12th Jul 2005, 08:10

Test results from reputable Aussie car magazines from the early 70's confirm some interesting information previously noted in prior comments.

From different mags with different testers, some of the times recorded are amazingly consistent.

I am and have been an E49 fan since I was twelve, reading every comparison test and road test including the E49 that I could get my hands on.

The figures below show the consistently recorded times for the E49 and Phase 3.

E49 0 - 100km/h = 6.1sec (not 6.4) 0 - 160km/h = 14.1sec.

1/4 mile = 14.4sec.

Phase 3, 0 - 100km/h 6.4sec, 0 - 160km/h = 14.4 + 14.5 (equal in number of times recorded) 1/4 = 14.4sec.

After 160km/h the Phase 3 was definitely quicker and had a higher top speed of 240km/h versus 211km/h.

As reported the E49 was the quickest Australian production up to 160km/h and the Falcon was the fastest 4 door in the world when released. The Falcon's claim was very short lived as the mighty Benz was released soon after.

The difference is, and some might say it is a play on words (but it is as reported), fastest and quickest are not terms used to identify the same vehicle capabilities. The Phase 3 was faster, but the E49 was quicker.

There is a strange twist to this story that no one has listed. A Phase 2 tested by Wheels that was fitted with the optional Hi Ratio diff (can't recall the ratio) ran these figures consistently: 0 - 100km/h = 6.2sec.

0 - 160km/h = I can't recall, but it was quicker than the Phase 3 but slower than the E49, 1/4 = almost broke my heart, but the truth is it ran 14.2sec.

This Phase 2 had options that were available to any purchaser of the GT.

So overall I appreciate both cars for what they were capable of given the available technology, and believe both should stand together as the best "old style" muscle cars produced in Australia. I prefer the Charger, but that is just my opinion. It is a crying shame that all this performance would not allow either car to keep up with some Hi Po Japanese cars released here and in other world markets.

Too much pure technology and no character. Long live the real Muscle Cars.

25th Jul 2005, 02:25

Hello, I own a 1972 VH R/T 2 barrel Charger. Stock with 2 barrel, the Charger has 164 kw, and that is with no Webers and that is quite impressive. Ford fans, I'm sorry that the GTHO being the V8 351 cubes couldn't keep up with the straight 6 265 considering it was 86 cubes bigger :O.

There is a book Hey Charger and that has got everything you need right there to break a Ford fan's heart.

GO THE CHARGER.

14th Aug 2005, 01:16

Whoever said that the Falcon started to pass the Charger on the 0-100mph test is wrong... Think about it, if its 0-60 time was 6.4 and its 0-100 time was 14.4, that would mean it takes 8 seconds to gain 40mph.

This is not true... the time quoted is 0-100-0 mph test used to test both the acceleration AND braking.

How does that factor into the equation??? Well if the Falcon started to pass the Charger at the end of the strip, that means the Charger has much better braking capabilities than the Falcon, a statement supported by many reviews and by simple logic... The Charger was lighter and had much less cast iron hanging over the front wheels. The only thing is the Charger had non-boosted brakes, but it is clear from the acceleration figures that it had better braking than the Falcon.

1st Oct 2005, 09:10

The writer of the last entry appears a little confused.

8 seconds for 100km/h - 160km/h is still quick by today's standards. Regarding 0 - 100mph - 0 times, this is old info so may have been surpassed now, but the fastest time for a road registered car I have seen for this test was 13.5 seconds. This was in a Modified Porsche 911 Turbo (factory backed) that achieved 0 - 100Km/h in 3.2 seconds and 0 - 200Km/h in 9.0 seconds. My memory may have faded, but I believe the 0 - 160Km/h was 6.5 seconds.

Other previous writers have noted that above 100mph the GTHO was quicker than the E49. This relates to timed increments above 100mph, not that magically the Falcon will pass the Charger at this speed. If side by side the Falcon would begin to reel the E49 in after reaching 100mph, but would not pass it until the speeds were approximately 115 - 120mph. The E49 would then run out of breath at approx 130mph, whilst the GTHO would continue on to 142mph.

The 155mph quoted was the theoretical top speed given the gearing of the Falcon and not an achieved top speed. I believe Wheels Magazine Testers wound a GTHO out, on a slightly downhill gradient on the Hume Highway, to just shy of an indicated 150mph on the speedo. The testers duly noted that speedo indications can be wildly inaccurate. I once modified my old Mini speedo to indicate 120mph when actually travelling at 80mph just to fool my friends. The legend grew very quickly about this "Hot" Mini.

As a reference to the 60 - 100mph increment, the 350 HQ Monaro laid down these times:

0 - 60mph 7.9 sec, 0 - 100mph 22.3 secs. Obviously over 14 seconds to add the extra 40mph. As the speed increases, the acceleration rate decreases due to the power and torque required just to keep the car at high speed. Someone proficient in physics can explain in factual detail how it works, I'm not that smart.

This has been an interesting and memory provoking forum to read and be a part of, so please let's not ruin it by putting down contributors.

One last note - No Commodore, factory direct, has recorded consistent sub six second 0 - 100Km/h times.

Also the BA Turbo Falcon is faster than the E49 and GTHO at an achievable 245-250Km/h and has achieved 0 - 100Km/h times ranging from 6.2 - 6.5 seconds. This makes it line-ball with the old guys between 6.3 - 6.5 seconds, but quicker at 6.2 seconds than both. The old guys only were timed to 96Km/h. Commodores claiming 6.0 seconds seem to lay times about 0.5 of a second slower consistently when put against the stopwatch. Very shortly a car will arrive on the scene that will leave no doubt as to the quickest Aussie production car. Where will it come from, your guess is as good as mine as all three Aussie car producers are working on genuine high performance models. I say three as let's not forget Mitsubishi who build their large cars here.

If they built the Lancer Evo here they could already claim the title. Hmmm something to think about!

5th Dec 2005, 21:50

Hi everyone, I am 13 years old and I LOVE Chargers! especially the E49 RT. I would love to own one when I am older, and want one in plain metallic black or Hemi orange with the original RT black stripes. But everyone's saying different stuff. Which one is the actual fastest? Charger or XY GTHO?