[Sol4rfl4re]

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

It is common knowledge that the GT is no match for the SS. No way, no how. Even on the Mustang forums all but the most hardcore Mustang fans will readily admit that they're fighting a losing battle and will need mods to keep up with a stock SS. And those hardcore fans are just FOS and can't admit they have a slower car. This information is nothing new. On the whole, no stock GT nowhere in no configuration is doing even mid 12s. It is much much less believable that they can do a low 12 on anything except a downhill track with a tailwind. Now on the other hand, I will give it to them that if you get a M6, upgrade the clutch, axles, driveshaft, suspension, and then hit it with boost with a good tire on it, then and only then will you have a car that will beat just about anything. Provided you don't grenade the engine and trans. But please stop with the BS that these cars bone stock are anything more than underwhelming at best.

LMAO!!!! This is the most non-sense Ive read this year Im pretty sure. Please avoid commenting on anything car-performance related for the rest of your life.

[1295/SS]

Originally Posted by Sol4rfl4re

LMAO!!!! This is the most non-sense Ive read this year Im pretty sure. Please avoid commenting on anything car-performance related for the rest of your life.

Actually, he's right. Face it, you have a car that can't compete with an SS. Either get an SS, STFU, or leave the forum. You're embarrassing yourself.

[Sol4rfl4re]

Originally Posted by 1295/SS

Actually, he's right. Face it, you have a car that can't compete with an SS. Either get an SS, STFU, or leave the forum. You're embarrassing yourself.

Thats the thing, I never said a stock 15-17 GT is a good race vs a stock 16+ SS. Its ~3-4mph and ~3-4 tenths slower on average from all that ive seen at the track. Im laughing at the rest of his post.

[Mrfixxit7]

Originally Posted by vtirocz

As the title states, do we know when the road tests and comparison tests will be conducted. I'm interested to see the comparison tests.

I went car shopping last month, I wanted a GT350. I found a local deal that had one. Of course they would not let me drive it. So I asked to drive a M6 GT. I don't know if there was something wrong with the car or if it was set to "granny" mode but I was shocked at the lack of aceleración and torque. I pointed it out to the sales person as I was mashing on the gas pedal and nothing happened. I asked him if it was in some valet mode or something because my wife's 2015 RAV 4 had way more acceleration.

Needless to say I was extremely disappointed because they would not let me test drive their marked up GT350 and by the lack of apparent power to the GT I test drove.
So I went across the street and test drove a 2018 ZL1 and the Callaway 50th Anniversary 2SS. I ending up getting the Callaway and I am very happy.

[Sol4rfl4re]

Originally Posted by Mrfixxit7

I went car shopping last month, I wanted a GT350. I found a local deal that had one. Of course they would not let me drive it. So I asked to drive a M6 GT. I don't know if there was something wrong with the car or if it was set to "granny" mode but I was shocked at the lack of aceleración and torque. I pointed it out to the sales person as I was mashing on the gas pedal and nothing happened. I asked him if it was in some valet mode or something because my wife's 2015 RAV 4 had way more acceleration.

Needless to say I was extremely disappointed because they would not let me test drive their marked up GT350 and by the lack of apparent power to the GT I test drove.
So I went across the street and test drove a 2018 ZL1 and the Callaway 50th Anniversary 2SS. I ending up getting the Callaway and I am very happy.

Its not uncommon that dealers put 87 octane on everything. The car I test drove was fairly snappy, but my car felt sluggish until I drove it 50 or so miles into the second tank, they filled it before giving it to me. Cant blame you for not buying it, Im not throwing 60k at a car I dont know what it feels like.

[Mrfixxit7]

Originally Posted by Sol4rfl4re

Its not uncommon that dealers put 87 octane on everything. The car I test drove was fairly snappy, but my car felt sluggish until I drove it 50 or so miles into the second tank, they filled it before giving it to me. Cant blame you for not buying it, Im not throwing 60k at a car I dont know what it feels like.

I hope that is what happened.
I am not a Chevy or Ford guy really. The GT 350's exhaust sounded awesome and I really wanted to test drive it, but since the dealer would only let me set and not let me drive it and they would not negotiate on the price (just to come down to sticker price) made me move on.

[ChefBorOzzy]

Nah, it's not the fuel.. Mustang basically feels weak. I had a 13 with 3.73. Still dead down low.

[BlaqWhole]

Originally Posted by Sol4rfl4re

Thats the thing, I never said a stock 15-17 GT is a good race vs a stock 16+ SS. Its ~3-4mph and ~3-4 tenths slower on average from all that ive seen at the track. Im laughing at the rest of his post.

No, it is not 3-4 tenths slower. Maybe with a good driver in a GT and a bad driver in a SS then the GT might not take a whupping. But on average it is at least half a second slower. 6th Gen SS Camaros are doing low 12s. S550 GTs are high 12s to low 13s. They are nowhere even close to a match.

Originally Posted by Sol4rfl4re

Its not uncommon that dealers put 87 octane on everything. The car I test drove was fairly snappy, but my car felt sluggish until I drove it 50 or so miles into the second tank, they filled it before giving it to me. Cant blame you for not buying it, Im not throwing 60k at a car I dont know what it feels like.

Nice excuse but it isn't related to the octane. It is a slow car. Especially if he had the non-Premium and non-PP GT. I had the Premium with a manual trans and 3.31 gears and it was not impressive at all. And on the first drive home I had the worst case of buyer's remorse that I ever had. Even after it went into the high octane settings after 2 tanks of 93 octane it still felt slow.

[BlaqWhole]

Originally Posted by Sol4rfl4re

LMAO!!!! This is the most non-sense Ive read this year Im pretty sure. Please avoid commenting on anything car-performance related for the rest of your life.

I find it funny that you just so happened to show up a week after Mustang Fanboy got suspended and your posts seem to resemble his quite a bit.

[hotlap]

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

I find it funny that you just so happened to show up a week after Mustang Fanboy got suspended and your posts seem to resemble his quite a bit.

Mustang Fanboy is baby shit alongside of what this dude is doin'. So much anger and hostility. Sol4rfl4re is hurting.

[Chadicus]

Originally Posted by Sol4rfl4re

Its not uncommon that dealers put 87 octane on everything. The car I test drove was fairly snappy, but my car felt sluggish until I drove it 50 or so miles into the second tank, they filled it before giving it to me. Cant blame you for not buying it, Im not throwing 60k at a car I dont know what it feels like.

You don't actually believe anything you just said do you? That a GT feels slow because of 87 octane gas? No, it feels slow because it IS slow. The current 550 has no punch or power until 4k rpm. Only way to get any torque out of it down low is with FI.

[vtirocz]

Back on topic! Any word on when the reviews will be out? Haven't seen anything on Facebook or Instagram with previews of comparisons to come (I recall seeing stuff this time two years ago when the Camaro was launching in fall of 2015). I'm anxious to see some comparisons!

As a bonus, I hope they test the optional handling kit at some point (lowering spring/shock kit + swaybar/link kit). I'd be interested to see what kind of instrumented handling numbers that puts out vs the standard SS suspension.

[Sol4rfl4re]

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

No, it is not 3-4 tenths slower. Maybe with a good driver in a GT and a bad driver in a SS then the GT might not take a whupping. But on average it is at least half a second slower. 6th Gen SS Camaros are doing low 12s. S550 GTs are high 12s to low 13s. They are nowhere even close to a match.



Nice excuse but it isn't related to the octane. It is a slow car. Especially if he had the non-Premium and non-PP GT. I had the Premium with a manual trans and 3.31 gears and it was not impressive at all. And on the first drive home I had the worst case of buyer's remorse that I ever had. Even after it went into the high octane settings after 2 tanks of 93 octane it still felt slow.

Non premium/non pp models aren't any slower and PP. if anything the fastest of them would be the base auto with optional 3.55 gears. You have an opinion on the performance, I have another. We both love cars, cheers and let's move on.

[Sol4rfl4re]

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

I find it funny that you just so happened to show up a week after Mustang Fanboy got suspended and your posts seem to resemble his quite a bit.

Sorry man. Not trying to troll anyone.