[Norm Peterson]

Originally Posted by kttxz06

YouTube.

Drag/street racing on Youtube is exactly why I hadn't heard anything about this silliness either.

<snip>

I, myself am waiting for it to happen since we spent about 3 weeks on here trying debunk the trolls from the Mustang forums. Deep down you guys believe that shit.

I hope deep down you don't really believe that last bit.


Norm

[BlaqWhole]

Originally Posted by 2012 IngotSilver 5.0

Heh 'Maro person!

You do realize the the only "fake news" out there originates from some people on Camaro forums wildly accusing Ford aficionados of making statements that '18 GT's will destroy 6th gen SS's.

I'm on Mustang forums, and across the vast majority of them this just isn't happening.

Please stop spreading the madness ...

Maybe you missed all the trolls and BS that popped up over here back when these 18 Mustang GTs got into the hands of tuners and pro shops...

Originally Posted by 2012 IngotSilver 5.0

So by saying the A10 GT doesn't "beat" the M6 Camaro, you're indicating that it will stick with it.

Got it, thanks!

You can take it however you want to. Maybe this thinking will help you swallow it down.

[BlaqWhole]

Originally Posted by Norm Peterson

I hope deep down you don't really believe that last bit.


Norm

SSFriendly, a troll who picked this specific name in an ill-fated attempt to hide his trollness, straight up insisted that a stock GT was running with stock ZL1s and with a tune/tire they would beat most ZL1s on our fast list.

[Norm Peterson]

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

SSFriendly, a troll who picked this specific name in an ill-fated attempt to hide his trollness, straight up insisted that a stock GT was running with stock ZL1s and with a tune/tire they would beat most ZL1s on our fast list.

If it was in the 'vs' section or the drag racing section, that would explain it. Regardless of where it was, I don't miss having missed such needless commotion.


Norm

[shaffe]

Originally Posted by tyler731

so will you argue that the car sent to Evan Smith was a ringer since no other magazine has come close to his time?

I wouldn't say it's a ringer. They clearly went to the track with the goal of best ET possible period. That was the goal, and in the article they mentioned they were going to use every advantage possible. Air up the fronts, drop the rears and short staging. I will find it on here, it was posted somewhere on here that short staging can be worth 2-3 tenths(that can be debated but short staging will shave ET) If we accept that 2-3 tenth range that puts his "hero runs" at 12.0 and 12.1 which would be right there with some of the fastest A10 runs we have seen. Not close to any mag times though so if you want to call it a ringer go ahead

Originally Posted by vtirocz

https://www.edmunds.com/car-reviews/...nd-trucks.html

A Few Words About Rollout
The term "rollout" might not be familiar, but it comes from the drag strip. The arrangement of the timing beams for drag racing can be confusing, primarily because the 7-inch separation between the "pre-stage" and "stage" beams is not the source of rollout. The pre-stage beam, which has no effect on timing, is only there to help drivers creep up to the starting position. Rollout comes from the 1-foot separation (11.5 inches, actually) between the point where the leading edge of a front tire "rolls in" to the final staging beam — triggering the countdown to the green light that starts the race — and the point where the trailing edge of that tire "rolls out" of that same beam, the triggering event that starts the clock. A driver skilled at "shallow staging" can therefore get almost a free foot of untimed acceleration before the clock officially starts, effectively achieving a rolling-start velocity of 3-5 mph and shaving the 0.3 second it typically takes to cover that distance off his elapsed time (ET) in the process.

We believe the use of rollout for quarter-mile timed runs is appropriate, as this test is designed to represent an optimum drag strip run that a car owner can replicate at a drag strip. In the spirit of consistency, we also follow NHRA practice when calculating quarter-mile trap speed at the end of the run. So we publish the average speed over the final 66 feet of the quarter-mile run, even though our VBOX can tell us the instantaneous speed at the end of the 1,320-foot course, which is usually faster.

There is where I saw that a shallow stage can knock as much as 3/10s off. Take it for what it's worth.

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

Good point but I think it is just as mentioned before, that they tested the Mustang in comparison to the SS 1LE and it felt that bad. If they had tested it according to it's own attributes or as compared to the 15-17 then perhaps they wouldn't have noticed it's flaws. But after coming out of the SS 1LE the flaws were blatantly evident.

!

And as others have stated, that might be the best/most logical reason I guess

Originally Posted by FastCarFanBoy

there could be a hundred reasons... atmospheric conditions, track conditions, some cars are just stronger runners. Steeda went 12.24@117 on 235 A/S tires and 1400' d/a

Originally Posted by End User

Show me a review that has gone to the lengths that M/T has.

Hopefully Car and Drive includes a 2018 GT equipped with PP1 in Lightning Lap 2018.

Lightning Lap Times:

2017 SS 1LE 2:54.8
2015 GT 3:05.2

hopefully, but I have a feeling by the time they do the LL they will have access to a PP2 car.

[kttxz06]

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

SSFriendly, a troll who picked this specific name in an ill-fated attempt to hide his trollness, straight up insisted that a stock GT was running with stock ZL1s and with a tune/tire they would beat most ZL1s on our fast list.

He wasn't the only one. A few others who still remain still deep down believe it. The funniest one was a stock GT w/blower only throws down 840 hp. We debunked that 'fake news' too. Anyhow, I have to ruffle the trolls feathers or this thread will actually get back on topic and we wouldn't want that.

[RagingHawk]

This piece of junk still isn't even out and we're closing on March? Unsubbed from Motortrend.

[Chadicus]

Originally Posted by RagingHawk

This piece of junk still isn't even out and we're closing on March? Unsubbed from Motortrend.

Hope that was sarcasm.

[End User]

Originally Posted by RagingHawk

This piece of junk still isn't even out and we're closing on March? Unsubbed from Motortrend.

It has been on Motor Trend OnDemand for the past month.

https://help.motortrendondemand.com/...-does-it-cost-

[RagingHawk]

Talking about Youtube guys ...

[End User]

Originally Posted by RagingHawk

Talking about Youtube guys ...

Splurge for the M/T OnDemand subscription.

[Bosse'sBoss]

The video is awesome. The SS1LE crushed the new 2018 Mustang GT, I wonder how the Camaro SS 1LE will do against the Shelby GT 350R. Maybe the SS1LE is in the same performance league of the Corvette Stingray Z51. The Camaro is a great performance car. I also wonder of which would feel better at the track: The balanced N.A. Camaro SS 1LE or the monster ZL1. Amazing road and track machines!

[Casalino]

I didn't put much attention to the comments. But it seems like there is a lot of back and forth over tenths of a second regarding acceleration times between the two.

In my opinion it is all garbage....irrelevant. First off, I could care less whether the camaro OR the mustang is a few tenths faster. Not a mustang....and not a camaro owner would make their decision off of that. Second...and this was probably mentioned.....these times were recorded based off many many test runs, making different changes to produce the best possible time. If you are worried because you want to beat the competitor off a green light, this is the wrong approach to take. In the real work neither you, or the mustang owner will be putting down the fastest time in that situation. On top of that your cars will have many variables changed. Whether it is the wear on your tires, or the smallest (or biggest) modifications done to the car.

This stock 2018 camaro vs stock 2018 mustang street race scenario anyone has in their heads will not happen. You will not have an even race. It will not happen. These tenths of seconds from best case scenario test runs mean NOTHING.

[Norm Peterson]

Originally Posted by Casalino

I didn't put much attention to the comments. But it seems like there is a lot of back and forth over tenths of a second regarding acceleration times between the two.

I'm afraid that's always going to happen as long as any acceleration results get published - or even if they're just hinted at in the text/conversation. It's the first thing about car performance that people become aware of, and for many folks it remains the first thing about cars that they think about and the easiest thing for them to talk about. It's been that way for as long as I can remember.

If you're not competing seriously enough to absolutely have to start out with the best raw material for the purpose, then of course differences of tenths of seconds, a mph or so, or a couple hundredths of a lateral g shouldn't hold make-or-break status. But even with that view, three full seconds around a short road course does indicate a big enough mismatch to tip more than a few decisions that might otherwise have been toss-ups.


Norm