Ford BA GT

[LowRider]

How was the AU better then the VX?
and if it was pitty the sales figures didnt show that

[fpv_gtho]

it had worse driving dynamics, was built like a straw house, ancient suspension and an all iron v6 still being used. the sales didnt show that cause most people buy a car on how it looks, thats what drags them into the dealerships. many people when they tested the AU's and VT/VX's noted on the AU's superior chassis and driving dynamics compared to the Commo's.

[LowRider]

Yeah fair enough mate. Im guessing you like the BA.
What do you think of that model?

[fpv_gtho]

i love the BA, its just a pity about its weight. the performance is heaps better than the AU equivelants, except for the GT replacing the TE50, theyre running bout the same as each other. hopefully they pull enough weight out of them for 2004, and they dont sick the 6th ratioi in their new auto at about 0.5:1

[LowRider]

hey mate couple of questions,
whats your favourite of BA Falcon and what did you reckon of the proformance hand Tickford?

[fpv_gtho]

thats a hard one: favourite BA, i like em all, but id have to put them in order of price: GT-P followed by GT, XR8, XR6T, V8XT, XR6. with tickford i think they just underestimated their target market. the actual cars were terrific in T1 and T2 but they were one step behind HSV and T2 was only a challenge to the VX SS. T3 was a ripper though, but apparently at high revs, the origins of the engine were apparent

[crisis]

Originally posted by fpv_gtho
the AU wasnt that bad, it just wasnt the best looking thing around when released. when u ignored the styling, the AU was asctually better than the VT/VX

How?

[crisis]

Excuse my last post.

[fpv_gtho]

has anybody heard about for the VY, holden are stating tare weight figures, not kerb weight figures which are making the commo seem about 80kg lighter?

[adz10]

Originally posted by fpv_gtho
has anybody heard about for the VY, holden are stating tare weight figures, not kerb weight figures which are making the commo seem about 80kg lighter?

Yeah, if you read the latest Motor magazine (the one with the 9 way comparo b/w Holden and Ford), all of the Holdens are heavier than they are claimed by Holden.

Also a funny thing to note, was that the GT has a claimed 290kw, and it produced 225kw at the rear wheels, while the GTS has a claimed 300kw, and that only produced 223kw at the rear wheels.

Actually, the power figures by all of the Holden cars varied hugely.. like the Caprice, 245kw = 158kw at the wheels. The SV8 which was supposed to have less power at the flywheel, actually had more at the wheels than the Caprice

[crisis]

The variations between the Monaro, SV8 and SS can probably be explained by the fact that they are mass produced components. I would not be surprised to see 5 SS Commodores return 5 different readings. This is why people blueprint motors. Only then do they match the exact specs of the prototype. The engine managment computers are also set to a generic setting. When the computers are mapped you can optimise the engine managment for the particular motor.

[fpv_gtho]

its got to be an accomplishment for ford though, for in that test they only had 3 fords compared to 6 holdens and yet ford had 1st and 2nd. i think the caprice shouldve been kept out of it cause i know i dont consider it a muscle car

[fpv_gtho]

Originally posted by adz10
Also a funny thing to note, was that the GT has a claimed 290kw, and it produced 225kw at the rear wheels, while the GTS has a claimed 300kw, and that only produced 223kw at the rear wheels.

i think that could be because of the GT's stronger midrange power and torque, cause i think in general, the BA's have slightly more drivetrain loss than the VY's

[Nildo]

Actually the dyno doesn't lie. The new fords have a better drivetrain than VY Holdens and therefore less drivetrain losses. Remember that the chassis dyno MOTOR used produced a full power curve, but peak power was the only number recorded in the article. Mid range power and torque has no bearing on the final number.

Personally it is why I have always preferred Ford to Holden. As FPV stated, the AU was vastly superior to the VT-VX commodores under the skin. Ford has consistently built much better cars than Holden in recent years, except in the key marketing areas of V8 engine output and styling.

[crisis]

Well wouldnt that mean that Ford has not consistently built better cars. Read a few posts on this site and get a feel for peoples feelings toward styling and you may see that styling is a fairly important design area. As far as the V8, they took advantage of a good, relatively cheap power plant from their parent company. You may view these areas as "marketing"areas however every manufacturer tries to design cars that sell. To continually argue that the AU was a better car than the VT-VX is futile and pointless. The majority of the car buying public didnt like them and neither did Ford themselves in the end. It was not only the exterior. The interior was critiscised, not only from a design point of view but also from a drivers seating position aspect. What Ford have now is a vast improvement in every area.