drive com fg vs sidi ve. surprise!

[bathurst77]

http://www.smh.com.au/drive/motor-ne...1009-gqou.html

They did 161 laps of mt pan at the speed limit (how boring) in both cars
Berlina 3.0-litre V6 6speed and G6 auto.

surprising results
some quote

After more than eight hours and 60 laps, it’s clear there’s already a favourite among our team of drivers ... The superior driving feel of the Falcon is making it the car our drivers are looking forward to sitting in. The Falcon is emerging as the more rounded package.

From a performance perspective, the FG Falcon has an edge. the Falcon was quickest in the 0-100km/h sprint, taking just 7.7 seconds, the Commodore reached 100km/h in 8.9seconds.

CLAIMED FUEL ECONOMY
Commodore claimed 9.3 litres per 100 kilometres fuel use is 6percent better than the 9.9L/100km claimed by the most frugal of Falcons (XT) thre G6s claimed fuel use is 10.1L/100km, almost 9per cent more than the Holden.

ACTUAL FUEL ECONOMY ON TEST
The Holden is using more than 11.0L/100km around Mount Panorama, meaning the fuel needle is dropping—fast.
There’s no way to sugar-coat it. The Commodore was thirstier. Despite the new direct injection technology, the Holden’s new 3.0-litre engine used 11.09L/100km, the Ford used 10.02L/100km

(Commoodore used) not only 19 per cent more fuel than its official claim but 10 per cent more than the Falcon.

And enthusiast publication Wheels, recently recorded near identical fuel use for the 3.0-litre Commodore and the more powerful 3.6-litre version, with the Falcon only slightly thirstier.

For this great race, it’s a shock victory to the Falcon.


-----

Are Holden telling porkies?