FPV GT vs Maserati GranTurismo

5.4 GT · 06-02-2008, 01:08 AM

Some important numbers...

FPV GT

Power: 302kW
Torque: 540Nm
Gearbox: ZF 6 Speed
Weight 1855kg

0-100km/h: 6.4
0-400m: 14.5

Maserati GranTurismo

Power: 298kW
Torque: 460Nm
Gearbox: ZF 6 Speed
Weight: 1880kg

0-100km/h: 5.2
0-400m: 14.3

*Figures attained from Wheels Jan08 edition*

So why is it that the heavier and less powerful Maserati attains better performance times using the same ZF 6 speed (except for the addition of paddle shifters and a different software calibration)?

Ridin-High · 06-02-2008, 02:28 AM

rear end gearing // Maserati probably has better tyre's // wheels are retards? // maserati better areo dynamics // maserati has better suspension set-up?

The Monty · 06-02-2008, 03:12 AM

I dont see how a GT gets that 0-100 time, I pull that at the track in a 6 cylinder AU...

XR8-260 · 06-02-2008, 03:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Monty

I dont see how a GT gets that 0-100 time, I pull that at the track in a 6 cylinder AU...

A lot depends on traction. The GT probably has difficulty getting power to the ground.

troppo · 06-02-2008, 09:18 AM

How well does the GT go to pull back a full second over 400m AFTER 100 km/h

T3ts50 · 06-02-2008, 10:16 AM

From what ive heard, it is very hard to get the GT off the ground cleanly. Too much revs = too much wheelspin, not enough revs, GT just bogs down. I cant confirm this as I havent driven one.

Racecraft · 06-02-2008, 10:24 AM

was the MazdaRatti tested in Australia?

billkara · 06-02-2008, 10:31 AM

come on guys 14.5... thats ridiculous...we all know that the gt is a mid-high 13 second car.

Rock ape · 06-02-2008, 10:59 AM

Wheels can't drive. I did a 14.1 in my 290 stock (6 man)

tapeworm · 06-02-2008, 11:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by billkara

come on guys 14.5... thats ridiculous...we all know that the gt is a mid-high 13 second car.

Yep, weak display, imo.

flappist · 06-02-2008, 11:34 AM

Wheels do their tests two people on board, full fuel, standard tyres at standard pressures using an accellerometer (meaning you can't cheat by moving to the back of the start light).
Wheels journos have driven more cars than almost anyone on AFF and I am fairly confident are better drivers than most on AFF.

They report what they actually see.

It is interesting to note that recently a magazine test was done by guest drivers (V8SC drivers). On the 400m they got similar results to the journos. I suppose they can't drive either.....

Rock ape · 06-02-2008, 11:39 AM

You saying i cheat?

flappist · 06-02-2008, 12:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BAGTp001

You saying i cheat?

Did you roll forward then back until the light broke, then 5mm forward?
Did you have 2 people on board?
Did you have full fuel?
Did you have standard tyres at standard pressure?

If any of these are not the same then you cannot compare your time to theirs.

By rolling back you allow the vehicle to be moving before the timer starts. This can reduce your time by quite a bit in the case of a high powered vehicle that has traction issues at low speed like for example a BA GT.
I know I took 0.2 off my time by doing it.

Rock ape · 06-02-2008, 12:17 PM

Did you roll forward then back until the light broke, then 5mm forward? No
Did you have 2 people on board? Who drag races with 2 people in the car?
Did you have full fuel? 1/2
Did you have standard tyres at standard pressure? Yes

Whats the point in testing a cars performance if you load it up with people? Maybe we should tell Wheels that there is still room in the boot for the pram and the suitcase.

Trust me there is a nack to getting the Boss of the line and when you get it your times do get better.

McobraR · 06-02-2008, 12:43 PM

One of the mags already replied to ths question (i think it was Wheels). Drag way strips tend to show faster times because the laser tracking system isn't as accurate as the on-board ones which the magazines use.
edit: and the fact that they have 2 people on board as mentioned

5.4 GT · 06-02-2008, 01:59 PM

So basically the general consensus is traction, so if the GT was fitted with 285 rears like the Maserati has, they would gain 1.2 seconds in their 0-100 if not more? I find this highly unlikely...

flappist · 06-02-2008, 02:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaveO_SP

So basically the general consensus is traction, so if the GT was fitted with 285 rears like the Maserati has, they would gain 1.2 seconds in their 0-100 if not more? I find this highly unlikely...

Get a bog standard GT, change nothing except the diff down to 4.11, see what happens to your 400m time......

Rock ape · 06-02-2008, 02:32 PM

Why are the Ford diffs so tall? I didn't get a GT for good fuel economy.

5.4 GT · 06-02-2008, 02:50 PM

This is the video that sparked my questioning of the claimed performance of the Maserati. (I just noticed they quoted exactly the same 0-100km/h time in it as Wheels did of 5.2 seconds so maybe its a manufacturers claim?)

Its a clip from the latest Fifth Gear:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U5kZL9dQ4ak

I also noticed he was going on about the lack of torque the car has and how it keeps having to change gears while rolling along (I find my 290 has no problems hauling along in 5th or 6th gear). This made me go to wheels to check the 0-100 and 0-400 time and compare it against the latest FPV GT.

I also thought Wheels dont claim manufacturers figures and only put a figure down when they are able to test the car?

It's one hell of a great looking car though!

flappist · 06-02-2008, 03:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BAGTp001

Did you roll forward then back until the light broke, then 5mm forward? No
Did you have 2 people on board? Who drag races with 2 people in the car?
Did you have full fuel? 1/2
Did you have standard tyres at standard pressure? Yes

Whats the point in testing a cars performance if you load it up with people? Maybe we should tell Wheels that there is still room in the boot for the pram and the suitcase.

Trust me there is a nack to getting the Boss of the line and when you get it your times do get better.

You are missing the point of the tests. The majority of FPV (and for that matter HSV) buyers never ever race the car on a strip or track (other than the drive day which is not exactly hammering).

The idea is to give a relative perfomance figure of what it goes like with you and your wife/husband/sheep/whatever on board.
The same as the fuel economy figure. You can always get better than they say but it gives you an idea.

The GT is a sports saloon and GT actually stands for gran turismo which is italian for good holiday or good touring. They are designed to be driven long distances at high speed (sort of) not for drag racing. This is why the diff ratio has been chosen.

I have done many long runs in my GT-P at about 200km/h (long = 500km++) and it did it effortlessly without to too silly a fuel usage. Over 220 it got REAL thirsty so I did not do that a lot.

CSV_LS1 · 06-02-2008, 03:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaveO_SP

This is the video that sparked my questioning of the claimed performance of the Maserati. (I just noticed they quoted exactly the same 0-100km/h time in it as Wheels did of 5.2 seconds so maybe its a manufacturers claim?)

Its a clip from the latest Fifth Gear:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U5kZL9dQ4ak

I also noticed he was going on about the lack of torque the car has and how it keeps having to change gears while rolling along (I find my 290 has no problems hauling along in 5th or 6th gear). This made me go to wheels to check the 0-100 and 0-400 time and compare it against the latest FPV GT.

I also thought Wheels dont claim manufacturers figures and only put a figure down when they are able to test the car?

It's one hell of a great looking car though!

The Maserati has 1.2 litres less. So less torque for cruising.
It should be getting updated with the 4.7 V8 stroker of the 4.2's engine found in the Alfa Romeo 8C sometime.

Quicksand · 06-02-2008, 04:46 PM

hmm there was a Maserati down at Perth Motorplex a few weeks back; he got stuck doing mid 15's all night. I didn't note the model though...He raced his missus who was in an old VP/VN/VR/VS (sorry they look similar to me hehe) and lost...i wonder what model it was that he bought cos it wasn't exactly lightning quick

edit: found a photo of him on High Octane Photos. dont know what model it is?

And here is his missus that beat him:

Source: http://www.highoctanephotos.com/inde...lbum=16&pos=98

ClevlndStemer · 06-02-2008, 05:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaveO_SP

So why is it that the heavier and less powerful Maserati attains better performance times using the same ZF 6 speed (except for the addition of paddle shifters and a different software calibration)?

I'd be almost certain that the ZF used in the Maserati is a different box to the one in the GT (OZ). I'd say the one we have is a base model type, nothing really special.

I am amazed people are comparing the two. The Falcon is just that, a 4 door family car with a big engine, a body kit and some stripes. It was never designed for real performance. The Maserarti on the other hand maybe a luxury GT, but that what is was designed to be, ground up and has the pedigree behind it.

The engineering and R&D in the Maserati would have been a lot more substantial than the Falcon's no real R&D.

They're two different cars, apples and oranges.

CSV_LS1 · 06-02-2008, 05:18 PM

It's a Maserati 3200Gt. Twin turbo 3.2 litre v8. Not a great engine. It was the last engine proper Maserati engine before the Ferrari takeover. Not very liked. The boomerang tail lights are gorgeous though.

CSV_LS1 · 06-02-2008, 05:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ClevlndStemer

I'd be almost certain that the ZF used in the Maserati is a different box to the one in the GT (OZ). I'd say the one we have is a base model type, nothing really special.

Say again?
The ZF in the Falcon is of same quality as the Maserati unit.

ClevlndStemer · 06-02-2008, 05:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CSV_LS1

Say again?
The ZF in the Falcon is of same quality as the Maserati unit.

read again.
I never said the quality was different, i said it i'd be almost certain it would be a different box, a base model in comparison to the one used in the Maserati.
I can't imagine ZF having one tranny for all.

Whitey-AMG · 06-02-2008, 05:30 PM

The times for the GT have been debated to death..........

14.5 seconds for the GT would be indicative of a very tight motor with probably no more than a couple of thousand KLM on the ODO. They also probably forgot to take the handbrake off................

There is no question that the BOSS 302 will do high 13's..........

The MASERATI times on the other hand are indicative of a very short 1st gear combined with a short final drive. The 0 - 100 time of 5.1 seconds should really equate to a low 13 second pass if the motor was up to it. Passing the trap at 14.3 shows very tall 3rd gear ?? or a very sluggy motor.

Something just doesn't add up.

CSV_LS1 · 06-02-2008, 05:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ClevlndStemer

read again.
I never said the quality was different, i said it i'd be almost certain it would be a different box, a base model in comparison to the one used in the Maserati.
I can't imagine ZF having one tranny for all.

Both cars have the same ZF 6HP26 model tranny.

5.4 GT · 06-02-2008, 06:00 PM

*Weird double post when I edited... Due to new 20 second post rule.*

5.4 GT · 06-02-2008, 06:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ClevlndStemer

I am amazed people are comparing the two. The Falcon is just that, a 4 door family car with a big engine, a body kit and some stripes. It was never designed for real performance. The Maserarti on the other hand maybe a luxury GT, but that what is was designed to be, ground up and has the pedigree behind it.

I'm not amazed. They are of similar weight, the FPV has more power and it utilises the same ZF gearbox albeit in a different software config no doubt to incorperate the paddle shift mode in the Maserati (maybe we'll see this in the Orion GT?).

I found it fascinating that 2 cars with such similar specs could be so far apart in 0-100 performance times.

Watch the Video review I posted up earlier of the Maserati... It's their GranTurismo model (GT) not their all out sport one so i'd say its quite a fair comparison in performance to the FPV GT.