[Sax1031]

Originally Posted by Blue Maro Demon

Really they should just compare the 2012 GT500 to the 2012 Camaro ZL1
Why everyone is making a big deal out of the 2013 Shelby GT500 I dont know. If they up the power in the 13 ZL1 then just compare it to that model year to model year in all fairness. Still dont get why Mustang fans feel the need to come to this forum and down the ZL1 like this. If you dont like it fine then dont come on here and bad mouth it. I especially wouldnt be bad mouthing it when the Camaro is going to be losing weight soon and the Mustang and it will have the same weight. I think that will pretty much make this argument about which car is better null and void by that point.

Ford has already stated that a goal is to reduce weight for the next mustang.

and people compare the 2013 GT500 to the 2012 ZL1 because they will be out at the same time.

2012 GT500 production has been over for awhile.

Originally Posted by Dragoneye

I'm beginning to realize. I actually deleted that post after revisiting the topic....hmm...

I think your logic is sound.

I think SAE factors for hp at altitude are the same for N/A and supercharged cars.

But NHRA correction factors for runs at altitude indicate that a 50% difference in correction between N/A times and S/C times.

[Sax1031]

one thing we do know is the turbo charged car will have the definite advantage.

[Sax1031]

If you get Car and Drivers Digital Magazine the new issue dropped. It has a video of the GT500's launch control in action.

I haven't personally seen it though.

[MauriSSio]

Originally Posted by Black GT

.4 is no where near5-6 car lengths with these type of times.

At most 2 car lengths.

at these speeds each tenth = AT LEAST a car length.

[tooslow]

Originally Posted by Sax1031

If you get Car and Drivers Digital Magazine the new issue dropped. It has a video of the GT500's launch control in action.

I haven't personally seen it though.

I have. Has video, too. Basically, setting the two-step at 3500rpm provides the perfect launch. It also says with slicks the car produces John Force-like take-offs.

[Sax1031]

Originally Posted by tooslow

I have. Has video, too. Basically, setting the two-step at 3500rpm provides the perfect launch. It also says with slicks the car produces John Force-like take-offs.

John Force like take offs is more than a stretch.

[ParisTNDude]

Originally Posted by Grabber

Where in the hell are you getting that a stock GT500 dynos 570HP?

They make 550 HP Crank.

The BEST ZL1 time and 2010-2011/12 GT500 times are within 2-3 tenths of each other. Yet you think that is going to be 5-6+ car lengths?

Have you ever run at a track? When I ran against a 10.8 Foxbody that was setup for ET's, I ran a 12.4 @ 117 in 100+ degrees, bogging and missing 4th/shutting down @ the 1000 mark. He trapped 124, and ran 1.6 seconds faster. He was MAYBE 5-6 cars ahead of me, and not pulling once I started going.

I posted links of guys running sub 12's on the stock Rubber. Not 11's, but close enough.

Also, why are you comparing the Average GT500 times vs the best ZL1 time that "apparently" ran 11's, yet you have provided no link, timeslip or video of this acclaimed 11 second run. Some guy from a magazing posted on the internet stating he ran a high 11 on a certain day. That doesn't hold much ground and has little credibility.

Originally Posted by Grabber

Where in the hell are you getting that a stock GT500 dynos 570HP?

Edmund's Insideline dynoed a 2010 GT500 and this is what they found:

"As you can see, our 2010 GT500 tester produced a peak of 511 horsepower at the wheels right at redline. That figure represents what is left over after the drivetrain has bled away some of the engine's power."

"In short, Ford's claim of 540 horsepower at the flywheel is conservative. This mill is comfortably cranking out something north of 570 horsepower on the possum urine they call California 91 octane "premium" fuel. That's no small feat. "

http://blogs.insideline.com/straight...lby-gt500.html

You can read it yourself, if you want.



No, there wasn't a "link" to the ZL! running 11 second times, but there is a video on C5 where the Motor Trend driver of the ZL1 says he ran sub 12 second runs...straight from the horses mouth.

Originally Posted by Grabber

I posted links of guys running sub 12's on the stock Rubber. Not 11's, but close enough.

What does this mean? You never posted anything showing a GT500 running sub 12s, even thought that's what your post says?????????

[Rock36]

Originally Posted by ParisTNDude

Edmund's Insideline dynoed a 2010 GT500 and this is what they found:

"As you can see, our 2010 GT500 tester produced a peak of 511 horsepower at the wheels right at redline. That figure represents what is left over after the drivetrain has bled away some of the engine's power."

"In short, Ford's claim of 540 horsepower at the flywheel is conservative. This mill is comfortably cranking out something north of 570 horsepower on the possum urine they call California 91 octane "premium" fuel. That's no small feat. "

http://blogs.insideline.com/straight...lby-gt500.html

You can read it yourself, if you want.



No, there wasn't a "link" to the ZL! running 11 second times, but there is a video on C5 where the Motor Trend driver of the ZL1 says he ran sub 12 second runs...straight from the horses mouth.



What does this mean? You never posted anything showing a GT500 running sub 12s, even thought that's what your post says?????????

I've often noticed whenever insideline does a dyno of a car, regardless of make and model, they always seem to be "underrated".

I trust that Insideline is reporting their results honestly, but trying to backwards calculate an engine rating based on a chasis dyno is far from accurate, and I find it curious that all these cars are underrated.

EDIT: Actually I looked back at insideline and every car I found was "underrated" when using traditional rules of thumb for calculating engine loss. More reason that I suspect the dyno shop they use reads a little high.

Note this is a personal gripe I have against Insideline more than anything else.

PSA: Dynos are tuning tools first and foremost.

[BigHemiSrt]

Originally Posted by Rock36

I've often noticed whenever insideline does a dyno of a car, regardless of make and model, they always seem to be "underrated".

I trust that Insideline is reporting their results honestly, but trying to backwards calculate an engine rating based on a chasis dyno is far from accurate, and I find it curious that all these cars are underrated.

EDIT: Actually I looked back at insideline and every car I found was "underrated" when using traditional rules of thumb for calculating engine loss. More reason that I suspect the dyno shop they use reads a little high.

Note this is a personal gripe I have against Insideline more than anything else.

PSA: Dynos are tuning tools first and foremost.

Exactly. Every car with the exception of the 5th Gen insideline has tested has put down crazy high numbers. They also use the same dyno everytime. The GT500,5.0,and 392 all were deemed "underrated". I dont buy into that underrated stuff, at least not these days.

[Rock36]

Originally Posted by BigHemiSrt

Exactly. Every car with the exception of the 5th Gen insideline has tested has put down crazy high numbers. They also use the same dyno everytime. The GT500,5.0, and 392 all were deemed "underrated". I dont buy into that underrated stuff, at least not this these days.

Add to that the Lexus-LFA, Mercedes SLS AMG, the BMW 1 Series M coupe, Ford F-150 Ecoboost, and the S63 AMG... they were "underrated" according to Insideline as well.

[BigHemiSrt]

Originally Posted by Rock36

Add to that the Lexus-LFA, Mercedes SLS AMG, the BMW 1 Series M coupe, Ford F-150 Ecoboost, and the S63 AMG... they were "underrated" according to Insideline as well.

Damn didnt kno it was that many!! One would think that the guys over at insideline would catch on...

[MauriSSio]

Originally Posted by Rock36

I've often noticed whenever insideline does a dyno of a car, regardless of make and model, they always seem to be "underrated".

I trust that Insideline is reporting their results honestly, but trying to backwards calculate an engine rating based on a chasis dyno is far from accurate, and I find it curious that all these cars are underrated.

EDIT: Actually I looked back at insideline and every car I found was "underrated" when using traditional rules of thumb for calculating engine loss. More reason that I suspect the dyno shop they use reads a little high.

Note this is a personal gripe I have against Insideline more than anything else.

PSA: Dynos are tuning tools first and foremost.

i agree that the dyno they go to is a happy one, but its strange that the ls3 5th gen dynoed average real world numbers. I think the gt500 510rwhp 5.0 392rwhp and srt8 392 440rwhp are all roughly 20-25hp too high

[Sax1031]

Originally Posted by ParisTNDude

What does this mean? You never posted anything showing a GT500 running sub 12s, even thought that's what your post says?????????

I've posted the link multiple times in this thread alone.

[ffrcobra_65]

Originally Posted by Sax1031

I've posted the link multiple times in this thread alone.

He is beating you with experience ....