[ULTRAZLS1]

Now they want the mustang to weight more lol

It’s not a 200lb difference

Loaded 2ss curb weight is 3760+.

Option for option the cars are ~100 lbs apart. Even less if a base GT with smaller brakes.

The 15-17 s550 got well into the 38xx lb range loaded as well I don’t understand the deal with this.

[ULTRAZLS1]

Originally Posted by newmoon

And yes the torqueless wonder is running 119+mph in the quarter despite being 200 lbs heavier than the SS, yes awful technology.

Not only because of the coyote
Because of the a10 and the gearing.

The first gear ratio of a 3.55 a10 car is insane. It doesn’t need any torque of it’s own

Artificial torque. The coyotes best friend. Next is a converter. And close 3rd is ftw purple nitrous fuel

The weight difference is not 200 lbs. it’s 100. Loaded 2SS a8 been weighed at 3760+. Base curb weights even closer

[SpeedIsLife]

Originally Posted by ULTRAZLS1

Now they want the mustang to weight more lol

It’s not a 200lb difference

Loaded 2ss curb weight is 3760+.

Option for option the cars are ~100 lbs apart. Even less if a base GT with smaller brakes.

The 15-17 s550 got well into the 38xx lb range loaded as well I don’t understand the deal with this.

I'm thinking the confusion was they quoted numbers in the test for a 1SS but clearly was using a 2SS.

[ULTRAZLS1]

Originally Posted by SpeedIsLife

I'm thinking the confusion was they quoted numbers in the test for a 1SS but clearly was using a 2SS.

Most know better. There’s little confusion. Its trolling

[ST1LE]

Originally Posted by ULTRAZLS1

Most know better. There’s little confusion. Its trolling

Yes it is! That is ALL it is!

[SuperSound]

Originally Posted by ULTRAZLS1

The weight difference is not 200 lbs. it’s 100. Loaded 2SS a8 been weighed at 3760+. Base curb weights even closer

LMRs weighted 3860lbs with a full tank. That's a non-premium PP1 with auto. C&D got 3760lbs from a 2SS auto (which I think they use a full tank too). So that's 100lbs difference in a loaded 2SS vs a not loaded GT PP1. 1SS vs GT PP1 difference is going to be larger than 100lbs for sure.

[SuperSound]

Originally Posted by vtirocz

The PS4s put down relatively poor handling and braking #s in C&D's test of the performance pack Mustang. I'm not yet convinced they are all that much better than the stock F1s on the Camaro.

Originally Posted by Chadicus

I don't remember off the top of my head what C&D's numbers were but if they were relatively bad then I wonder how much of that is the tire possibly or the Mustang suspension, weight, and chassis.

I have never owned a set of the MPSS 4s. I can say the cup 2's are far better than what our SSes come with factory for sure. (of course)

I didn't see any handling metrics in their review. Did I miss something?

[newmoon]

Originally Posted by ULTRAZLS1

Not only because of the coyote
Because of the a10 and the gearing.

The first gear ratio of a 3.55 a10 car is insane. It doesn’t need any torque of it’s own

Artificial torque. The coyotes best friend. Next is a converter. And close 3rd is ftw purple nitrous fuel

The weight difference is not 200 lbs. it’s 100. Loaded 2SS a8 been weighed at 3760+. Base curb weights even closer

I'm still waiting for your link to a publication review of the SS which shows it to be faster than 12:20s. With all this massive torque advantage the SS has and with 2+ years of reviews I'm sure you can quickly post the link.

[ULTRAZLS1]

Originally Posted by SuperSound

LMRs weighted 3860lbs with a full tank. That's a non-premium PP1 with auto. C&D got 3760lbs from a 2SS auto (which I think they use a full tank too). So that's 100lbs difference in a loaded 2SS vs a not loaded GT PP1. 1SS vs GT PP1 difference is going to be larger than 100lbs for sure.

The GT gains weight from PP. Larger brakes. The 2ss weight gain is kind of minor it just electronics/options. The biggest weight gain would be if either car has a sunroof.

Either way. It s roughly 100lbs. Not anywhere near 200

[ULTRAZLS1]

Originally Posted by newmoon

I'm still waiting for your link to a publication review of the SS which shows it to be faster than 12:20s. With all this massive torque advantage the SS has and with 2+ years of reviews I'm sure you can quickly post the link.

Im still waiting for a sound argument from you.

[Snowblind]

Originally Posted by ULTRAZLS1

Im still waiting for a sound argument from you.

Good luck with that.

Looking at the fast list from each site is the best way to gauge how a car truly performs. Different cars, different drivers, different tracks and different months of the year.

No one on this site uses Jeff Lutz's time as the standard...not sure why some people try to press that point.

[vtirocz]

Originally Posted by ULTRAZLS1

The GT gains weight from PP. Larger brakes. The 2ss weight gain is kind of minor it just electronics/options. The biggest weight gain would be if either car has a sunroof.

Either way. It s roughly 100lbs. Not anywhere near 200

That SS in the C&D test did have a sunroof. I think that's the heaviest possible configuration that they tested (2SS, auto, sunroof, MRC).

[metros11]

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

High revving DOHC engines are for posers who want to FEEL like they're going fast. Pushrod engines that make gobs of torque down low and then carry hp/tq thru it's entire band are for when you actually wanna GO fast.

That's an interesting take. I present to you the argument, one of the few C4 Corvettes people actually want, and also the fastest C4 built from the factory:

[hotlap]

Originally Posted by metros11

That's an interesting take. I present to you the argument, one of the few C4 Corvettes people actually want, and also the fastest C4 built from the factory:

5.7L displacement and DOHC.