Here is a copy of a review article I posted in the Tech section of our Ford based forum. The cars are obviously only of relevance in the Australian market.
Introduction
The newly revised Chrysler range has been a bit of a surprise in the Australian market, particularly the 300C which has handed out a bit of stiff competition in the local Prestige market.
Of most interest to an enthusiast group is the recently released SRT8 version of that car so it is time to do a bit of an analysis to see how it might fare against the somewhat stiffer opposition provided by a couple of the home grown heroes in the Luxury Performance category.
The Opposition
I've chosen two from the V8 luxury performance car category; the FPV GT-P and the HSV R8 as they are close in price and closest in their target market niche.
Because the 300C in standard form has been stealing sales from the long wheelbase locals I have also thrown in the Fairlane G8 and the Statesman both of which are also similar in price if not intent.
For those not familiar with the models, here are some stock images:
Ford Performance Vehicles GT-P
Holden Special Vehicles Clubsport R8
Ford Fairlane G8
Holden Statesman
The Basics
Rather than start with the performance stuff let's start with the physical items like how big and roomy these cars are. It's what attracts people to them in the first place and is thus a good starting point.
As usual we will deal with all the hard data in a graphical form for ease of understanding.
These are BIG cars so the best place to start is a look at wheelbase and overall length as per the first two charts below. As you would expect the two LWB cars are the longest overall with the Statesman 40 mm longer than the G8 with the SRT8 a further 39 mm behind but still 139 mm longer than the shortest car here, the R8 which is 317 mm behind it's big brother. For the unmetricated that's a whole foot shorter.
Despite taking 3rd place in the overall length, the SRT8 has the longest wheelbase in this group, 109 mm longer than the Statesman which perhaps explains the shorter front and rear overhangs when viewed from the side.
The SRT8 is also the widest car in this group but only by 18 mm to the pair of Fords and a further 15 mm to the Statesman with the R8 slightly behind that.
Weight is a different story altogether with the R8 holding a clear advantage of 48 kg over the Statesman, 126 kg over the G220 and 164 kg over the heaviest car here, the SRT8. Note that the Commodore platform vehicles all gain some weight with the VE update that is coming but the numbers are presented as they stand now.
This is also the first category that counts in our overall scoring which will be looked at in our conclusions.
1st R8 2nd Statesman 3rd G220
So how do these measurements translate on the inside of the car? Logic would suggest that the SRT8 should have some advantage with the longer wheelbase and extra width to provide extra passenger space but logic disappears out the window in this instance.
There are 3 key measures of interior space; head room, leg room and shoulder room for both the front and rear of the vehicle.
Headroom
If you wear a hat and sit in the front then the Ford pair are the most comfortable place to be with 18 mm more than the Holden pair and 27 mm more than the low-line SRT8. Likewise if you sit in the back then the G220 offers almost as much in the rear as the front and 20 mm more than Statesman, 25 mm more than GT-P and 35 mm more than R8 which holds a narrow 1 mm advantage over the SRT8. The latter two obviously more suited to cap wearers.
No change in the pecking order here either with the G220 offering 54 mm more space up front than the GT-P which is a further 15 mm ahead of the R8 which, somewhat surprisingly, has 1 mm more room than the LWB cousin. The SRT8 trails by a further 8 mm.
The rear is a slightly different story with the Statesman making use of the wheelbase to offer 25 mm more than the G220 which has a 53 mm advantage over the SRT8. The SWB pairing are close to each other but there is 119 mm between the best and worst - that's a substantial gap.
If your mates happen to be larger people, or you don't have a liking for the Mitsubishi style “squeezy” then all of these are going to be fine in the front with only 6 mm separating best (R8) to worst (SRT8).
It's a different story in the rear where the R8 enjoys a 23 mm advantage over the Statesman which is just ahead of the GT-P and G220 with the SRT8 56 mm behind.
Our final measure of space is luggage capacity and here the G220 has a narrow advantage over the Statesman with the SRT8 bringing up the rear some 98 litres behind the leader.
Price / Equipment
I've put these two together as they are related to some extent in assessing value for the buck.
The cheapest car in our comparison is the G220 from the GT-P, R8, SRT8 and the chart tops out with the Statesman.
As you'd expect for prices around the seventy thousand mark, all of these cars are well equipped with most of the features that are considered desirable in this segment included. There are notable omissions though such as:
The lack of leather seats in either the GT-P or R8, the addition of which tips the value equation around substantially dropping them below the SRT8.
The lack of power adjustment for the passenger seat in GT-P.
The single (rather than dual) zone climate control in the R8.
The lack of power adjustable pedals in either Holden.
The optional alarm in G220.
It's obviously up to each individual to weigh the merits of the various features but the chart below identifies the major ones and uses colour coding to show which vehicles have an advantage (green), which have a low weighted disadvantage (orange), which have a high weighted or clear disadvantage (red) and where they are all equal (yellow).
1st SRT8 2nd Statesman 3rd G220
Performance
For three of these cars, performance is their reason for existence while for the other two it is merely incidental to the task of carrying people in comfort. We'll start with the raw numbers first.
Power / Torque
The most obvious difference here is the philosophical one that sees Ford power the supposedly sporty gentleman's carriage (G220) with the least powerful engine in this group whereas Holden choose to fit their equivalent with a somewhat different lump of iron/alloy/plastic.
The power bragging rights go to the SRT8 which has an 87 kW advantage over the underendowed G220.
1st SRT8 2nd R8 3rd GT-P
The torque pecking order is identical at the top with a 60 Nm gap from best to worst.
1st SRT8 2nd R8 3rd GT-P
Engine Efficiency
The best measure of engine efficiency is the ever reliable specific output measure which compares the power produced with the engine capacity. Interestingly, for all the criticism it has received, the Boss 290 tops this table with 53.7 kW/l, well ahead of the SOHC per bank version of the same block which trails the field with a bit over 42 kW/l.
1st GT-P 2nd SRT8 3rd R8
The other useful measure of theoretical performance is the power to weight ratio and those who were paying attention earlier will have worked out that the R8 tops the field with a mere 5.80 kilograms to carry for each kilowatt whereas the poor old G220 has to lug around just over 8 kilograms.
1st R8 2nd SRT8 3rd GT-P
The Times - Updated with AU Test Data
No doubt some of you have been reading all of this and wondering where the actual performance numbers are - so here they are. Figures for the SRT8 come from the initial Wheels Magazine test.
We are only going to look at two numbers here. The standard 0-100 km/h time and the Euro measure of 0-160 km/h even if the latter is irrelevant to us anywhere except a track.
The SRT8 leads the pack here with a 5.6 second time for the 0-100 measure with the R8 and GT-P trailing by 0.3 and 0.6 sec respectively. Real world times on run-in cars will be better than any of those figures.
The 0-160 measure maintains a similar gap and the same running order at the top of the tree so we will combine these measures for placings.
1st SRT-8 2nd R8 3rd GT-P
Conclusiuons
We are going to use a really simple scoring system. A win in any category earns 5 points down to 1 point for running last. This should determine the best all rounder from the chosen vehicles using all the measures above.
The winner, on that basis, is the Clubsport R8 with 46.5 points from a possible 70, ahead of the GT-P on 43 with the Statesman finishing 3rd with 41.5 - helped by the high scores in the dimensional areas.
If, however, we start to apply some weighting based on performance and value criteria and ignore the dimensional values what do we get then ? We will obviously leave weight in as it impacts performance but when only considering the bang received for the buck spent the results pan out quite differently with the SRT8 topping the field and scoring 29 points from a maximum possible 35 and ahead of the R8 (26 points) and the GT-P (21 points).
The only element missing from the test is the subjective road test but as I've not driven one of the cars on the list (yet) that will have to wait for another day. Until then, the choice between a solid all-rounder and a performance oriented vehicle remains with the priorities of the buyer.
Hey Mr Velvet, that's an incredible amount of work you've presented. I can see that your posts are going to be very interesting reading (especially for us Aussies).
Keep the info coming
__________________
"For those who like this sort of thing, this is the sort of thing they like." Abraham Lincoln
Russ, outstanding comparison. Thanks for your efforts.
Just a couple of corrections, the SRT8 does not have adjustable pedals, colour ICC or auto headlights.
I have come across the discussion about the boot capacity before and I am surprised in the statistics. My last car was a VT Commo and the boot space was woeful. I travel regularly in both Fairlanes and Statemans (Airport Limos) and have difficulty fitting 2 decent sized suitcases in either cars. The 300C just swallows them with room to spare and there are no intrusive lid hinges to worry about either. Just my $0.02
Russ, outstanding comparison. Thanks for your efforts.
Just a couple of corrections, the SRT8 does not have adjustable pedals, colour ICC or auto headlights.
I have come across the discussion about the boot capacity before and I am surprised in the statistics. My last car was a VT Commo and the boot space was woeful. I travel regularly in both Fairlanes and Statemans (Airport Limos) and have difficulty fitting 2 decent sized suitcases in either cars. The 300C just swallows them with room to spare and there are no intrusive lid hinges to worry about either. Just my $0.02
Thanks - I picked up the specs from the US web site so I shall amend the doc accordingly to reflect those changes. I am likewise surprised by the luggage capacity but I have confirmed that info from 3 different sources - the only thing I can think of is that the locals include the seat down capacity??
Hey MrVelvet great post, but please confirm the last table that is weighted for the performance stats. Because to me how can the SRT8 get a 5 for value and win this category when it is the second dearest car? I know the SRT8 has more features but it is very subjective, to me I don't care if I have leather interior or not on a performance car (I have a car with a leather interior and it requires more care and is a bit slippery for spirited driving) but I would like a manual gearbox?
Perhaps in this day and age the value could be substituted with fuel economy? That is a little less subjective than value and you can leave the value up to the individual?
You may then find the R8 and SRT8 are line ball? Don’t get me wrong, I think the SRT8 is the best looking full size sedan on the market at the moment (with the 300C a close second) and good value. I am looking at getting an SRT8 next year, Once again great post, keep up the good work.
Hey MrVelvet great post, but please confirm the last table that is weighted for the performance stats. Because to me how can the SRT8 get a 5 for value and win this category when it is the second dearest car? I know the SRT8 has more features but it is very subjective, to me I don't care if I have leather interior or not on a performance car (I have a car with a leather interior and it requires more care and is a bit slippery for spirited driving) but I would like a manual gearbox?
Perhaps in this day and age the value could be substituted with fuel economy? That is a little less subjective than value and you can leave the value up to the individual?
A fair point but value is a valid comparator at this end of the market. The reason the GT-P and R8 exist is to offer a little more fruit over and above their ~$10k cheaper GT and Clubsport cousins and the creature comforts will matter to much of the target audience. You may not require leather but much of the target audience does.
Thus the awarding of a class win to the SRT8 is justified (as outlined in the text) because both the R8 and GT-P end up being dearer cars when optioned to similar equipment levels. At the end of the day it's a subjective review anyway. All of the cars were priced as autos to keep the playing field level and the test data came from autos as well.
I very much doubt that the buyers in this segment actually care too much about fuel consumption and those who do won't be buying 1800 kg cars with > 5.4 litre V8 engines. The Green Guide figures put the SRT8 and R8 level at 14 l/100 km with the GT-P at 15 as well as giving it (SRT8) a 3 star energy efficiency rating against 2.5 for the R8. In the real world these figures are useless anyway but a replacement of value with fuel economy wouldn't change the final order.
MrVelvet did you just answer your own question ? i know its late but looking at the style of writing both you and hemi srt8 have and they looks very very similar
Linear Mode
