FPV GT F v HSV GTS 2014 Comparison

It started simply enough: Take an Aussie family sedan, spike it with a loping, large-capacity V8 and finish with a badge that would leave no doubt about the vehicle's Grand Touring credentials. Then take it racing.

It was the limited-edition 1967 Ford XR Falcon GT, with its 289ci (4.7-litre) Windsor V8, which introduced the phrase 'Australian Muscle Car' to the national conscience. A Bathurst winner that year, it gave Ford Australia a much-needed halo car with which to do battle with its red-blooded rival on the showroom floors.

Holden, of course, returned fire with devastating effect – and with a name just close enough to the Blue Oval boys' heavy-hitter to show just what it was targeting. The 1968 HK Monaro GTS in 327ci (5.4-litre) form packed more punch into a more purposeful two-door body, and even the upgraded 302ci (4.9-litre) XT Falcon GT couldn't keep the Roaring Lion at bay.

After the legendary 1969 Bathurst battle, in which the 350ci (5.7-litre) HT Monaro GTS once more triumphed over the 351ci (5.8-litre) XW Falcon GTHOs, the battleground of these behemoths moved from circuit to street-light as Holden moved to the smaller Torana for racing purposes – but the genre's roots were by then firmly embedded.

The much talked about 'Supercar Scare' of the early 1970s, combined with a fuel crisis and more stringent emissions controls, saw both GT and GTS disappear by 1980.

Dormant for more than a decade, is it coincidental that both nameplates were rekindled in 1992?

Holden's performance arm, Holden Special Vehicles (HSV), rekindled the fire with the VP-series GTS. Producing 200kW from its locally-built 5.0-litre V8, it was no longer a Monaro (and copped a fair whack at the time for being – four-speed -- automatic-only) but independent rear suspension modernised its handling. With only 130 built, it's a collectible car in its own right.

Ford built its 25th anniversary GT off the base of the EB Falcon. Again a limited-edition model (250 units), the EB GT was tweaked and assembled by Ford contractor Tickford. The new-age GT featured a US-sourced 4.9-litre Windsor V8 that generated 200kW (allegedly; there was much conjecture as to its true output).

Ford continued to flirt with the GT badge by releasing a 30th anniversary edition during the EL series, before making it a regular production vehicle with 2003's 290kW BA, built under the Ford Performance Vehicles (FPV) banner.

By then, the GTS had become HSV's flagship, only taking a break during VZ production in 2005 before returning with VE vengeance.

As the sunset lingers over the final iterations of GT and GTS, there's no doubt a little of this country's vehicular identity will be lost with the demise of these Aussie icons.

Modern Takes
With battle lines trampled to dust over 45 years ago, it's fair to say these combatants haven't forgotten what brings them to us today. The core recipe remains: grunty V8s up front, with torque transferred straight to the rear treads.

With time, however, comes development. For years, local journos have lavished praise on our muscle machines (occasionally without just cause), comparing them favourably to far more expensive European opposition. However, it's not really until this latest pair that they are truly close to the Continental heavy-hitters.

Enter the ultimate FPV GT and what is most likely the penultimate HSV GTS.

First things first: If you were in the market for a FPV GT F, you're already too late; all 500 allocated to the Australian market (there's another 50 for New Zealand) are already spoken for, making the $77,990 (plus on-road costs, in six-speed manual or automatic form) list price a (largely) moot point.

For reference, that is only $1000 more than the RSPEC, on which its suspension settings and wider rear wheels are based. In GT F form, the supercharged 5.0-litre quad-cam V8 improves from 335 to 351kW (a curious nod to 1970s GT Falcons, which used 351ci 5.8-litre engines) on paper, though as we've proven hereabouts, the transient overboost facility allows a nominal output far greater than this number suggests.

As detailed in our GT F launch review, the GT F's equipment upgrades include the premium 355mm, six-piston (front) and 330mm four-piston (rear) Brembo brake package as standard, as well as an individualised ICC which displays the particular GT F's build number on start-up, before switching to useful (read: distracting) virtual gauges for boost and engine/transmission in this six-speed automatic example, along with a g-force meter.

Also fitted as standard is a driver's seat that is power adjustable, but only for the seat base. It does nothing to fix the trademark poor driving position of FPV's Falcon-based products, the seats in which don't go low enough for the low-rent steering wheel to feel comfortable.

The GT F also shows its age with no shift paddles for the auto gearbox, no keyless entry/go, a simple on/off stability control system and cheap plastics to contrast with the otherwise supple leather and suede interior flourishes. And the key fob? It's the same as my wife's 2011 Fiesta...

Thankfully it scores well on the safety front with six airbags and a five-star ANCAP safety rating.

At a list price of $96,990 (plus on-road costs), the Gen-F HSV GTS may sound expensive but it is (in comparison) packed with equipment; enough to justify its near-$20,000 premium over the GT F.

Power and torque from the supercharged 6.2-litre V8 sit at a quoted 430kW and 740Nm respectively, and the shouting match is stopped by massive 390mm, six-piston (front) and 372mm, two-piston (rear) brakes.

The GTS immediately feels the newer, higher-quality vehicle, save for the steering wheel, which might as well come from a Cruze.

Thankfully, quality suede and carbon-look fillets bring a modern prestige air to the cabin, and the sculptured, fully electric front seats even offer heating for those cold Wodonga mornings. Like the Ford, the GTS has six airbags and a five-star ANCAP safety score.

HSV has introduced a multi-stage drive mode system in this generation of its vehicles that selects (among other things) different modes for steering, traction and stability control, bi-modal intake and exhaust, torque vectoring and the vehicle's adjustable damping.

The infotainment system also has an Enhanced Driver Interface (EDI) system that offers all manner of readouts including over and understeer indicators, drive schematics and various lap and acceleration timing modes. This is teamed to VF's significantly better MyLink sat-nav and infotainment system that has embedded apps and the like. It's two generations ahead of the Ford's set-up.

A multi-function head-up display, parking sensors, blind-spot monitor and electronic park brake add further value. In a vehicle so nicely specified, why then does the full-size spare wheel consume most of the boot space?

Taking the GTS first, Luke is impressed with its composure. "Working up through the driving modes, you don't think it's making much difference to begin with, but there's definitely more immediacy in the Track setting," he explains.

"The less intrusive stability control calibration allows a fair degree of slip, which is progressively taken away without cutting all the grunt.

"It has a good front-end on it, though there is some understeer – [understandable] given the nature of the track and the conditions. Braking is strong, though I am reaching for paddles to downshift... They've missed a trick there – and the sequential shift won't always obey my command."

Youlden was disappointed to hear the cheaper US-market Chevrolet SS comes with paddles as standard.

But our 'driver' is very impressed with the GTS' torque, using third gear comfortably for maximum traction out of corners, though "it will still oversteer if provoked".

Jumping into the FPV, the contrast is worryingly stark. All supercharger whine and tyre squeal, the GT F looks a little at sea from an external point of view, and Luke's initial impressions back this up.

"It's too soft in the suspension, and just wants to understeer everywhere," is his immediate comment, though with increasing familiarity he uses that dynamic to his advantage.

"If I throw it in towards the apex, I can then get it steering on the throttle with the weight transfer... It's a lot of fun that way and once it is sliding it is quite controllable. The engine is quite linear in its delivery. It's better at being a hooligan than the HSV, but isn't a better track car," Youlden rules.

Luke also notes the intrusive stability control (despite revised calibration work by Prodrive, he can lap much faster with it disengaged), relatively long gearing ("I'm stuck between second and third on this track") and a lack of tyre grip from the Dunlop Sport Maxx tyres in the drying but cold conditions. And though the brakes last the torture test, the pedal stroke is long and brake feel is less positive.

Luke's seat-of-the-pants assessment is supported with the objective performance data. In damp but drying conditions, the GTS (first up) records laps around 2.3 seconds quicker than the GT F. Over a 60-second (approx) lap that's a large margin.

There's a similar advantage in standing-start tests. Rather than attempt to establish record acceleration times, our strategy with our six-speed autos is to replicate what we'd term fast street starts – sidestep the brake and mash the throttle. The times recorded were consistent over three runs with the transmissions in sport or performance mode (auto shifting) and stability control turned off in both vehicles.

The 0-100km/h times aren't stellar (blame low track temperatures and some damp patches) but at five seconds flat the HSV is 0.3 seconds faster than the FPV. Our Wodonga test facility does not have a straight long enough for 400-metre times.

Braking (and perhaps tyre traction) is another HSV strong-suit, hauling the GTS down from 100km/h an impressive 4.7 metres ahead of the FPV.

On the beaten track
Although quite capable of thundering around a racetrack, the reality is these vehicles are optimised for use on Australian roads.

Back from the outer edges of their respective performance envelopes, both HSV and FPV proved to be capable tarmac devourers, with more performance than you'll ever need on public roads, especially in the damp and foggy conditions we experienced.

Following Luke in the FPV, I settled the HSV GTS into 'Sport', the second of its four performance modes, with the shifter set to D. There's certainly some tyre roar entering the cabin, the combination of 35-series Continental SportContacts and 20-inch alloys proving hard to insulate. Thankfully, Sport mode opens the exhaust, so the V8 burble dims the drumming somewhat.

The GTS's electrically-assisted steering is quite weighty but offers more feel than the FPV's. Even after a hammering on the track the front tyres faithfully track my requests with a positive, keyed-in feel that can be adjusted further if/when more lock is required.

The GTS also rides (comparatively) well. Tour is the pick for maximum comfort but even with the damping set to its 'firmest' Track setting it's better than most.

Braking and natural traction are both more capable than you might think, given the combination of 1842kg (tare weight) and 430kW/740Nm, and the stability control systems (particularly in the third 'Performance' mode, when torque vectoring comes on-stream) further flatter the average punter.

As on the track, however, there are a couple of occasions where a third-second downshift is requested but not responded to.

Fuel consumption for the HSV measured at 11.8L/100km on a 110km/h highway cruise, up to a thirsty 17.2L/100km after our touring drive route. You've gotta pay for all that grunt at some point...

Swapping into the GT F, my first thought – apart from the more obvious supercharger whine – is where have the brakes gone? The Brembos stop the thing fine, but the pedal needs a far longer, firmer shove than in the GTS.

The single-mode suspension (no fancy adaptable dampers here) is very compliant, but that pitch Luke so happily converted to oversteer on the track translates to the need for constant traction management on the road.

The FPV's hydraulic steering has reasonable feel, but an immediate response that then softens off, leaving you unsure as to whether the front is truly as gripped up as you imagine. Very quickly, the GTS ahead disappears from my sights.

And as for the driving position...

Plusses for the GT F include that wonderfully linear power delivery, better insulation from road noise, and superior fuel consumption. We measured 11.1L/100km on the highway cycle and 15.7L/100km on the twistier route.

The truth is, despite the evocative 351 badges and that dyno result, the GT F is bettered in nearly every conceivable way by the lion-hearted GTS.

The big, burbling FPV is a hero car in its own right, a fitting final fling to its illustrious brethren. But the truth is, the HSV GTS in Gen-F form feels about at least decade further down its development trail.

It's more comfortable, better equipped, faster and easier to drive quickly than the Broady Boy, and that is why the HSV GTS takes the Australian Muscle Car title... Perhaps for the last time.

Pricing and specifications:

Racer's Edge

It's bitter sweet.
Throwing a couple of Aussie muscle cars around a racetrack is a tempting
prospect offset by the thought that this may be the last chance I ever
get.

The end of Aussie-made in our industry is looming fast and
this current generation of vehicles will be its legacy. Yes, in at least
one car's case, there will be updates here and there but essentially
their DNA will go to the grave unchanged. How will they stack up and
what will be their forever lasting impression?

At first glance
both the HSV and FPV exhibit a presence of performance: big wheels,
brakes and spoilers. On closer inspection I'm so pleased to see
275-section rear tyres on the GT F. Performance Falcons have been
screaming out for these for 10 years. I'm guessing the boffins at Ford
finally won that battle against the all too powerful bean-counters!

However,
I feel it still won't be enough. Getting circa-350kW and 700Nm to the
ground on 275 wide tyres in a car approaching two tonnes... We'll see...
Actually on second thought, it could be the most fun I've ever had!

The
GTS doesn't seem to suffer in the presence department. Its purposeful
stance is dominated by huge brakes that seem to fill every bit of
available space inside the big 20-inch rims, just taunting me to get
them on the track.

Move to the interior of the GTS and I find the
layout, look and features that one would expect to see in a
current-generation performance vehicle. Good seating position and I love
the fact that with a flick of a switch, I can change the dynamics of
the car from Touring to Track mode – with a couple of intermediate
settings in between.

The steering wheel lets it down, however – a
bit plain-Jane for my liking. If I didn't know better, it looks like it
could have come from the baseline Commodore.

The GT F, in
contrast, feels a generation or two behind the HSV. Nothing is really
wrong with it but it lacks a lot of features, especially from a vehicle
priced around the $80K mark.

Unfortunately, the seating position
is absolutely diabolical. I'm not mincing my words here – I just can't
believe how a historically great engineering company can get this basic
of basics so wrong. I can't get the wheel anywhere near high enough, nor
the seat anywhere near low enough and can't help but feel like I'm
sitting on top of the car, not in it.

Now, track time! We're
evaluating these rockets on a circuit that doesn't really play to the
strengths of big, powerful and heavy machinery. But that's the point –
the tight, twisty Wodonga TAFE track does possess a diverse range of
corners and a short straight where top speeds should be north of the old
100mph (162km/h) mark.

First up the GTS... and I'm immediately
impressed with the turn in. The car sits very flat and responds well,
with great steering feel and less understeer than anticipated. Here I
can use third gear through most of the corners with that big, fat,
healthy torque curve effortlessly pulling me towards those outside
edges.

I'm actually quite surprised with how well the HSV puts
the power down. The stability control system strikes me as very
sophisticated and an area that has seen some obvious calibration effort.
It cuts just enough power to limit the wheel-spin, recovers quickly
and, with each mode change all the way to Track, allows the car to
progressively slide a touch more.

Approaching 170km/h on the
straight with a tight hairpin at the end, the brakes cop a pounding. But
wow, the GTS delivers awesome retardation with a very firm pedal and,
with each extra lap, shows no hint of fade.

On track with the GT
F and the car is noticeably softer in the suspension and dumps a lot of
weight onto the outside front tyres.

The resulting understeer
is the big limiting factor when trying to drive it smoothly, but give it
an aggressive tug on the wheel and the soft front-end pitches the car
into turn-in oversteer and the fun begins!

This is only possible
with the stability control off and what lets the car down is that I
only have the two options -- on or off. With stability on it's very
conservative and cuts so much more power than is actually needed that
I'm basically forced to turn it off. Turned off, the power-down is left
wanting and there's no happy medium.

Compared to the GTS the
brakes are very soft -- with nowhere near as much retardation and a
longish pedal it doesn't really inspire me with confidence.

The
gearing is different and I'm a little busier having to use second and
third gear. I could really do with some sort of paddle shift
arrangement. This is a standard feature in many cars these days – even
in non-performance models. The fact neither GTS nor GT F gets them is an
area that both makes could improve on.

In the end the GT F is over two seconds per lap slower over a 60-second lap and the fact is it's all brakes and handling.

Both
cars have strong engines and pull similar numbers on the straights but I
can't help but feel the FPV is a generation behind the HSV. Brakes,
roll stiffness, being able to change the dynamics with a flick of a
switch, the incredible stability control system that suits any skill
level in the GTS – all of these factors really makes the Ford feel old.

Don't
get me wrong, the GT F is a great car. In fact, with its lack of rear
traction and softer front-end, it's certainly a bit more fun – if you're
a budding drifter. That said, if I was looking for a track day car that
would suit everyone from the average driver all the way to a pro, the
GTS would be my pick.

If I was looking to 'up spec' the GT F for
a bit more speed on track, then definitely a stiffer suspension package
is needed. Throw in a heavier anti-roll bar and spring combo and
perhaps some shocks to match and I think you'd be on your way.

Bigger
brakes and/or better pads wouldn't go astray but the rear tyre width is
pretty much set and would always be the limiting factor in terms of
rear grip.

On the road both cars are great. This is a comparison
though and, if anything, the front-end stiffness and confidence of the
GTS is probably highlighted further in the real world.

The HSV's
greater steering wheel weight was not something that really affected me
on track (mainly as was I driving over the level of grip and that
always lightens up the feel) but on road, I would choose it over that of
the GT F.

As a daily driver, the seating position in the FPV is
a deal breaker and, with the extra features in the newer generation
GTS, it also gets my vote for the road.

Two from two then for the GTS!