phase 3 vs FG GT - Page 2

**Falcon Coupe** · 25-02-2009, 08:03 PM

I guess this question could be swayed either way depending on ones interpretation of the rules regarding suspension tyres etc...

We all know in 100% showroom everything the FG has the goods to be on top.

Still i find it impressive that its actually worth debating.

XR Martin · 25-02-2009, 08:06 PM

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.

**Falcon Coupe** · 25-02-2009, 08:10 PM

Another question to ponder.

What would a production FG GT need nowadays in the way of power/weight etc... to make the same impact as the XY did, albeit without racing.

Edit
Example, the fastest mass production four door, it would have to be n/a in the GT theme and not against the blown Euro's ?

nugget378 · 25-02-2009, 08:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Falcon Coupe

Another question to ponder.

What would a production FG GT need nowadays in the way of power/weight etc... to make the same impact as the XY did, albeit without racing.

If it was 1500kg it would be a monster, especially if it didnt have as much weight bias up front..But alas we can only imagine..

XR Martin · 25-02-2009, 08:22 PM

Fastest 4 door sedan is the Caddy CTS-V, 420kw and 750Nm

So at minimum the Falcon GT would need the alloy 5.4 Supercharged out of the Ford GT.

Bad Bird · 25-02-2009, 08:24 PM

Quote:

37 years of automotive evolution

is all good, except for the fact that modern cars weigh so much more. As Colin Chapman said, more power makes the car faster in the straights, but less weight makes it faster everywhere.

needaXYGT · 25-02-2009, 08:28 PM

Quote:

what a stupid comparison, would you compare a 1935 Ford to the Phase 111 because thats the same gap in the cars ages.

dumbest thing mentioned yet!

mik · 25-02-2009, 08:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Monty

And the GTHO would never come close to it on the 1/4 mile. Around 14.9 or something werent they?

actually phase 3 best 1/4 mile on the day re: sports car world magazine was dead 14.00 seconds average was 14.4 razor blade tyres where a major limitation.

Gammaboy · 25-02-2009, 08:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ELtim

Lets look at it this way. The average driver (me), no track exerience at all. The XY would make me crap myself past 140k's(ish). Where as the FG I could quite comfortably hit 200k's down conrod straight... This is just a guess as I have never driven either car.

Xy's are fairly comfortable at 180... If they could keep it on the Hume @ 140mph in the 70's, then whats the issue? As you said you've driven neither.

MITCHAY · 25-02-2009, 08:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tx3dude

FG GT for the win, and if theres any doubt break out the F6 and leave the gtho where it belongs - in the history books

X2

:

Whitey-AMG · 25-02-2009, 09:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tx3dude

but is it faster??????

yes, but not by much and not as much as 37 years of automotive evolution will have you think- but itll do it alot easier and i know which one id rather live with day to day.

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 ????????

Bad Bird · 25-02-2009, 09:30 PM

Why would you want to make an already nose-heavy car have an even worse weight distribution?

Screw the Boss, a good 700 hp 427 Clevor would do the job just fine.

Whitey-AMG · 25-02-2009, 09:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bad Bird

Screw the Boss, a good 700 hp 427 Clevor would do the job just fine.

Didn't realise the PH3 was factory optioned with a 427 Clevo............

5.4 GT · 25-02-2009, 09:38 PM

GTHO PHIII Vs FG GT-P

Full Article:

http://www.drive.com.au/Editorial/Ar...&vf=13&IsPgd=0

Excerpts from

Ford GTHO: Passing phase lives on
Stephen Lacey , The Sydney Morning Herald, February 20, 2009 :

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drive

It was the best car of its time, it won at Bathurst and set the racing world on fire. But today Ford's GTHO Phase 3 is considered ridiculously expensive, it drives around corners and brakes like a brick with wheels and people who have fallen out over it are so distressed they have asked that they do not appear together on these pages: "I'm over the Phase 3, I'm over the hype."

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drive

"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."

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drive

We decided to pit the HO against a new Ford GT-P from Sinclair Ford at Penrith.

On paper, the new FPV Falcon should whip the HO. And that proved true. Technology has come a long way in 38 years and so has build quality, comfort, economy and everything else.

.....

And I gained a new appreciation of Allan Moffat. He was either very brave, or he was crazy.

But the GT-P, with Terry Bowe driving, left the GTHO shrinking in the rear-view mirror.

Basically the new cars flog them on the road and the track.

TSERIES · 25-02-2009, 09:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 5.4 GT

GTHO PHIII Vs FG GT-P

Full Article:

http://www.drive.com.au/Editorial/Ar...&vf=13&IsPgd=0

Excerpts from

Ford GTHO: Passing phase lives on
Stephen Lacey , The Sydney Morning Herald, February 20, 2009 :

Basically the new cars flog them on the road and the track.

mate if drive is making a comparison on the both cars presented in 2009 then they are just plain stupid ......the phase 3 is 38 years old so the car is 38 yrs old in drive train and components ,it would not preform like it did in 1971 fresh off the floor .

**Falcon Coupe** · 25-02-2009, 09:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tx3dude

FG GT for the win, and if theres any doubt break out the F6 and leave the gtho where it belongs - in the history books

And i was thinking we may have one GT thread without that comparison bought in, too much to expect.

The G6ET Spot · 25-02-2009, 09:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PURSUIT-250

Dont forget that the FG is a little Fatter than the XY.

By around 300kg's. Take that sort of weight off the FG and see what time it does.

Gammaboy · 25-02-2009, 10:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ESP

People forget that the PH3 was actually quite highly strung

Compared to what? a Massey Ferguson tractor?

Quote:

Originally Posted by ESP

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 ????????

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...

Quote:

Originally Posted by ESP

Didn't realise the PH3 was factory optioned with a 427 Clevo............

Reading wasn't one of your greatest skills at school was it?

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

Gammaboy · 25-02-2009, 10:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RAPID XR8

By around 300kg's. Take that sort of weight off the FG and see what time it does.

Good luck finding places to do that

Donny · 25-02-2009, 10:21 PM

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.

XR Martin · 25-02-2009, 10:33 PM

Heres one with 38 years of development... If you time the clear lap, it did about 2:45.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=diQ2YJQtXK8

Gammaboy · 25-02-2009, 10:41 PM

On crossplies, and it's a mid pack car at best when you look at his times compared to other Nc cars.
The Biante cars are a better comparison, they at least run radials.

XR Martin · 25-02-2009, 10:50 PM

According to here, any road tyre is ok... Looks like the rules changed in 2007.

http://www.cams.com.au/bulletins/B07...0S%20Tyres.pdf

Quote:

Any historic racing tyre, street-legal tyre, treaded race tyre or standard road tyre
may be used.

If you go to page three, theres a list of approved tyres. And when you google image them, they dont look alot like crossplys

RE55s

AO48

Gammaboy · 25-02-2009, 10:54 PM

Any 15", 60 profile tyre. Biggest semi-slick 15" radial you can find is a 225/60/15. There's a reason the Big HP Nc guys resort to a 275 wide crossply. Trust me, I know this backwards...

Back in 2007 the Biante cars were still stuck with 60 profile tyres - the Tilley XY Falcon ran a 2:29 on crossplies. Reputedly the Tilley Car was still largely Nc spec - ie pre '72 brakes with drums on the back.
http://www.natsoft.com.au/cgi-bin/re.../2007.MOUN.R10

They didn't run the Biante cars last year at Bathurst.

500SEC · 25-02-2009, 11:39 PM

What mods were permitted to cars that competed at last weekend's 12 hour race? They looked and sounded pretty standard, except for interiors that were stripped yet still recognisable.

snappy · 26-02-2009, 01:21 AM

For those who mentioed the f6 an turbo the v8s has spanked them last year and this year in the production series.

XBROO · 26-02-2009, 02:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 4Vman

Not sure how 1/4 mile has any relevance to it....

It hasn't I was just stating that out of fun.

: I think you put too much thought in to it.

4Vman · 26-02-2009, 07:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gammaboy

Any 15", 60 profile tyre. Biggest semi-slick 15" radial you can find is a 225/60/15. There's a reason the Big HP Nc guys resort to a 275 wide crossply. Trust me, I know this backwards...

Back in 2007 the Biante cars were still stuck with 60 profile tyres - the Tilley XY Falcon ran a 2:29 on crossplies. Reputedly the Tilley Car was still largely Nc spec - ie pre '72 brakes with drums on the back.
http://www.natsoft.com.au/cgi-bin/re.../2007.MOUN.R10

They didn't run the Biante cars last year at Bathurst.

A 2.29 is exceptionally quick.. 10 seconds a lap quicker than a current model GT. 290kph down conrod in an XY with std disk front and std drums rear... crazy stuff.
From memory the Mason car Camaro touched 300kph.

mcnews · 26-02-2009, 08:46 AM

Weight is the keyword in this discussion. You can never hide the extra half a ton the new cars carry no matter what you throw at it.

mcnews · 26-02-2009, 08:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by snappy84

For those who mentioed the f6 an turbo the v8s has spanked them last year and this year in the production series.

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 :-)

: