Printable View
WP507 GTS 507kw auto
$95490 + $7990 = $103,480 (includes pulley, exhaust, intake & tune)
0-100km/h = 4.38
0-400m = 12.39 @189.99km/h
80-120km/h = 2.45
100-0km/h = 33.42m
Herrod XR8 500kw manual
$52490 + 27260 = $79,750 (includes engine, exhaust, brakes, suspension, wheels and tyres)
0-100km/h = 5.08
0-400m = 13.12 @185.17km/h
80-120km/h = 2.77
100-0km/h = 37.68m
Sucks that the XR8 had to be a manual.... :(
The GTS went backwards from stock too.
Drive got:
12.18 @ 190kph
0-100 4.31
Stock auto GTS....
I was a fair bit off in my estimation of mid to high fives but I only estimated going off the shift to third. Maybe it hits 100kph in 2nd.
Both are slower than what I'd expect but moreso the 507 since it's auto.
They're also both slower than expected in the rolling start. Being manual there would be a shift from 2nd to third in the XR8 which wouldn't have helped. The GTS probably lost traction because that time isn't much better than a standard Rspec auto. A tuned F6 would rip it another six sphincters.
On a similar note, this is becoming silly. In conclusion these tests show no real improvements over the standard issue products. If you're showcasing the aftermarket both these entities would be disappointed with the results. Looking at the outlay it looks like it's a total woftam.
This is where the law of diminishing returns applies most. In cars that can harness this much extra power when using launch metrics to gauge any gains. The way around this is difficult due to track space but it's time they started looking at rolling acceleration from 100kph to 200kph, and/or the standing 1000m.
Now's the time they start looking at these tests because power is getting ridiculous and it's too hard to differentiate between two cars when they're both 3.9 to 100, but much easier to see which has better outright power if measured up to 200kph, like the Euros are doing with their supercars - now in the low 8s and high 7s, quicker for the hypercars.
You have cars such as AMG's A45 getting a power boost and a claimed 0-100 of 4.3 seconds, then you have cars that have twice the power and three times the price not doing any better, so, how do these archaic yardsticks help show the true power and potential of today's performance cars?
The thing i don't get is the terminal speed, both are bang on the same as stock cars, (in fact so is 0-100 and et) the GTS has always shown about 5kph more than the GT.
Now if we refer to the Moroso calculator which all drag racers keep claiming is the ultimate measure of HP neither car has shown any improvement in peak power?
Given both cars weigh about the same according to the Moroso type calculator using weight/Terminal speed that puts the XR8 at 375kw and the GTS at 405kw.
I completely agree about the theory of diminishing returns but the extra KW we know both have has to show up somewhere measurable under 200kph or why bother spending the money?.
XR8 proves to be bang for your buck. Herrod fun once again.
Mates W507 kit is officially on hold at the moment till he can make sense of those numbers.
I think it's safe to say that mods are wasted coinage on either car based on those figures.....
Certainly on the xr8 I would think you would be better off just spending your money on suspension and brakes, and maybe an intercooler For that consistancy.
The gts? Beats me, it's got mostly all the right gear stock, so I don't understand how someone like walkingforsure can do so much but not seem to gain anything.
I guess its just a matter of not being able to put all that power down to the ground?
Not convinced about that, the XR8 had even wider Contis and the terminal speeds were both almost identical to stock cars.... With that much extra power it might struggle 0-100 but should storm past the 400m at a higher speed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Damo