Maloo vs Xr8 in Motor mag

[ClevlndStemer]

god, its the same thing everything month for you all, a new mag a new lot of whingers.

[Nikked]

these magazines just like to stir the pot

[Steffo]

What I don't get is how the Maloo could gain 115kW and 178Nm, only to run stock times... and the XR8 could gain 130kW and somehow not get any torque... and become slower then a stock AUIII XR8 220. Something doesn't compute...

[Bent8]

I stopped buying car mags about 12mths ago, I don't even bother going into the newsagent to flick through them anymore...it's become just another form of advertising with a few articles and road tests which are about as accurate as the nightly news.

In regards to this 390kW XR8 having only 500Nm, they might be able to trick a 10yo kid with that but I'm sitting here trying to contain my laughter......maybe they meant 800Nm...

BTW, newspaper and magazine readership is actually on the decline thanks to the good ol' internet and it's sidekick Google.

[Bossxr8]

Another thing that annoyed me was the little couple of paragraphs about Fords new facilities at the proving ground, stamping plant and PD that was in the editors comments bit at the front. I don't know if they will go into more detail next month but they even had an official pic of a camoed Orion and it didn't even get mentioned. Yet when Holdens proving ground had its 50th anniversary they had a huge write up about it of 5-6 pages. Anything Holden get huge coverage and anything Ford gets next to nothing. :

[Ghiadude]

power is calculated from torque measurements on any dyno Therefore you cant have an increase in power without an increase in torque. At best its a misprint

[Steffo]

Originally Posted by tx3dude

power is calculated from torque measurements on any dyno Therefore you cant have an increase in power without an increase in torque. At best its a misprint

You can have an increase in power without increasing torque... but not that dramatic... from a blower.

Examples would the the 1989 Ferrari F348tb (224kW 323Nm 3.4 V8) and 1993 Ferrari F348 GTB (239kW 323Nm 3.4 V8). 15kW gain with no change in torque out put, but peak went up from 4200rpm to 5000rpm from tb to GTB. That's nothing like going from 260kW 500Nm N/A to 390kW 500Nm Blown though... which seems impossible.

[drew`SEVNT5]

to the conspiracy theorists:


Id say the 500nm figure for the XR8 maybe because the engine has not been pulled out and put on a engine dyno, and rear wheel torque figures are stupidly high, rather than WP's engines, who may have had one of there charged engines out(being a semi-official holden partner and all)

[Citric GT]

Originally Posted by Airmon

Holden SS ute out handle F6 R-Spec?

It wouldn't surprise me. They really are a nicely balanced car to drive and from what I here, the ute is just as good.

[Stefan]

Originally Posted by tx3dude

power is calculated from torque measurements on any dyno Therefore you cant have an increase in power without an increase in torque. At best its a misprint

Not saying this is a not a misprint but, HP is a calculation of Torque x RPM so yes you can have an increase of HP without an increase in torque, by increasing the RPMs. in fact you can even have drop in torque and an increase in HP.

[Pedro]

Originally Posted by vanman_75

the test was in the wet never gunna get times doing that . i was surprised they even printed it . may as well say id fall faster if i didnt have a parachute on .idiots first time ive bought it in a long time but will be even longer before i will again

I've read the whole story. It's just another "MOTOR" infomercial for Holden.
It was a wet track and the only reason the Holden got a "better" 1/4 mile time was that it has 22" wheels (less slippage). We all know how hard it is to get a car with a bit of grunt off the line when it's wet.

I might add the front cover showed both vehicles, but wait ... the Maloo image was in front of the XR8 image and twice as big ... funny about that.

Had to laugh though ... a reader's letter complained about the predominance of Holden front covers.

I don't usually buy this extension of Holden publicity masquerading as a motor magazine, but I've been laid up with a crook back and asked my wife to buy me something to read. LOL.

[WASP]

I know nothing of this article or Herrods involvement but based on what I have read here I would assume if the XR8 Ute was supplied by Herrod, it maybe their work vehicle which is a standard XR8 with the base Y/T kit on it running around 6psi and around 280-290rwkw's and between 5500-6000Nm of 'rear wheel' tractive effort from around 2000rpm. Factory figures are quoted at the flywheel. The car I think is a manual and would be quite a challenge to get the power down with so much low down torque on street tyres (in the wet to!). Did MOTOR quote the MPH? I can't speak for the Maloo but supercharging a stock 6lt would generally produce more power & torque than a stock 260/290 all things being equal and ADR compliant.

[smoo]

Originally Posted by Force6

And what the hell was with the 500Nm XR8? Maybe that's at the wheels..

Torque would be multiplied by the time it gets to the wheels.

I don't believe it's Holden bias, as it was the same story when the BA came out. Again it is the same old shiit, slow times, and, after buying the Jan issue, buggered up ratings of the cars (one of the journos reckons an Maloo is a better performance car than the new M3?!?! What a crock). Similar story when the BA first came out - GT v Clubby, FPV wins, and few months later, the same test, but the HSV wins. All in the name of sales, while their credibility goes down the shitter.

[theunfairadvant]

Wheels mag is better.

[56L]

Originally Posted by SpoolMan

XR8 IS 260KW The Maloo is what how much?
Shouldn't they be comparing a Super Pursuit to a Maloo?

I can remember MOTOR mag testing an auto pursuit250 against a Holden/CSV special vehicle ute because holden or motor mag refused to do a test between the pursuit250 and maloo.
The funny thing is that the pursuit 250 beat it haha

looks like nothing has changed over the years with GMH/MOTOR mag

[Rev28K]

Originally Posted by Airmon

but what tipped it over the edge for me was when the same bloke wrote 2 articles in 1 issue.
1 article "The F6 R-Spec is definately not a racer and is not good around a track blah blah", ok fair enough, a few pages over.
"The handling on the new Holden ute is supurb, its like a proper track car"....... Wtf? Holden SS ute out handle F6 R-Spec?

Maybe you and they were expecting too much out of the R-spec. FPV were claiming a 3 second improvement at Winton with the R-spec dampers. You would have to assume that FPV provided the best vehicle they could for testing and Warren Luff would drive it as hard as he could (he knows who pays his salary).

So were did the improved times go? Was the test car not up to scratch, had it been thrashed by a string of motoring journos and now wasn’t at it’s healthiest?

I will be interested in seeing any times for an FPV Territory around there – it is meant to be 6 seconds slower than a Typhoon – so 1:49’s should be easy.

[TadKa]

How disgusting is that bonnet growth Uncle Tom puts on his cars. I couldnt stand having to look at that. I'd throw up.

[Fev]

theyve done these articles to the death already! why wont they let them rest in peace?

13.3 for a 422kw maloo doesnt sound right.. especially sicne the GTS does the same stock!

[T3ts50]

Originally Posted by TadKa

How disgusting is that bonnet growth Uncle Tom puts on his cars. I couldnt stand having to look at that. I'd throw up.

The funny thing about that growth is, Tom doesnt like it either.