Is the au quicker and lighter than the EF/EL?

ST · 31-10-2007, 06:46 PM

I've heard a lot of people say the AU is heavier than the EL a lot, but i've read on wikipedia (not the best source I know) that they are 35kg lighter (for the base model).

So what is the truth? Which is quicker and what would the average 1/4 mile be for each stock? (This is in reference to the standard I6)

falzoony · 31-10-2007, 07:45 PM

The EF/L revs harder off the line, thats the first thing I noticed when I got my AU after owning an EL. I think it's to do with fuel economy.
I've read the AU stock does the 1/4 mile in 16.3 and the EL is 16.2.

schuldiner · 31-10-2007, 07:58 PM

not being picky with your info falzoony but .1 of a second is neither here nor there as far as i know

DoreSlamR · 31-10-2007, 08:05 PM

I think if you ask anyone else but an AU owner they'll say the AU will be heavier because its gotta lug around all that UGLEE lol

I don't thing there'd be much difference in the two but my money would be on the AU being quicker.

No Judge · 31-10-2007, 08:15 PM

Im with you DoreSlamr, there is a trend for newer cars to have more power than their replacements (the new Holden Ute ad, for example, states one of the earliest utes had around 60HP, and the new ute has 270KW-ish - from memory). Hell, the stoke BA came out with about 180 KW!! I do realise that the AUs and BAs were geared differently, but ponies and ponies.

Also, the AU is supposed to be one of the most aerodynamically efficient cars around, that's gotta help a little bit.

IMO, the AU might be quicker, but firstly the car has to be driven by the right person to get the most potential out of it, so either car could win on a good day...

**Stav** · 31-10-2007, 08:18 PM

had an eb wagon.i dont know if it compares but the thing was much zippier than my au.It felt alot lighter.The au feels like a heavy wet sack cloth when you drive it.

gtfpv · 31-10-2007, 08:24 PM

well i have an el . and the au is bounds ahead in comfort and engine refinement.
i drove an AUIII SR . and it drove better than my dads BA XT.

No Judge · 31-10-2007, 08:30 PM

Just some 'references' and proof for above from www.trueblueford.com

1. AU I6 non-VTC: 157kW @ 4900 rpm. 357Nm @ 3000 rpm.
Cant find how many ponies the EL I6 put out, but considering the V8 put out "a measly 165kW", the result can almost be drawn.

2. In total a 10% reduction in the Coefficient of drag was achieved by the AU's slippery shape - down to a low of 0.295 on low series sedans & XR's with thier low profile bonnet vs. the Fairmont's more upright version. There is no doubt that was it's slippery shape along with the new engine dynamics that helped achieve the impressive highway economy figures more indicative of a smaller car making long trips all the more enjoyable. Fittingly, the AU's fuel consumption was down by 8% - shared between the driveline and aerodynamic advances made - with overall emissions reduced by a staggering 54% compared with the 1996 EL Falcon.

I couldn't find 1/4 mile times on this site, although if anyone is willing/able to correct me, fell free.

falzoony · 31-10-2007, 08:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by No Judge

Just some 'references' and proof for above from www.trueblueford.com

1. AU I6 non-VTC: 157kW @ 4900 rpm. 357Nm @ 3000 rpm.
Cant find how many ponies the EL I6 put out, but considering the V8 put out "a measly 165kW", the result can almost be drawn.

The EF/L put out the same kw and same torque.

falzoony · 31-10-2007, 08:39 PM

http://www.geocities.com/falconfacts/falcon/index.html
This site has the EL running a 17 and the AU running 16.6, so different souces tell different stories. The first times I got were from the history of for falcon book.

EF Futura 07 · 31-10-2007, 08:44 PM

EF Sedan GLI I6 Auto With all fluids weighs in @ 1500KG
EL "" Put on 30kg's, AU1 Forte I6 Auto is a porker at about 1650kg, From EF-AU3 non tickford/VCT the I6's have 157kw@4900 and 357nm@3000
All have the same ratio's except AU3 which i think has a 3.23 not a 3.08 diff.

EF's are the quickest off the line and over the qaurter. When EF came out it was the quickest non tickford I6 to date (0-100 8secs flat and 16.1 1/4 -for a auto sedan)

The AU was around 8.3 and 16.3. they were about 0.5 sec quicker to 100 than a VT/VX/VY 3.8 Auto

The BA I6 auto are quicker again @ 7.7 and 15.6 (182kw@5250 and 380nm@3250) but weigh 1700kg.

My EF's make a BA work

:

FGII-XR6 · 31-10-2007, 10:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EF Futura 07

AU1 Forte I6 Auto is a porker at about 1650kg

where did you get that weight from according to the XR brochure the curb weight of the XR6 is 1530 Kgs

sly · 31-10-2007, 11:00 PM

The TR Magna of the early '90's was heavier than the base Falcon of the day...

and had all of 2.6 litres to haul its lardy a55 around. Falcons, like Commodores, stacked on weight during the '90's due to rapid increases in base equipment levels and NVH attenuation. The weight gain from EL to AU was reduced due to the AU having a new "lightweight" body shell.

V3RSAC3 · 01-11-2007, 12:29 AM

john ... why weren't you at our graduation mass???

anywayz, the AU is quicker than an EF/EL ... my AUI Fairmont is Quicker than an EF XR6

GK · 01-11-2007, 08:10 AM

I'm only talking about feel here but I've driven two EF wagons (both Futuras)off and on, and they are much brisker off the line than my AU Futura Wagon.

GK

sprjenkins · 01-11-2007, 02:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EF Futura 07

EF Sedan GLI I6 Auto With all fluids weighs in @ 1500KG
EL "" Put on 30kg's, AU1 Forte I6 Auto is a porker at about 1650kg, From EF-AU3 non tickford/VCT the I6's have 157kw@4900 and 357nm@3000
All have the same ratio's except AU3 which i think has a 3.23 not a 3.08 diff.

EF's are the quickest off the line and over the qaurter. When EF came out it was the quickest non tickford I6 to date (0-100 8secs flat and 16.1 1/4 -for a auto sedan)

The AU was around 8.3 and 16.3. they were about 0.5 sec quicker to 100 than a VT/VX/VY 3.8 Auto

The BA I6 auto are quicker again @ 7.7 and 15.6 (182kw@5250 and 380nm@3250) but weigh 1700kg.

My EF's make a BA work

:

Yeah thats rubbish, the manual sitting in my glove box tells me my AU series 1 forte weighs 1500ishkg not 1650kg.

Plus my stock AU 1 forte did a 15.8 quarter mile and I posted the time slip for that up here a while ago

sly · 01-11-2007, 02:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GK

I'm only talking about feel here but I've driven two EF wagons (both Futuras)off and on, and they are much brisker off the line than my AU Futura Wagon.

My AU wagon used to be my company car & was driven for errands by the office staff during the day, as they'd been doing for 20 years or so. A couple commented to me that the AU seemed sluggish and inclined to change up early compared to the EBII and EF wagons that they'd been used to. AFAIK the gearing was the same (3.23 diffs), I wonder if the earlier cars' stall points were higher? My tranny stalls up against the brake at 2000, never tried it in an EL or earlier.

5.4 GT · 01-11-2007, 02:45 PM

In standard 6 cylinder form the EF/EL is quicker as its lighter than the equivalent AU and has the same power outputs. EF/EL Tickford 6 vs AU VCT i'm thinking the AU would be faster. If its V8s the AU would be quicker especially the SII (200kw) and SIII (220kw) XR8s, however if an ELII XR8 (185) and an AUI XR8 (185) were matched up I would be betting the ELII would win.

loxxr6 · 01-11-2007, 02:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sprjenkins

Yeah thats rubbish, the manual sitting in my glove box tells me my AU series 1 forte weighs 1500ishkg not 1650kg.

Plus my stock AU 1 forte did a 15.8 quarter mile and I posted the time slip for that up here a while ago

My AU1 XR6 weighed in at 1540kg (from memory). Forte wouldn't be that much less.

Forte's were meant to be good for 16.3 quarter miles.

soulfire · 01-11-2007, 03:52 PM

The EF and EL are heavier than the AU, if you look at factory brochures. Even an AU3 XR8 220 with IRS is lighter than an EF2 XR8. The whole point of the AU was that it was lighter, stronger and more agile. Not to mention more reliable.

FS5 · 01-11-2007, 06:36 PM

[QUOTE=loxxr6]My AU1 XR6 weighed in at 1540kg (from memory). Forte wouldn't be that much less.[QUOTE]

just to back up loxxr6's post

mines an series 2 s pack .i weighed it with me in it and after i took the weight of myself out it was around 1530/1540.
theres a thread already on here somewhere about the weight of au's

V3RSAC3 · 01-11-2007, 06:49 PM

i've found that (and not being biased) the fairmont/XR's/T-series' seem to drive better than the Forte/Futura models, i prefer driving my monty better! it may not be as light on the steering but it feels like it is finished off more and has far more grunt and transmition is stronger! ... although i could be imagining things!

has anybody else noticed this? or is it just an obvious fact?

falzoony · 01-11-2007, 07:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by V3RSAC3

i've found that (and not being biased) the fairmont/XR's/T-series' seem to drive better than the Forte/Futura models,

Well they should drive better seeming the forte is a base model and the fairmonts are the luxo's. They would want to drive better or there wouldn't be much point owning one.

V3RSAC3 · 01-11-2007, 07:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by falzoony

Well they should drive better seeming the forte is a base model and the fairmonts are the luxo's. They would want to drive better or there wouldn't be much point owning one.

i didn't mean to touch a nerve john

:

forgive me?

waggaclint · 01-11-2007, 10:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by V3RSAC3

it may not be as light on the steering but it feels like it is finished off more and has far more grunt and transmition is stronger! ...

motor and g-box are the same and the steering in a fairmont/fairlane is accually lighter (makes them easier to park) and there are slower than abase model case they weigh more (with all the extra stuff in em)

waggaclint · 01-11-2007, 10:50 PM

in regards to the thread AU;s have the same power as an EL but are lighter & AU2 & 3 are lighter again different comp ratio on all models but...
according to redbook anyway....
http://www.redbookasiapacific.com/au...6613&id2=63140

**Mechan1k** · 01-11-2007, 11:19 PM

Meh ... who cares about lightest ... I want to be able to drag as much load around as possible.

Found out when I arrived at the local Waste Management Centre that ute + trailer + general waste = GCM of 4.4T.

All that dragged by a measily 99rwkw EGAS engine with A/C on ... it was a slow drive ... but could still handle it well.

OOPS.

5.4 GT · 01-11-2007, 11:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by waggaclint

in regards to the thread AU;s have the same power as an EL but are lighter & AU2 & 3 are lighter again different comp ratio on all models but...
according to redbook anyway....
http://www.redbookasiapacific.com/au...6613&id2=63140

I think redbook is a crock as usual...

Quotes a 96 EFII Ghia as being 1321kg and a 99 AU Ghia to be 1641kg

http://www.redbookasiapacific.com/au...63287&id=62694

streetracer23 · 01-11-2007, 11:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by falzoony

The EF/L revs harder off the line, thats the first thing I noticed when I got my AU after owning an EL. I think it's to do with fuel economy.
I've read the AU stock does the 1/4 mile in 16.3 and the EL is 16.2.

do you know what the fuel economy is for the el xr6?? would be appreciated.

V3RSAC3 · 01-11-2007, 11:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by streetracer23

do you know what the fuel economy is for the el xr6?? would be appreciated.

depends how you drive it dude, my mate gets 350 - 400k's out of his! where as i get 450 - 600 in my AU ( again, pending how i drive it )