One Thing the Camaro has over the gt500

[SRT8Tech]

Another thing the ZL1 has over the 2013 GT500 is its reality and not paper. I dont think Ford even has a 2013 GT500 yet to test. Maybe a prototype but thats it. ZL1 is real and the 2013 GT500 is not.

[motorhead]

Originally Posted by SRT8Tech

Another thing the ZL1 has over the 2013 GT500 is its reality and not paper. I dont think Ford even has a 2013 GT500 yet to test. Maybe a prototype but thats it. ZL1 is real and the 2013 GT500 is not.

It's not like I can go down to my chevy dealer and by one. To me neither one is real yet.

[scythezo6]

Originally Posted by Deki

It's much easier to achieve consistency on 0-60, 1/4 mile runs, and smaller tracks.. .

Another point I forgot in my last post...
Straight line data may or may not be any more consistent than track data. Again driver capability, human error and nature come into play.

Aside from consistency, testing a car in a straight line for 0-60 and 1/4 mile times only provides a fraction of data on a car's capability and is simply not enough to determine if a car performs better than another. The ring can provide information on a car's handling, acceleration, deceleration, etc. giving more meaningful data about the entire spectrum of a car's performance.

[chevy 3]

ford ever figured out how to put the power to the ground then they might have some thing.One things for sher the new mustang needs the extra hp just to keep up with the zl1.the new zl1 IS THE COMPLEAT PACKAGE SOOO GOOD LUCK FORD .

[RedRooster]

Originally Posted by scythezo6

Not to be rude but, who put you in charge of the standards of automotive testing? 1st of all what you are arguing for being considered relevant testing is moot. You are asking that engineers take control of way too many parameters that are uncontrolable in an experiment. Weather, time, driver capability, human error, etc. In your ideal test a professional unbiased driver should be able to run car A around the track 3 times (for statistically significant results), clock his times and on the same day run car B 3 times and clock those times as well... And still be within a certain margin of error for both cars? This is not possible. In scientific testing there ways of doing things and you have to just accept that certain elements of a test are out of your control. It may be possible to get the driver to test both cars in one day, but what about driver fatigue? What if the driver put forward an honest effort and was not within the time margin (does that speak of his skill as a driver or the performance of the car?) do you dismiss those results? What if it begins raining during one test? What if someone says the results are moot because the testing was done in October rather than April when there are differences in air pressure/wind speeds/air & surface temperatures? Do you see where I'm heading? You cannot control everything so we work with the best of what we have. I'm a biologist and I may not test cars, but simple experimental design still comes into play wether I'm testing a vaccine or an engineering team is testing a car's capability at a track. In order to get what you believe to be resonable results the cars would need to be driven by robots (lack of human error and fatigue) on a track in a controlled environment (to rule out nature factors)... This would be unreasonable and provide no relevant data.

It's really not a monumental feat to compare the same cars on the same day at the same track with the same driver(s) like you're making it out to be. The magazines manage to do this all the time.

That being said, I agree with deki, it's rather ignorant to sit here and declare supremacy based off one test done by different drivers, on different days, different track conditions, different tires, etc. It's also not as if certain manufacturers cheat at these track tests too, so an unbiased source would sure go a long way as well. Sure, nothing is perfect, but you can certainly reduce the number of variables quite easily.

(Any reason why all my posts continue to get deleted? Someone PM me, please.....)

[chevy 3]

The reason the use the ring to juge cars is the consistency of the track and conditions. but Deki you would know this no.not for nothing but cars run tracks allover and get within 10ths or less all the time and thats lap after lap.what kind of tracks would you like them to use ovels .

[tooslow]

Originally Posted by el ess X

There is a coolness factor the exudes from the Camaro.....

I hear what you are saying, but I can't help but to flashback to when I owned my 2005 GTO and what all the GM guys where bellyaching about regarding the then-new S197 Mustang; the "gotta have it" factor.

http://www.caranddriver.com/comparis...mparison-tests

In a nutshell, Car and Driver compared a 2005 Mustang and a 2005 GTO and the Mustang won the comparison based on what was termed the "gotta have it" factor. The commentary provided stated, "So what was the Mustang's appeal? Well, we're suckers for a great body, and the Mustang looks a lot better than the GTO."

Now here it is 2011 and so many of the GM fanboys who said things like...

Originally Posted by VeeTec

I just read the latest comparo, between the Goat and the Pony, and the Goat lead by 6 points, right up until a funny little category called the, "gotta-have-it", factor, which was suprisingly worth 25 points!

This pretty much ended any chance of me thinking that C&D would give a fair review on the Goat.

I agreed with a lot of points, but overall the Goat just flat out performed the Pony, and up until that vote swayer category, it was going to lose.

Originally Posted by Josh-'04GTO

As far as I'm concerned, the GTO's performance and mint interior/ride quality is all the "gotta have it" that I need. :judge:

Originally Posted by WEDJ

What a lamo way to get the rating you want out of an "objective" article. How did they determine the "GHI Factor?" - polled Stang owners? Ford Exec's? The whole thing leaves me

...are now using the same entirely subjective "gotta have it" factor as the reason the Gen5 Camaro is better than the Mustang?!

[scythezo6]

Originally Posted by RedRooster

It's really not a monumental feat to compare the same cars on the same day at the same track with the same driver(s) like you're making it out to be. The magazines manage to do this all the time.

That being said, I agree with deki, it's rather ignorant to sit here and declare supremacy based off one test done by different drivers, on different days, different track conditions, different tires, etc. It's also not as if certain manufacturers cheat at these track tests too, so an unbiased source would sure go a long way as well. Sure, nothing is perfect, but you can certainly reduce the number of variables quite easily.

(Any reason why all my posts continue to get deleted? Someone PM me, please.....)

There's really nothing monumental about what I said other than the size of the post lol. I agree with you - declaring supremacy based off ring times is not a good idea and neither would be using quarter mile or 0-60 times. All I'm saying is ring times are still valid pieces of information that can inform you about how well your car performs overall - nothing more, nothing less. I'm sure with enough time and money we could set up the ultimate GT500 vs ZL1 showdown at the ring, but I just don't see it happening. I'm not using ring times to base my judgement on a car purchase (because that would be silly) but it is still cool to see how well your car stacks up to the rest of the competition regardless of test factors and drivers and test days (who really cares anyway?).

I just feel Deki's opinions of Ring times may be rooting from something deeper than wanting consistent and accurate testing times. Reading his posts, he came off as quite defensive that mustangs don't have ring times publicized and the ZL1 does (fanboyism? if not then ). In all reality I can careless. I love both cars and if I had the money I'd own them both and drive the piss out of them.

[ffrcobra_65]

why so many people are hung up on the ring time is beyond me. Who cares if your chosen car is a better car at the f'n ring if you can't beat the other guys with slower ring time at VIR, LS, or Infenion, etc? That is "real world." I don't know any car guy (and I know a ton who drive Carrera GTs and Enzos) who boast or talk about ring times.

[SRT8Tech]

Originally Posted by HufferSS

Why are all the Mustang guys buttholes?

I'm starting to like the Mopar guys better.

We tend to grow on people.

[chevy 3]

This car is faster than that car witch is faster then ther car. I'm a Chevy guy and love the Chevy vers ford deal. Can't hate all the time. It's like Boston vers new York. I'm ok with good old competition.

[RedRooster]

Originally Posted by ffrcobra_65

why so many people are hung up on the ring time is beyond me. Who cares if your chosen car is a better car at the f'n ring if you can't beat the other guys with slower ring time at VIR, LS, or Infenion, etc? That is "real world." I don't know any car guy (and I know a ton who drive Carrera GTs and Enzos) who boast or talk about ring times.

Pretty much and it's probably safe to say no one here is a professional driver either which makes it even further a moot point.

..are now using the same entirely subjective "gotta have it" factor as the reason the Gen5 Camaro is better than the Mustang?!

Apparently, I can't say the slightest thing pro-Mustang without getting my post deleted meanwhile Camaro owners can personally insult me at will, so I'll simply say that I wholeheartedly agree with you.

[91Z28350]

No worse than some of the 'stang forums where anything from GM is a total piece of crap. Me, I look forward to seeing ZL1's on the road, and I hope the Z28 also sees the light of day. Competition makes the brand (insert your favorite here) better. Also, I assure you, noone who is a car guy/gal, like it or hate it, mistakes my Shelby for "just another stang" , at least around here (DFW). No more than anyone will mistake a ZL1 for a LS,LT or even a SS.
Myself, I give thumbs up to any nice car, Dodge,Ford,Chevy et al.

[Synerbee]

There is way more 5th gen Camaros vs 6th gen mustangs around here. But mustang is more common if you count the other generations

Sent from my Droid using Tapatalk