phase 3 vs FG GT

[4Vman]

Originally Posted by mcnews

That means nothing. The V8 boys were probably more prepared, more professional, better drivers... Too many variables... And the fact that Ford would like the V8s to win something would even perhaps get involved to try and ensure (fix) to make sure that happens. I know its great for the Boss boys to have something to crow about to make up for their small weiners :-) :

Or simply just a better tool for the track, especially endurance type events...

[Whitey-AMG]

Originally Posted by Gammaboy

Compared to what? a Massey Ferguson tractor?

Bwahahahah. "If it stayed glued together for long enough. You're funny. The biggest issue the XY would have is you stuffed a "Boss"* into it is trying to stop the sump dragging on the ground with that overweight guttless pig of a motor....

I wonder what an XY falcon would lap Bathurst in with 37 years worth of development on the suspension and engine? And i don't mean plugging in those Retarded Racing Suplies Pogosticks either. Heck, I made a very mild, very streetable 310rwkw on a STOCK 351C bottom end with CHI heads.
I hate to think what Nuggets motor with my suspension setup would do (with modern rubber)... I guess even with just springs and shocks Nuggets XA will thrash any BA-FG GT you want to bring out to play...


*Boss? reminds me more of Tony Danza...

Geez mate.......Obviously too much gamma radiation in that response.........

I'm outta here........:eclipsee_

[nugget378]

Originally Posted by ESP

There are lots of pluses in the 37 years of evolution.........granted........BUT.........that evolution has also brought with it an extra 3 - 400 Kg.........exhaust and noise pollution restrictions resulting in a lot of engine and subsequent performance numbing v the actual engine potential. People forget that the PH3 was actually quite highly strung and engine performance at the time was not nearly as compromised by any ADR or EPA regs............so in a straight line at least.........it may not be as handicapped with its cheese cutter tyres and sloppy gallopy suspension.

Punt it round some corners and throw in some stop start challenges and the FG GT should have its measure. I'd be surprised if it didn't.....easily.

In reality it says a lot for both cars in the fact that the PH3 was an uncompromising race car for the road and the FG GT is really a road car for the potential weekend hobby race .

I wonder what kind of performance you'd get if you whacked a tuned Boss 315 motor into the featherweight XY chassis ???????...........if the body stayed glued together for long enough ????????

This is getting a bit out of hand now, if's and but's are all well and good, but they open up a huge can of worms, if you developed these cars to their ultimate track configuration the lighter car will allways have the huge advantage..
I think it pays to remember the Xyho was a supercar in its day, the fg is a great car, but certainly no supercar compared to its contemporaries.
To be even mentioned together in this comparison is testament to the effort Ford put in to this car in '71..They are both great in their own way and maybe it's putting both of them down even having this debate.

[nugget378]

Originally Posted by 4Vman

Or simply just a better tool for the track, especially endurance type events...

YES.
In my experience on the track, N/A has an advantage in endurance, I have a few examples of late model turbo awd sports/track type cars that have blown up on track days after getting a high boost drag type tune/edit..its a completely different environment to street and 1/4 mile work..

[flappist]

Originally Posted by nugget378

YES.
In my experience on the track, N/A has an advantage in endurance, I have a few examples of late model turbo awd sports/track type cars that have blown up on track days after getting a high boost drag type tune/edit..its a completely different environment to street and 1/4 mile work..

On the other hand, what was the engine configuration of the car that won the last 12 hour race at Bathurst.

And the one that came second.

And the one that came third.

And the one that came forth.........................

[vanman_75]

side note, isn't it funny how everyone is referring to an xy as "light".Too many variables in racing so i will go 50/50 ...

[4Vman]

Originally Posted by flappist

On the other hand, what was the engine configuration of the car that won the last 12 hour race at Bathurst.

And the one that came second.

And the one that came third.

And the one that came forth.........................

To be fair Mitsu and Subaru have invested a fair bit more money into the their 4wd rockets as showroom racers than Ford do....
Turbo cars can be made to be reliable in endurance race conditions, but at a cost.

[nugget378]

Originally Posted by flappist

On the other hand, what was the engine configuration of the car that won the last 12 hour race at Bathurst.

And the one that came second.

And the one that came third.

And the one that came forth.........................

I wouldnt have a clue to be honest used:
Stock factory performance is'nt my thing..
I was only speaking in general term's, with modified engine's you cant run as much boost for circuit endurance as you can with drag racing etc..

Im sure in factory spec it isnt an issue,

In saying that, the turbo Ford's have alot more scope for safe performance improvement compared to an evo or sti, with the very low boost level's they run "as is" in comparison..

[Bad Bird]

Originally Posted by vanman_75

side note, isn't it funny how everyone is referring to an xy as "light"...

Compared to modern domestics and even most modern Japanese/Euro cars, they are.

For their time, they were considered heavy.

[RG]

How much further off topic can this get??????????

[belvo]

i dout Steven Johnson was hammering it as hard as alan moffatdid in 1972

[vztrt]

Were the P3 gutted back then so they would be lighter?

[bingoTE50]

Ha love this stuff...I don't know who would win , but if someone wants to swap a Phase 3 for my GT bring it.....lol... :

[Falc'man]

Good thread, nice info ehast.

The FG GT was also considerably slower than alot of other cars... all the Fords were slow. I don't know how that effects your comparison, but it seems the Fords were alot closer to factory than their competitors? Straight off the factory floor a standard NA XR6 (let alone the GT) would beat the P3 around a track, but that's expected. The only true measure of a car is how it compared to it's competitors in it's own era, but nevertheless, it's interesting to learn how good they were, and still are.

Originally Posted by Munroman

WPS 12 Hour - Qualifying Times




1 96 J.Koundouris/ T.Koundouris/S.Owen Superbarn Supermarkets Pty Ltd Mitsubishi Lancer RS 2000 C 4 3 2:28.8838* 2 11 B.Morcom/L.Searle/ P.Stubber Rondo Building Services BMW 335i 2979 A 15 9 2:30.7202 0:01.83643
9 T.Quinn/K.Quinn/ G.Denyer VIP Pet Foods Mitsubishi Lancer RS 2000 C 11 3 2:30.8360 0:01.95224
55 G.Crimp/T.Ricciardello/ S.Kostera West Surfing Products Mitsubishi Lancer RS 1998 C 14 1 2:31.1763 0:02.29255
34 G.Seton/N.Crompton PRO-DUCT Motorsport Mitsubishi Lancer RS 2000 C 5 1 2:31.2390 0:02.35526
43 D.Wall/D.Wall/T.Symonds Easts Holiday Parks Mitsubishi Lacer GSR 1999 C 14 1 2:31.2575 0:02.37377 1 R.Salmon/T.Longhurst/ D.White TMR Australia Mitsubishi Lancer RS 1998 C 12 1 2:31.3127 0:02.42898
20 G.Holt/P.Morris/R.Shaw Eastern Creek Karts BMW 335i 5000 A 11 11 2:31.3659 0:02.48219
12 T.Alford/P.Leemhuis/ M.Rose Donut King Holden HSV VY GTS Co 5665 A 5 1 2:32.2542 0:03.370410
35 J.Bargwana/S.Knight/ B.Jones PRO-DUCT Motorsport Mitsubishi Lancer RS 2000 C 16 14 2:32.9712 0:04.087411
9 C.Hollings/C.Corkery/ N.Caratti Cerasport Mitsubishi Lancer RS 1997 C 5 3 2:33.3362 0:04.452412
23 S.Briffa/M.Zukanovic/ T.Sipp GSK Group Holden VE R8 Clubspo 6200 A 14 7 2:33.3947 0:04.510913
62 T.Leahey/P.Hill/E.Bana Love the Beast Mitsubishi Lancer RS 1998 C 15 1 2:33.6030 0:04.719214
33 M.King/B.Pearson/ B.Stewart PRO-DUCT Motorsport Mitsubishi Lancer RS 2000 C 17 2 2:33.7318 0:04.8480
15 3 S.Jones/K.Wade/ A.Caratti Messages on Hold / Tyrepower Mitsubishi Lancer RS 1997 C 15 9 2:34.0438 0:05.160016
5 B.Nesbitt/P.Freestone/ R.Jones Donut King Holden HSV VY Series 5665 A 9 7 2:34.3366 0:05.452817
85 R.Ingall/N.Pretty/ A.Jones Holden Motorsport Holden Commodore SS 6162 A 13 13 2:34.7443 0:05.860518
91 A.Mechtler/J.Walsh/ M.Brame Anton Mechtler Mitsubishi Lancer RS 1999 C 17 3 2:35.1069 0:06.223119
71 D.Mertens/L.Mertens/ S.Cramp Endless Holden HSV VY Series 5667 A 10 9 2:35.6325 0:06.748720
25 C.Baird/L.Castle/ R.Forbes WBR - Wilson Brothers Racing Subaru Impreza WRX S 1994 C 18 3 2:36.0002 0:07.116421
47 G.Johnson/J.Watts/ G.Willis Hi Tech Motorsport Holden SS VE UTE 6000 J 16 1 2:36.5215 0:07.637722
44 J.Hunter/J.Bowe/ G.Bullas Johnson Window Film Subaru Impreza WRX S 2495 C 11 9 2:37.1897 0:08.305923
15 J.Hunt/J.Webb/P.Stokell Rockstar Energy Drink Nissan 350Z Track 3500 B 17 5 2:37.7410 0:08.857224
32 G.Keogh/B.Brewer/ G.Emery GSK Group Holden VE R8 Clubspo 6200 A 10 4 2:38.0416 0:09.157825
36 J.Camilleri/S.Nicholas Grand Prix Mazda Mazda 3 MPS 3A 3884 D 11 1 2:38.0483 0:09.164526
24 G.Walden/B.Walden/ M.Auld Walden Motorsport Holden Commodore SS 5665 E 5 2 2:38.5152 0:09.631427
22 C.Delfsma/D.Wood/ G.Tierney WBR - Wilson Brothers Racing Subaru Impreza WRX S 1994 C 19 4 2:39.1781 0:10.294328 10 M.O'Connor/R.Buttrose/ S.Hogg Lotus Cars Australia Lotus Exige B 19 3 2:39.3939 0:10.510129 69 T.Zani/J.O'Dowd/ J.Pollicina Killarnee Formwork / Hammond E Holden HSV VY GTS Co 5700 A 17 3 2:39.7281 0:10.844330
2 I.Tulloch/J.Sax/ C.McLaren Tulloch Transport Holden HSV VZ GTO Co 5700 A 18 1 2:40.7752 0:11.891431
26 P.Kelly/D.Grant/M.Twigg WBR - Wilson Brothers Racing Subaru Impreza WRX S 1994 C 16 4 2:41.0806 0:12.196832 27 A.Shepard/P.O'Donnell/ C.D'Agostin GWS Personnel BMW 130i 2966 D 19 6 2:41.4530 0:12.569233 17 S.Johnson/N.Tinkler/ N.Callaghan Supercar Club Australia Ford Falcon FG GT-P 5408 A 15 13 2:42.1532 0:13.269434
18 J.Moffat/G.Kenny/ C.Baldock Team Qld Racing Ford XR8 FG 5400 E 16 1 2:42.8758 0:13.992035
21 T.Conroy/L.Burgess/ L.Tander Hankook Tyres/ DBA Honda Integra type S 1998 F 18 14 2:43.8957 0:15.011936
13 C.Osborne/N.Bates/ J.Roecken Osborne Motorsport Toyota Celica ZR 1796 F 16 6 2:44.6422 0:15.758437
50 G.McLeod/P.McLeod/ R.McLeod Racer Industries Holden Astra Sri 2000 F 17 10 2:45.3828 0:16.499038
14 P.Conroy/C.Schembri/ R.Gartner Disc Brakes Australia Honda Integra type S 1998 F 17 13 2:47.6841 0:18.800339
28 L.Gray/J.Veth/R.Thomson GWS Personnel BMW 130i 2966 D 19 10 2:47.8015 0:18.917740
8 A.Letcher/C.Harvey/ B.Nial Tinkler Motorsport Pty Ltd Ford XR6 TURBO 6773 E 14 4 2:48.3840 0:19.500241
31 S.Evans/T.Keene/S.Jones Osborne Motorsport Toyota Celica ZR 1796 F 17 16 2:50.0203 0:21.136542
99 J.Tremeer/C.Tremeer/ T.Stone Patinack Farms Ford XR6 TURBO 6773 E 12 2 2:50.0251 0:21.141343
67 T.Douglas/B.Holdsworth/ G.Holdsworth/ L.Holdsworth Nemo Racing Pty Ltd Holden Astra CDTi 1909 I 13 3 2:50.2252 0:21.341444
77 D.Filipetto/N.Gotch/ W.Vinckx Thomson Alfa Alfa Romeo 147 JTD 1900 I 12 4 2:55.6062 0:26.722445
88 M.Windsor/S.Shiels/ P.Newman Jim Hunter Suspension Subaru Impreza 2.5 2495 G 13 13 2:55.9575 0:27.073746
94 R.Howe/D.O'Keefe/R.Lago/ C.Williams APORSCHAPART Ford BF 6772 E 11 8 2:57.6978 0:28.814047
76 K.Booker/R.Rinnaldo/ D.Stone Thomson Alfa Alfa Romeo 159 JTD 2389 H 11 6 2:59.3539 0:30.470148
66 H.Spurle/C.Orr/M.Taylor Jim Hunter Motorsport Subaru Impreza 2.0R 1996 G 15 9 3:08.7530 0:39.8692

http://www.fordforums.com.au/newrepl...eply&p=2541404

[Falcon Coupe]

Originally Posted by Falc'man

Good thread, nice info ehast.

Tfactory floor a standard NA XR6 (let alone the GT) would beat the P3 around a track, but that's expected.

Having been in an HO at full noise i must disagree, it pulled 240kph in top gear and had more in it, didn't take long to get there either.

What would an XR6 pull on conrod ?

[phillyc]

Wheels did a test in about 1993 and they compared several cars around Bathurst. It was done to celebrate Ford releasing the EB2 S-XR8 as they were originally known (before becoming just XR8).

The cars compared were XY GT P3, VH SS GrpA, VP SS, EB S-XR8.

All cars were very similar in outright lap times. Within a few seconds. From memory, the EB was the quickest with something like a 2m59s.

The opinion was that if the VH has a 5th gear it would've been the quickest. But, it didn't.

The later cars had the better balance and brakes which made up for the lack of absolute power to weight.

[FGXR270]

Originally Posted by scradley_6666

According to this page which should be accurate the Ho3 did quater in 14.4

Performance
GT-HO Phase III: 0-100 km/h: 6.5 secs; Standing 400m: 14.4 secs


Link: http://www.fpv.com.au/theheritage/fa...yfalcongt.aspx

But do remember the GTHO Phase 3 was grossly underrated by ford in terms of power and other figures...

Thats about right coz i have a blockmount with specs at the bottom and is 0-60mph in 6.4 and 1/4 mile in 14.2 which is astonishing,in nearly 40 years Ford have not really progressed much with V8 performance until the boss imho

[TIC-302]

Originally Posted by Falcon Coupe

Having been in an HO at full noise i must disagree, it pulled 240kph in top gear and had more in it, didn't take long to get there either.

What would an XR6 pull on conrod ?

In the 1999 3Hr bathusrt race Longhurst ran a AU1 XR6 and reached 222km/h just before the chase.


Last weekend There were also the 6cyl saloon cars(Vt's and Au's ) racing there as a suppory category, pole time was a 6cyl VT with a 2.39sec lap.

The 12Hr FG's very very slow, i was very disappointed.
they should have been in the 34's-35's NOT in the 40's-42's

[TIC-302]

here is the 2008 12hr qualifying times...go the BF XR8 !





1 43 Alan East Motorsport David Wall (NSW) Mitsubishi Evo 9 GSR 1999 A 10 6 2:30.3179*
2 20 Eastern Creek Karts P/L Paul Morris (QLD) BMW 335i 5000 B 15 12 2:30.4696 0:00.1517
3 29 VIP Petfoods (Aust) PL Klark Quinn (QLD) Mitsubishi Evo 9 RS 2000 A 15 10 2:31.1157 0:00.7978
4 87 SKWIRK.com D.White/G.Alexander Mitsubishi Evo 9 1998 A 16 4 2:31.4449 0:01.1270
5 33 Pro-Duct Pty Ltd Bob Pearson (NSW) Mitsubishi Evo 8 2000 A 15 8 2:31.4862 0:01.1683
6 34 Mark King M.King/M.Brame Mitsubishi Evo 8 2000 A 20 12 2:31.8746 0:01.5567
7 11 Rondo / CIS Group S.Owen/L.Crambrook BMW 335i 5000 B 20 17 2:31.9020 0:01.5841
8 80 Coopers/Brock Harcourts M.Brock/G.Young/
J.Elsegood Mitsubishi Evo 8 1997 A 18 17 2:31.9808 0:01.6629
9 25 WBR / Gizmo / Laminex K.Kratzman/I.Tulloch/
B.Collins Subaru 03 WRX Sti 1994 A 14 6 2:33.9542 0:03.6363
10 5 Donut King Paul Freestone (VIC) Holden HSV GTS 5665 B 11 9 2:34.0264 0:03.7085
11 26 Wilson Brothers Racing D.Schulz/A.Knight/
J.Winslow Subaru 03 WRX Sti 1994 A 17 6 2:34.3469 0:04.0290
12 1 Jack Daniels S.Price/N.Pretty Holden Sportswagon 5967 D 13 12 2:35.4386 0:05.1207
13 24 Walden Motorsport / Syd Fab Garth Walden (NSW) Holden Commodore VZ 5665 D 15 10 2:35.5249 0:05.2070
14 21 Century 21 C.Delfsma/J.Bowe Ford BF XR8 5400 D 13 8 2:35.7205 0:05.4026
15 71 G & D Performance D.Mertens/L.Mertens/
T.Wyhoon Holden VY HSV GT 5667 B 18 17 2:36.5111 0:06.1932
16 91 Humes G.Deane/R.Rubis/
R.Dawson Subaru WRX Sti 2000 A 19 11 2:36.7234 0:06.4055
17 3 XEETEC L.Searle/P.Kelly BMW 130 2996 C 17 17 2:36.8027 0:06.4848
18 17 V8 Race Experience J.Spychala/L.Yelland/
A.Saliba Ford GTP Falcon 5408 B 16 6 2:37.3234 0:07.0055
19 9 The Car Stockade/Blue Oval Gar D.Heath/W.Luff Ford BF XR8 5408 D 13 4 2:40.2824 0:09.9645
20 36 Grand Prix Mazda J.Camilleri/S.Nicholas/
T.Sipp Mazda 3 MPS 3844 C 18 5 2:40.3477 0:10.0298
21 10 Lotus Cars Australia M.O'Connor/A.Fisher/
R.Buttrose Lotus Exige 1796 B 16 3 2:42.9702 0:12.6523
22 27 The Shire Conveyancer A.Shephard/D.Cribbin/
L.Cave Mazda 3 MPS 2260 C 17 4 2:44.2957 0:13.9778
23 13 Osborne Motorsport C.Osborne/N.Bates/
J.Roecken Toyota Celica 1796 E 15 15 2:44.5115 0:14.1936
24 16 Sherrin Motorsport I.Sherrin/M.Sherrin/
G.Sherrin BMW 130i 2966 C 13 11 2:44.9266 0:14.6087
25 94 Aporschapart R.Howe/D.Neville Ford Falcon XR6 T 3984 D 11 7 2:45.8799 0:15.5620
26 72 True Blue Motorsport A.Letcher/N.Callaghan/
C.Harvey Toyota Celica E 18 10 2:47.4710 0:17.1531
27 68 Queensland House and Land.com R.Thomsen/G.Willis Lotus Exige 1794 B 16 15 2:49.2649 0:18.9470
28 14 Hankook Tyres / Disc Brakes Au P.Conroy/T.Conroy/
C.Schembri Honda Integra Type S 1998 E 17 7 2:50.4768 0:20.1589
29 31 Osborne Motorsport Hadrian Morrall (NSW) Toyota Celica 1796 E 9 3 2:50.6018 0:20.2839
30 7 Aussie Stop Leak D.Turner/R.Prince Honda Integra Type R 1798 E 19 5 2:53.1419 0:22.8240
31 77 Thomson Alfa D.Filipetto/N.Gotch/
W.Vinckx Alfa Romeo 147 JTD 1910 H 13 6 2:53.5953 0:23.2774
32 88 Jim Hunters Suspension J.Hunter/W.Bossie Subaru Impreza RS 2495 F 11 4 2:55.4709 0:25.1530
33 93 Lubrimaxx D.Harris/N.Lange/
L.Kearns Proton Satrina Gti 1800 F 15 14 2:58.0050 0:27.6871
34 40 Kangan Batman TAFE/Hankook Tyr R.Buckingham/
J.Augustine/B.Youlden/
G.Sticker Hyundai Sonata 2359 F 16 2 3:01.2178 0:30.8999
8 Paul Wakeling Holden Steve Briffa (NSW) Holden Commodore 5700 D

[Falc'man]

Originally Posted by Falcon Coupe

Having been in an HO at full noise i must disagree, it pulled 240kph in top gear and had more in it, didn't take long to get there either.

What would an XR6 pull on conrod ?

That's out of context. What I'm saying is even if it's beaten (around a track or straight line) by today's cars then there's certainly something wrong with today's cars. The fact that ehast13 has noted there's similarity in outright speed - even after 37 years - it shows why the car is legendary.

There's more to the times though of the FG GT, I doubt that a VY Clubby can be 10 seconds quicker, and I have trouble believing the mazda3mps is 4 seconds quicker... something isn't adding up. What makes it even more bewildering is all the Fords were slower again? Can someone confirm these weren't seasoned track cars?


The numbnut (whoever it was) that said "I'm over the p3" should give himself an uppercut. Of course it doesn't drive better, but neither does a 1937 Bugatti Type 57S which sold for $4.5 million... it's heritage. :

[gtfpv]

those tyres were crap, no they werent these ones are better,
the PH3 was severely understated in its power, no it was the dyno readout with loose straps. the stock clevo spun to 7500 rpm , or was it 5800. the 351 was faster than the boss 315, not it wasnt . todays FGGT would easily win the race, the PH3 was heaps faster than what they said , they lied , no they didnt.

WOW would you look at that . 50 POSTS WRAPPED UP INTO ONE !!!

[ehast13]

interesting to see that J.Bowe put the BF XR8 around in 2:35 last year. I might have just answered the question. Obviously The FG's werent being pushed too hard or weren't that well set up for the track.

Interesting to see that the #17 FG gT's fastest race lap was line ball with it's qualifying time.

On a side note. The comparo between VPSS, EB XR8, VH grpIII and Phase three was won by the phase three. Not by much but it was hardly a sprint. Even on old aquejets, no cage, etc it pulled a 2:58

Some interesting stuff. In 1970, Wheels tested the Latest Lamborghini Countach. It pulled a 14.1 quarter mile with 0 - 100mph in 14.9. The same issue they tested the phase 2 and it pulled a 14.2 with 0-100mph in 15.6.

To have the same effect today, an FG GT (GTHO???) would have to match a lamborghini....

The phase 3 was a beast

[steamin63]

Originally Posted by Donny

But today Ford's GTHO Phase 3 is considered ridiculously expensive, it drives around corners and brakes like a brick with wheels.
"I'm over the Phase 3, I'm over the hype."

"The esteem in which the GTHO is held now is way out of proportion," Day says. "Put it up against a modern-day car and you see how overrated the GTHO really is. Any new BA, or BF GT, any XR8, would leave a Phase 3 for dead. It's chalk and cheese."


The bold stuff above was said by the President of the NSW GT Club.
Not the best choice of words to refer to the legend of the phase 3.

The HO3 is still a legend. 38 years of new innovation and technology should make the newer stuff dominant. Its unfortunant the Super Car series is using shadows of what these cars (FG etc) really are.

i wonder if this is still president. he probably owns an ELGT and is sick of the others in the club not waiting for him on cruises. lol.

[mik]

you cant really compare the fg to the xy, but for probably most of the members on here, that have never been in one or driven one and will never have the hair stand up on the the back of the neck feeling that the xy had , modern cars will never have it no matter how much money is poured into them, not taking anything away from other gt`s all good, but the xy was a great car in its time and will never be cloned, HO DOWN THE HUME was a favourite ho story for me , it sorta gives a feel for the car, yes that was ho not hoe

[FGXR270]

Originally Posted by TIC-302

In the 1999 3Hr bathusrt race Longhurst ran a AU1 XR6 and reached 222km/h just before the chase.


Last weekend There were also the 6cyl saloon cars(Vt's and Au's ) racing there as a suppory category, pole time was a 6cyl VT with a 2.39sec lap.

The 12Hr FG's very very slow, i was very disappointed.
they should have been in the 34's-35's NOT in the 40's-42's

Is the VT running a trent 900 engine or something? (Airbus A380 engine for the unaware)

[smally289]

The FG GT is not better than the Ph3, and vice versa.

The playing field has changed since 1971.
Emissions, safety, comfort, tyres, etc etc, are all light years apart with them.

The Ph3 was the ultimate Aussie muscle car in its day (I can hear XU1 and E49 owners arguing already), just like the FG GT is the ultimate V8 Ford Australia make at the moment. Sure, the FG may not ever be worth big bucks in years to come like the Ph3 has, but thats got more to do with racing heritage than anything and thats a side effect of the current V8 Supercar rules.

So does one have to be better than the other? I can't decide, so I will have both thanks.

[xbgs351]

Originally Posted by XR6 Martin

Also if Crompton says the chase chicane adds 7 secs, I imagine he means 7 seconds to a V8 Supercar? Which can brake, corner and accelerate faster than a normal road car.
I would imagine a production car like a GT might add double that time.

Personally, I don't think the Chase slows the lap times much at all and this is supported by the similarity in lap times from the year before and after the Chase was installed. The difference was only one to two seconds. If you have seen footage/photos from the early 70's, the improvement in the rest of the track is amazing.

[xbgs351]

Originally Posted by Falc'man

That's out of context. What I'm saying is even if it's beaten (around a track or straight line) by today's cars then there's certainly something wrong with today's cars. :

The obesity epidemic isn't just restricted to people. Our Falcons are also afflicted with it.

[gtfpv]

i have to say this . if the FG GT . HAS MORE POWER ,HIGHER REVS, than its predecessors , and gets a better wrap off the mags with track times etc . then why is it slower at bathurst , than a BF XR8. FFS.

I SEE HOLDENS ARE DOING BETTER TIMES TOO.

for me , i think sales will be effected to some degree here . somethings wrong . ARE WE BEING MISS LED BY FORD . and where was the F6 310 KING ???

[xbgs351]

Originally Posted by gtfpv

i have to say this . if the FG GT . HAS MORE POWER ,HIGHER REVS, than its predecessors , and gets a better wrap off the mags with track times etc . then why is it slower at bathurst , than a BF XR8. FFS.

I SEE HOLDENS ARE DOING BETTER TIMES TOO.

for me , i think sales will be effected to some degree here . somethings wrong . ARE WE BEING MISS LED BY FORD . and where was the F6 310 KING ???

Read post 88.