phase 3 vs FG GT

ehast13 · 25-02-2009, 01:02 PM

I know this will be a controversial post but, Last weekend's 12 bathurst race got me thinking...

In 1972, Alan Moffat planted his xy gtho phase 3 on pole with a 2:35.8 lap. Now I know that moff's car was probably a little more 'factory' than some of the others, but it was essentially a production car.

In 2009, Steven Johnson qualified the latest FG GT at 2:40. Young james Moffat was about a second behind in an FG XR8. Now, these cars get free spring and shock rates, intergrated roll cage, track tyres, free flow exhaust, Flash Tune etc so they are at least as well modified as Moff's XY if not more so.

No one is gonna dispute that over 500 mile, the FG would win, thanks to bigger brakes but...

Caltex chase has added 5 - 7 seconds per lap (according to Neil Crompton), but the track is considerably wider and smoother (hell, murrays, the cutting etc)than it was, add newer better hotmix which would pull back a second or more and it makes things interesting.

Moff's 1972 xy on 2009 spec rubber and 09 spec roll cage vs Johnson's Fg GT?

Which would be quicker over one lap???

You'd probably say the FG but it seems much closer than I thought.

Was moffat that much quicker than today's heros?

Was the HO a far faster car than today's "Anti pollution, anti fun, anto history" magazines and newspaper columnists(yeah, that means you, Dowling!) suggest?

To spice things up a little - can anyone find the lap times of dick johnson's ed xr6 at bathurst 12 hour 1994? Or Tony Longhurst at Bathurst 1997 production car race in EL xr6, John Bowe is AU xr6 or John Bowe in BF XR8 last year (or 2007, I can't remember). My old AutAction collection is packed into boxes and I can't find Jack.

**Peuty** · 25-02-2009, 01:08 PM

The real question you should be asking, is if they both raced on a conveyor belt, would they take off?

F6 R-Spec · 25-02-2009, 01:17 PM

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

schnoods · 25-02-2009, 01:20 PM

Its certainly an interesting point.

I guess it might have something to do with the measures on what is and isnt ok to do the car.

Still, I'd put money on the XY, screaming clevo to 7500 in a one lap wonder, they woulda tweaked here and there alot more then the FG, then weight comes into it.

4Vman · 25-02-2009, 01:26 PM

What's the group Nc and Biante series lap records?
I doubt the moff XY would be able to maintain that qualifying pace over 30 laps, back then their qualifying lap times were much faster than their average lap times under race conditions because they had to conserve the cars..

nugget378 · 25-02-2009, 02:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 4Vman

What's the group Nc and Biante series lap records?
I doubt the moff XY would be able to maintain that qualifying pace over 30 laps, back then their qualifying lap times were much faster than their average lap times under race conditions because they had to conserve the cars..

This is mostly due to the rubbish tyres and brake linings of the day IMO, rather than any mechanical fragility..

XBROO · 25-02-2009, 02:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 4Vman

What's the group Nc and Biante series lap records?
I doubt the moff XY would be able to maintain that qualifying pace over 30 laps, back then their qualifying lap times were much faster than their average lap times under race conditions because they had to conserve the cars..

Yeah but he's only talking one lap. I know the XY would have it over a 1/4 mile, go the old school! :evil3:

4Vman · 25-02-2009, 02:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by XBROO

Yeah but he's only talking one lap. I know the XY would have it over a 1/4 mile, go the old school! :evil3:

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

The Monty · 25-02-2009, 02:17 PM

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

smciner1 · 25-02-2009, 02:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ehast13

I know this will be a controversial post but, Last weekend's 12 bathurst race got me thinking...

In 1972, Alan Moffat planted his xy gtho phase 3 on pole with a 2:35.8 lap. Now I know that moff's car was probably a little more 'factory' than some of the others, but it was essentially a production car.

Moffat's XY in 1972 was the first of the Group C Cars, no where near standard.

**CAT600** · 25-02-2009, 02:31 PM

What do you expect, there is over 35 years of design gone into a Falcon since the PH3.

By rights, the "prepped" FG GT should be quicker, even considering the additions to the track.

Just shows how good the PH3 really was.

scradley_6666 · 25-02-2009, 02:42 PM

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...

4Vman · 25-02-2009, 02:44 PM

Just to clear this up the OP is talking lap times around Bathurst.. 1/4 mile times and ability its totally irrelevant to the discussion...

**FTE217** · 25-02-2009, 03:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 4Vman

Just to clear this up the OP is talking lap times around Bathurst.. 1/4 mile times and ability its totally irrelevant to the discussion...

Agreed and coming to a conclusion about then and now in terms of lap times will never be answered unless the track is taken back to how it was and get the BSeries or FG cut the mustard.

XR Martin · 25-02-2009, 04:21 PM

Sure its a flying lap? Because a new Mini Cooper S did it in 2:30 (Mini Challenge Cup)

XR Martin · 25-02-2009, 04:32 PM

Oh and dont forget that comparion race between the VY SS, A9X and V8 Supercar a few years ago

The SS started 30 secs behind the V8 supercar and they finished nearly lineball.
That puts the SS about 2:37, bit disappointing that a modded FG GT is slower than a stock VY SS.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SXKvIKVvP1Y

snappy · 25-02-2009, 04:49 PM

The phase 3 without out a doubt is a quick car but it would take alot of skill and expierence to get those times in it. For most of us to race it around bathurst we would need to pack a fresh pair of undies.
The fg gt not so much would be alot easier of a car to drive fast.

ehast13 · 25-02-2009, 04:59 PM

Quote SMCINER1
Moffat's XY in 1972 was the first of the Group C Cars, no where near standard.

1972 was NOT group C. 1972 was the last of the production cars. The ATCC was still using boss mustangs and super falcons and camaros (for reference Moff did a 2:22 lap at Bathurst in 1972 in his ATCC Boss Mustang). Moff pulled a 2:38 for pole in 1971 and a 2:35.8 for 1972. The 72 car had some small differences - 15 globes with the lastest goodyear race rubber, no fan belt.

At the time quarter miles for the phase 2 and 3 ranged from mid thirteens to high fourteens depending on diff/gearbox etc. My Dad's mechanically stock phase 2 ran a best of 13.2 with big rubber under the back and 3.5 diff. His Phase 3 never got big rubber and retained it's 3.25 but would pull 13.8 on a good night.

Modern Motor got a 14.2 out a phase 2 in 1970. And in a special story on drag racing they got a 13.9 out of a phase 2 and a 12.0 out of Moff's mustang.

ELtim · 25-02-2009, 05:29 PM

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.

But...For evenly skilled drivers in each car...I have to say..that 30 years of development between the cars would surely show itself somehow?

4Vman · 25-02-2009, 05:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ehast13

Quote SMCINER1
Moffat's XY in 1972 was the first of the Group C Cars, no where near standard.

1972 was NOT group C. 1972 was the last of the production cars. The ATCC was still using boss mustangs and super falcons and camaros (for reference Moff did a 2:22 lap at Bathurst in 1972 in his ATCC Boss Mustang). Moff pulled a 2:38 for pole in 1971 and a 2:35.8 for 1972. The 72 car had some small differences - 15 globes with the lastest goodyear race rubber, no fan belt.

At the time quarter miles for the phase 2 and 3 ranged from mid thirteens to high fourteens depending on diff/gearbox etc. My Dad's mechanically stock phase 2 ran a best of 13.2 with big rubber under the back and 3.5 diff. His Phase 3 never got big rubber and retained it's 3.25 but would pull 13.8 on a good night.

Modern Motor got a 14.2 out a phase 2 in 1970. And in a special story on drag racing they got a 13.9 out of a phase 2 and a 12.0 out of Moff's mustang.

1971 was the last year of true production cars at Bathurst, 1972 was the introduction of "improved production" which turned into group c the following year.
In 72 they got engine freedoms, exhaust freedoms, bigger wheels and could remove the spoilers.
Moffs 72 spec car is a fair bit quicker than the showroom "stock" spec 71 car.

hy_boi · 25-02-2009, 05:44 PM

I know this is a little off topic, but that HSV VXR Astra did a quicker race lap around bathurst then the XR's and GT's....like WTF?

steamin63 · 25-02-2009, 06:15 PM

a lot of it would depend on the driver also. the guys who cut their teeth driving ho's and monaro's were in a class of their own. steve richards was quoted a couple of years ago after driving a ho around bathurst that he could not believe that people use to race these cars.
cheers.

ehast13 · 25-02-2009, 06:25 PM

Quote: 4Vman
1971 was the last year of true production cars at Bathurst, 1972 was the introduction of "improved production" which turned into group c the following year.
In 72 they got engine freedoms, exhaust freedoms, bigger wheels and could remove the spoilers.
Moffs 72 spec car is a fair bit quicker than the showroom "stock" spec 71 car.

Sort of...
They could remove rev limiters (so no 6150rpm limit). There were no real freedoms in terms of rolla rockers or cams or porting or anything substantial.
They could remove spoilers (not add them)
They could not have bigger wheels. the 15 x 7 globes were sent to all phase 3 owners after phase 4 was canned. They could use slick race rubber.
Exhaust was only free after first muffler. So no bigger extractors, no side exit

It was only 2.5 secs quicker than 1971, a lot of that was down to better rubber.

there were still fewer freedoms in 1971 than there is 2009...

Honestly, on a modern 245/15 Hoosier tyre, i reckon over one lap that the HO wouldn't be that far behind. I'd love to see how quick a GT-p can lap with John Bowe or Jim Richards at the wheel with no regard to longevity...

Mr Hardware · 25-02-2009, 06:27 PM

Quote:

lap times will never be answered unless the track is taken back to how it was

Correct. Comparisons are completely irrelevant as the bathurst track has been modified since 1972.

snappy · 25-02-2009, 06:29 PM

Take the adr requirements out of it see which is faster

**TUF_302** · 25-02-2009, 07:39 PM

This is a very intresting question indeed!, you would think the FG easily with all its late model technologys but even them up a bit, with rubber and brakes and the like and i think it would be a very close race!

4vxc · 25-02-2009, 07:44 PM

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

nugget378 · 25-02-2009, 07:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by snappy84

Take the adr requirements out of it see which is faster

And if my aunt had balls she'd be my uncle..

GTP owner · 25-02-2009, 07:53 PM

If they are both on modern slicks, my money would be with the ph3 for a flying lap, then the fg for every lap after. Think similar horsepower, huge weight penalty in the fg, and worked suspension on both. The old springs can be made to work pretty well. Which only leaves the fg with the advantage of brakes, which would not really count until lap 2.

Good question though. Hope this does not end in a mud slinging match.

Ghiadude · 25-02-2009, 08:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 4vxc

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

look the guy was just wondering, I think stupid is a very strong word?? - and now that hes asked the question..its got me thinking and one would think the new widget is better than the old widget and it is. Itll start idle and cruise. Itll be cool inside, comfy with a nice stereo. Itll use less fuel, be better for the environment and keep your missus happy by carting the kids around. Itll break down less(yeah i know) and need to be serviced less often. It wont rust as quickly, its paint will remain shiny for longer and you can bet your bottom dollar its cheaper to buy at the moment. 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.
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