But Noname there shouldn’t be a “u” in oooch. haha.

(And I did have a little chuckle, by the way)

Of course I knew it wasn’t Dingo so I didn’t respond.

I thought you guys would do/say something like……………”Ha Dingo see that wasnt hard!” or “You finally admited Dingo!” Because we all know Dingo would have not said that. It would be good if he said that, that’s all!

come here and let me ull your ear.

stop being so rebelious

“Look this a big time first, but I’ll have to admit that Ford and Holden are better companies than TOYOTA.”

It was me that said that. I thought you guys would have said something to the comment. Oh well, i wish Dingo said that anyway.

I used the 198kw figure because I always use 95RON in cars and dirt bikes and 91RON in the mower, pump, etc. And don’t forget, it’s the last truly Aussie designed, engineered and built engine left. 2010 will mark the end of real Australian angines.

And yes Bret, I’d bet the Tourer would be quite a tower too.

even if you add your extra for displacement, the torque still falls short.
only in that case its the “power” figure that excells. you know, the figure that simple people think explains the true grunt of a vehicle……….

1. Watto the difference is 10kw not 2kw.
2. Aurions torque is just as useable, it has 90% at around 2000RPM. As someone calculated very well, displacement helps torque alot, for the engine its good. Add to this torque is pulling power, Aurion is 200kg lighter, it doesnt need as much torque in the first place!!
3. AndrewM fuel argument is drivel, its like saying a V12 is crap because it consumes more fuel but has more power. If the Aurion had that dispalcement PERHAPS it would consume more but it would have 390Nm of torque AND 235kw!!! Going off this 15% rule of course

P.S. Toyota………………SUCKS!!!!

the CGI topped it off perfectly when it had them

for toyota though i suppose none exsist because they are like that and find each others attitudes acceptable

Bret is right.
its a matter of the effortless acceleration that makes the big difference.
3200 odd and 4800 odd is where the max torque is for each, but at the 1800 mark (cruising pace) there is also a massive difference.

i still have one question that the aurion buffs havent been able to answer. Jobber perhaps you can……….

you guys love to peddle the “falcons got .5L more displacement” line so when you level it out they are the same.
so what happens when you add 15% fuel econony to the aurions figure bringing it to 11.5L/100k, and then add another 15% to bring it into line with the apparently inefficient RWD drive line that the falcon is running, bringing the aurion to 13.2L/100k.

isnt boh sides of the argument better?
i mean you only want to add your 15% or what ever to the part that makes the aurion look better but forget that with displacement increase comes more than the rosey stuff

gee I’d hate to see a 4.0L RWD Aurion.

when you look at it like that, 10L from the falcon is great for what you get