VZ vs BA

[sweet vt]

What do you guy s think, Has anyone driven both and compared??? Which one would be in front in a traffic light drag to 100km/h??? I am talking standard 6's. I have driven a BA XT and it would eat my VT for breakfast.

 

[Toa]

I have driven both, VZ exec and BA xt, the BA's are pretty much a full second faster 0-100 than the VZ.

But it's not only the WOT squirts where the BA has the goods, at partial throttle applications the BA effortlessly pulls it's weight along to keep up with or better the speed of the other traffic from the lights, while the VZ needs a fair bit more of a kick in the pants to acheive the same, unlike the previous ecotec which was fairly responsive at partial throttle openings.

I found the VZ exec a little dissapointing, reminded me of a bit of a jap V6 having nothing down low in the revs but not a bad top end, but I haven't driven an SV6 yet but I'd imagine in the lower revs it'd be exactly the same but with a stronger top end.

 

[mixin]

The 190 is a great motor - so much different to the 175 it's hard to believe they are related - such few things that make all the difference too.

The 190 is king of the hill in the "big 6 n/a" category, but the 182kw 4L is hot on it's heels. The 175 is very disappointing by comparison.

But back to base models, the ford eats the holden now.

 

[clixanup]

For mine, the interiors of the BAs seem to be all over the place.

The VY/VZ interior is much nicer. Also, methinks it would be damn near impossible to upgrade the stereo in a BA, but can be easily done in VZs. Most guys here would not be happy with the standard stereo in either car.

 

[digitok]

I remember reading a stereo install article about a falcon ute, got fully decked out to the max etc but they had to leave the stock stereo in there because if they took it out the car won't start or something.. pretty silly me thinks.

 

[Toa]

The 190 is king of the hill in the "big 6 n/a" category, but the 182kw 4L is hot on it's heels.

Not necessarily, the SV6 has a quoted 190kw, 5 speed auto and weighs in at 1592kg.
The falcon XT exec has a quoted 182kw, 4 speed auto and weighs 1672kg.
On paper, more power, closer ratio gears and less weight all mean a faster car, but, motor mag has done several tests with these cars and the fastest 0-100km/h they could get out of the SV6 was 6.95sec and the XT 7.23sec, fair enough the SV6 should be quicker. But over the quarter the SV6 pulled a fastest of 15.34sec pass while the XT pulled a 15.28sec pass? and the XT is supposedly able to hold the SV6 of upto it's speed limited 180km/h. Not bad out of a taxi.

Around a race track the SV6 is definately quicker than the XT but in a straight line duel there isn't much in it.

 

[BobT]

SV6-v-XR6

Wheels Magazine records the SV6 quicker than the TX6 everywhere. On the other hand Motor Magazine has the XR6 faster everywhere. For 0-120 Wheels has the SV6 at 10.0sec and the XR6 at 10.2sec yet Motor has the SV6 at 11.76sec and the XR6 at 11.17.

Are these cars really so similar that it's just a matter of production variations on the particular car or is there something else going on here?

If you're into speed, Wheels has the XR6 at max speed of 210km/h and the SV6 at 240km/h in 4th gear. If only we had autobahns.

 

[Toa]

The XT's are a smidge quicker than XR6's in straight line drags as they have exactly the same power/torque but weigh a little less and have tyres that are better for launching from the line.

Those top speed figures are only claimed not tested, I'd imagine if I can reach an indicated 220 in a 147kw VT wagon the XR6 would be capable of at least that as long as it doesn't have any limitors. I've gone to the 180km/h limit in the base model and if the limit wasn't there I'm sure it would've gone quite a bit quicker as the XT was still pulling hard upto that speed, and could sustain that speed with less than half throttle.

With that said, I don't think that there is really much in it between the ford n/a sixes and the SV6, in a straight line drag that is, not enough to award either one with the crown anyway.

 

[greenfoam]

I think BA Falcons are the best looking Falcon since the XY, if only they were 200 kg's lighter it would be just about the best family/performance car ever made , The thing I don't like about the VT-VZ as far as looks go is where the front roof pillars join the front gaurd, everytime I look at one it looks like some kind of banana boat with a roof just sitting on there, it anoys me so much I don't think I will ever be able to own any of those models, from a distance I'm fine with them but I just can't handle how the lines are up close. I'll have to buy a VS one day and then keep that untill BA's are cheap. I also don't like the VY-VZ dash with that crazy hazzard light switch and weird dials, uncool Holden, uncool. But I do like to drive the newer Commdores more than the Falcons, the Commodores are just like a VN without the rattles and the Falcon is so different it would take me months to get used to one

 

[sweet vt]

I am sorry to do this on a Commodore forum but, I went with a mate of mine out to the darling downs to visit his brother. He has had a BA now for about 2 months and he of course wanted to take his car for a bit of a blast. We were cruisin at about 140km/h for ages dead silent. So what my VT cruises pretty well at these speeds. We came up behind a B-Double and were stuck behind him for a few ks and finally a straight stretch and he pulled out and nailled it. We went from about 100km/h to 200km/h in what seemed an instant... It gets to 200 dead on and literally bounces off the speed limiter. Faaaaark. These thing really hall for a stock 6. i really want to get a newer car as I am not that happy with the VT's performance and can mabe stretch it to a standard VZ with some alloys. I know I can't test drive it at these speeds but are they streets ahead of the VT in performance????? If not I really don't want to swap sides but I would have to consider it for 35 large.