V6 vs V8 Thread

[AirStrike]

I prefer a V8 i prefer a V8's power, I also love a V8 sound nothing beats it..

But this for me isn't money and it isn't Worlds of torque from a V8.
I just really wont to make a V6 go fast and to it easy, To me building a quick V6 would be more satisfying then building a fast V8, Look everyone can make a V8 go fast, But few if any can make a NA V6 walk the talk, And that is why my preference at this stage is making a very competitive V6..
Now only in June before a bought my VT Berlina i walked in to buy a VTII Execitve LS1. I had my heart set on it i wanted it bad!, But unfortunately it was a little more damaged then i anticipated , So it's back to the V6 and my goals are making a V6 weapon without FI and without ripping the engine apart to do it. If i can do this i will be very satisfied, And my next car will probably be going on fuel prices hope they drop a V8.
I'm still cheesed off about the LS1 Exec it was a good idea for a sleeper.

That's then thing though, without FI or pulling the motor down you are never going to have much more then something like 140rwkw and that's camm'ed and decent head work. My car made 153rwkw stock with pacemakers and a **** twin into single exhaust and a SV airbox.

 

[hingo1983]

There is no way known that those quoted figures could be right. I drove a military Calais from Sydney(Holsworthy) to albury and it used 11.7l/100km.

I am yet to drive a holden six that even gets close to the 8 for economy on the highway.

It can be done. My old man brags that his VY Commodore does 8L/100K on long trips. If you are getting 11.7 then you must have a heavy foot. I have a VR Calais 6 that I can easily drop below the 10's on long distance trips.

My current average from driving to one side of Canberra to the other and back every day for work is only 11L. That includes stop/start driving in heavy traffic.

 

[pandaman]

It can be done. My old man brags that his VY Commodore does 8L/100K on long trips. If you are getting 11.7 then you must have a heavy foot. I have a VR Calais 6 that I can easily drop below the 10's on long distance trips.

Is that instantaneous fuel consumption or average though?

 

[minux]

It can be done. My old man brags that his VY Commodore does 8L/100K on long trips. If you are getting 11.7 then you must have a heavy foot. I have a VR Calais 6 that I can easily drop below the 10's on long distance trips.

My current average from driving to one side of Canberra to the other and back every day for work is only 11L. That includes stop/start driving in heavy traffic.

How the hell do you have a heavy foot using cruise control lol?

Has nothing to do with a heavy foot, fact is the holden sixes are guzzlers on the highway.

Just curious, what does everyones 6 sit on rpm wise at 100? I know every 8 i have been in has lower revs at 100 than a 6..which in my guess would make the 8 more economical on the highway.

 

[Reaper]

How the hell do you have a heavy foot using cruise control lol?

Has nothing to do with a heavy foot, fact is the holden sixes are guzzlers on the highway.

Just curious, what does everyones 6 sit on rpm wise at 100? I know every 8 i have been in has lower revs at 100 than a 6..which in my guess would make the 8 more economical on the highway.

My Gen III's and VE all sit on 1500 rpm at 100. Can't say I ever paid attention to what the 6's were.

Reaper

 

[vt1538]

Haven't driven a VZ or a VE with the 6 litre yet, but I totally agree on the gen3. Apparently even just a tune and diff gears will give it a fair bit more urge off the line, but in stock form it feels very peaky.

Just a tune will get them going like they should. Damn Holden & there torque reduction.

 

[pandaman]

How the hell do you have a heavy foot using cruise control lol?

Has nothing to do with a heavy foot, fact is the holden sixes are guzzlers on the highway.

Just curious, what does everyones 6 sit on rpm wise at 100? I know every 8 i have been in has lower revs at 100 than a 6..which in my guess would make the 8 more economical on the highway.

Up until VZ when things got a little complicated, all auto commodores ran the same gearbox and diff ratios. Hence 100km/h rpm's should be the same. Manuals pre VT had very similar top gear ratios. (0.71 and 0.72) Only commodores that really had lower crusing rpm was with the introduction of the gen3, manuals got a stupidly tall top gear ratio (0.5) and a slightly shorter diff to bring it back a bit, (3.46) which still resulted in very low cruising revs. While the VT onwards V6 manual with the getrag had a top ratio of 0.81. All this means: only difference in cruising revs should be between VT2 onwards V6 and V8 manuals.

Cruise control can actually chew slightly more fuel than a driver with a very careful boot. To put it simply, the computer can't anticipate changes in load conditions like a human can. I could start ranting and raving about the maths of how it all works, but I don't think that would be very useful.

 

[Sweetas_VT_SS]

My car made 153rwkw stock with pacemakers and a **** twin into single exhaust and a SV airbox.

See I have trouble with this... At the recent L67 drag day at Heathcote what did you run? A 15.1? I know guys with similar figures to yours were running nearly half a second quicker in heavier cars?

Not trying to stir just curious thats all?

 

[hingo1983]

How the hell do you have a heavy foot using cruise control lol?

Has nothing to do with a heavy foot, fact is the holden sixes are guzzlers on the highway.

LOL I dunno. I run mine on cruise as well and there is no way in hell that it would average a trip above 10L. That is a fact. I do it often from Canberra to Orange which has some very hilly sections.

Your figures don't sound right. Especially since the trip to Albury is dead flat.

Not to mention that the Buick V6 isn't as economic as the later 6's. My Dads VY gets better economy than my VR despite being a heavier car. I didn't think it was possible to get a Holden V6 in the 8's but he proved me wrong.

My VR's economy is much better if you sit on the 95-100Kmh range on long trips. Anything over 100K's and it is significantly less economic.

 

[hingo1983]

Is that instantaneous fuel consumption or average though?

Average fuel consumption over the distance of the trip and back. Trust me, reset your average, go on a trip and keep it on cruise between 95-100Km/h and you will be pleasantly surprised. Saying that, how many people stay under 100's on a trip? Not many. I usually sit between 100 and 110 and will get in the 9's.