V8 territory.

The advantage the 6 has over the V8 (badges on the tappit-covers aside for now) is very simply torque. Nope, not the peak numbers, but the average torque throughout the powerband.

That's why it won, simple.

Someone asked earlier how would it go if you had a blown 8 vs the turnbo'ed 6 - again, fairly simple - depending on the boost levels, if you ran the 6.2l 8 at 7psi boost, you would approximate 8L n/a V8 - similar then, if you ran the 4l straigt-6 at 21-odd psi boost, both engines should yield fairly similar results. Once again, crank the boost up on the V8, past the 8-9psi level, and it would peel the backhide of the 6 - it's all about cubic capacity.

No person should ever refer to as a 7psi 4.0L 6 as a 4liter engine - it's not true, it's a 6l capacity.

The one point we should not forget here is that if this race was 600-800m long, the gap would have been significantly larger due to the turbo coming into it's own.

Guys, this was a good race, nothing to feel disgraced about - that R8 is a stunning car - having the extra weight was beneficial at the launch, as we saw - better power transfer from the wheels - but, the slightly nimbler 6 had it going with more average torque, and slightly lighter mass after the initial launch.

I have a 370rwkw F6 turbo, it's a screamer. Do I miss the sound of a decent V8 - yes, of course. I have given a fair few R8's a good spanking - was it fun - yes! Was it fair - in all honesty, how could a n/a V8 compete with a animalistic 6 with plenty boost up the intake. In the same breadth, would I take on a V8 with a turbo or blower with decent boost - nope, I'm not stupid.

Let's compare apples to apples. Both the cars tested will do their drivers proud, and any one could win on any given day depending the driver

Good going boyz, luv the competition.

Take you all.

MrBean.

[tmac450]

All the excuswes coming from the meat head V8 brigade sh*t me to tears.

What if the V8 had a blower, what if it was tuned with a cam?

What if the moon was made of cheese?

The excuses have been the same for years, when a V8 got thrashed by an EVO or STi, but they're light hi-tech things, my V8 would be quicker on Nos, blah, blah.

The simple fact is, they're both stock cars, they're both performance models with big power, they're both aimed at the same market. One has two less cylinders and a turbo, one had a bug V8 and bigger back tyres for better traction. One is quicker (and cheaper), using more advanced technology, the other's only way of going quicker appears to be to make the motor bigger.

I bet the LS1 guys won't complain when they match-up the F6 with the new 427!

[DaveO]

Clubsport R8 is cheaper... 0.1 of a second is hardly a triumphant win!

[F6_Tornado]

I agree its hardly a triumphant win! Looking at the ET!

However to come from behind after being beaten off the line to overtake the R8 is!!

When you consider the F6 terminal speed of 180.4Km/h compared to the R8 with only 176.2 Km/h

Then as can be seen from the Video a car and a ½ length win when it lost near ½ a car length at the start makes for a 2 car length win and 4.2km/h

I'd say pretty impressive & a triumphant win!!!!