[Gunkk]

Originally Posted by whiteboyblues2001

Rumor has it, the GT500 will have a 7-spd DCT

Then it will be a collector's dream, because anyone who drives it will hate it and get rid of it.

[ST1LE]

Originally Posted by crankaholic

I hope not. It's not just about performance. I have a 135i with a DCT (same gearbox as the e92 M3) and there's a huge difference in how a DCT feels compared to an auto, even a good ZF 8-speed implementation. The shifts are mechanical and you feel and hear it working... it's incredibly quick, yet it doesn't feel imperceptible... kind of hard to describe... it feels like the Flash shifting gears for you. I guess a good motorcycle transmission with a quickshifter is the closest thing. Maybe it's a placebo effect or maybe the new GM/Ford 10 speed is actually good enough that it doesn't matter

It is spectacular isn't it! I have an automatic 135 loan car right now while my M3 gets its rod bearings replaced, and I HATE it. Auto and DCT are nothing alike. Even if they match performance, I would prefer a DCT over an auto.

[BlaqWhole]

Legitimate question here. If the Ford guys and the Mustang enthusiasts never expected the PP1 to beat the SS, why do they all get soo worked up about it losing? LOL! I swear, they get pissed off but then they keep saying it isn't a direct or fair comparison. It's like they tell themselves that bullshit but deep down they really were hoping for a GT win...and got super disappointed when it lost.

Personally, using myself as an example, I fully expect the ZL1 to lose to the GT500. I don't even hope it will win because there is no way it should. So when it loses, I won't be sore about it at all. The PP2 vs the SS 1LE, I think that could go either way with the advantage going to the SS. It will be interesting. But I would not be surprised if the GT PP2 wins. Nor will I be disappointed. But these GT guys all claim that they never expected a win but they actually did. It is funny really.

[ST1LE]

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

Legitimate question here. If the Ford guys and the Mustang enthusiasts never expected the PP1 to beat the SS, why do they all get soo worked up about it losing? LOL! I swear, they get pissed off but then they keep saying it isn't a direct or fair comparison. It's like they tell themselves that bullshit but deep down they really were hoping for a GT win...and got super disappointed when it lost.

Personally, using myself as an example, I fully expect the ZL1 to lose to the GT500. I don't even hope it will win because there is no way it should. So when it loses, I won't be sore about it at all. The PP2 vs the SS 1LE, I think that could go either way with the advantage going to the SS. It will be interesting. But I would not be surprised if the GT PP2 wins. Nor will I be disappointed. But these GT guys all claim that they never expected a win but they actually did. It is funny really.

Yeah, I didnt believe that for 1 second LOL. Of course they thought it would win.

They are still over there claiming the '18 A10 GT and C7 are a driver's race. TO THIS DAY! HAHAHAHAHA, its hilarious.

[SSfriendly]

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

Legitimate question here. If the Ford guys and the Mustang enthusiasts never expected the PP1 to beat the SS, why do they all get soo worked up about it losing? LOL! I swear, they get pissed off but then they keep saying it isn't a direct or fair comparison. It's like they tell themselves that bullshit but deep down they really were hoping for a GT win...and got super disappointed when it lost.

Personally, using myself as an example, I fully expect the ZL1 to lose to the GT500. I don't even hope it will win because there is no way it should. So when it loses, I won't be sore about it at all. The PP2 vs the SS 1LE, I think that could go either way with the advantage going to the SS. It will be interesting. But I would not be surprised if the GT PP2 wins. Nor will I be disappointed. But these GT guys all claim that they never expected a win but they actually did. It is funny really.

They don’t! The loss was expected. What we’re arguing about is the slander against the mustang for performing exactly as everyone expected. This has nothing to be about being “fair”, it’s about some of your asinine comments that because it lost it was somehow a failure…when it was never meant to compete in the first place. If you put a miata against a zl1 in a drag race…and the miata (expectedly) lost, would it then be considered a failure?

The 1LE had wider front tires, wider rear tires, a better track tuned suspension…and all of the camaro folk are hailing a win by GM and Fail by ford when the PP2 is sitting right now on dealer Lots ready to compete? Come on now, how do you not see the validity of this argument? If the PP1 was all Ford had for this model lineup….go ahead, tear it apart, but that’s not the case here is it?

The only reason the 1LE and PP1 were compared was because Motortrend in all their wisdom couldn’t wait 2 months to get their hands on a PP2, and decided they would get far more subscriptions ($$$) if they did this whole comparison twice.

[ST1LE]

Originally Posted by SSfriendly

They don’t! The loss was expected. What we’re arguing about is the slander against the mustang for performing exactly as everyone expected. This has nothing to be about being “fair”, it’s about some of your asinine comments that because it lost it was somehow a failure…when it was never meant to compete in the first place. If you put a miata against a zl1 in a drag race…and the miata (expectedly) lost, would it then be considered a failure?

The 1LE had wider front tires, wider rear tires, a better track tuned suspension…and all of the camaro folk are hailing a win by GM and Fail by ford when the PP2 is sitting right now on dealer Lots ready to compete? Come on now, how do you not see the validity of this argument? If the PP1 was all Ford had for this model lineup….go ahead, tear it apart, but that’s not the case here is it?

The only reason the 1LE and PP1 were compared was because Motortrend in all their wisdom couldn’t wait 2 months to get their hands on a PP2, and decided they would get far more subscriptions ($$$) if they did this whole comparison twice.

LOL, PLENTY did!! Good that you are not one of them, but more than an acceptable amount did.

Edit: To be clear we agree, not many thought it would on the track but most if not all thought it would in the 1/4 mile.

[whiteboyblues2001]

Originally Posted by SSfriendly

They don’t! The loss was expected. What we’re arguing about is the slander against the mustang for performing exactly as everyone expected. This has nothing to be about being “fair”, it’s about some of your asinine comments that because it lost it was somehow a failure…when it was never meant to compete in the first place. If you put a miata against a zl1 in a drag race…and the miata (expectedly) lost, would it then be considered a failure?

The 1LE had wider front tires, wider rear tires, a better track tuned suspension…and all of the camaro folk are hailing a win by GM and Fail by ford when the PP2 is sitting right now on dealer Lots ready to compete? Come on now, how do you not see the validity of this argument? If the PP1 was all Ford had for this model lineup….go ahead, tear it apart, but that’s not the case here is it?

The only reason the 1LE and PP1 were compared was because Motortrend in all their wisdom couldn’t wait 2 months to get their hands on a PP2, and decided they would get far more subscriptions ($$$) if they did this whole comparison twice.

I don't think anyone really expected the PP1 to win against the 1LE on the track, but I bet MOST of the Mustang fans thought that it would win in the 0-60 and 1/4 mile. There was soooooo many Mustang trolls on this site arguing that the new Mustang was blowing away the Camaro in the 1/4 mile. But, once there were true same-day same-driver tests, even if it was Edmunds or on a dry lake bed, it became obvious that the Mustang closed the gap, but did not exceed the Camaro in the 1/4.

So, this H2H had a lot more to it than just Randy's lap time.

And let me give you my personal opinion on the subject: I expected a bit more out of the Mustang on track. No, I didn't expect it to beat the 1LE in a lap time, so that had nothing to do with it. You mentioned the Miata. Folks LOVE to take that to a road course, because it is fun to drive in the twistys. It almost won the Car & Driver Best Driver's car one year. But not because it was fast, but because it was a proper driver's car. But no one expects it to be faster than a Mustang or Camaro.

Watching this Mustang PP1 drive, and hearing the comments in the video show me that this car's body movements are all over the place on a road course or a windy road. Waiting for the rear end to come around and let the car set into the turn is horrible. It gives a ton of vagueness to the steering, and no feedback. Did you see the video? That body was like it was riding on a bouncy house, not a properly set up suspension.

And don't give me any of that, "well, the Mustang is a GT car" b.s. either. Why? Because, first of all, I have driven many BMW's (and other cars) that don't have all those issues, and ride more comfortably anyway. And that is WITHOUT Magnetic Ride Control. WITH Magnetic Ride control, you can have an extremely planted and sorted suspension with great comfort AT THE SAME TIME. That is what MRC does best. But, it is kind of wasted on the Mustang.

Watching that Mustang go around the track was like seeing a pontoon boat riding in rough seas. It was making me seasick. Even the base Mustang shouldn't do that, let alone the PP1, LET ALONE something with MRC.

That was very disappointing.

Now, I looked at some of the specs of the PP2, and here is a quote:

"Custom tuned MagneRide® dampers and quicker steering calibration provide better response. Other improvements over Performance Pack Level 1 equipment include a 67 percent stiffer rear stabilizer bar, a 12 percent stiffer front stabilizer bar, 20 percent stiffer front springs and rear springs that are 13 percent stiffer, all of which contribute to a more stable ride around corners with less body roll."

Hopefully this will settle the car down, and reveal some true potential. But, why should someone have to get PP2 with tires that are not very useful on the street to get a car that doesn't ride down the road like 'sitting on a stack of phone books on a water bed"?

And please don't tell me "comfort", because you can have both.

[Chadicus]

These guys all thought the GT would be running low 12s and it isn't. Now we are hearing every excuse as to why it shouldn't be expected to compete with the 1LE when the fact is it was almost a second slower than the base SS. At this point I just hope the PP2 can beat the base SS around the track. I'm not sure it will to be honest.

[newmoon]

Originally Posted by whiteboyblues2001

I don't think anyone really expected the PP1 to win against the 1LE on the track, but I bet MOST of the Mustang fans thought that it would win in the 0-60 and 1/4 mile. There was soooooo many Mustang trolls on this site arguing that the new Mustang was blowing away the Camaro in the 1/4 mile. But, once there were true same-day same-driver tests, even if it was Edmunds or on a dry lake bed, it became obvious that the Mustang closed the gap, but did not exceed the Camaro in the 1/4.

So, this H2H had a lot more to it than just Randy's lap time.

And let me give you my personal opinion on the subject: I expected a bit more out of the Mustang on track. No, I didn't expect it to beat the 1LE in a lap time, so that had nothing to do with it. You mentioned the Miata. Folks LOVE to take that to a road course, because it is fun to drive in the twistys. It almost won the Car & Driver Best Driver's car one year. But not because it was fast, but because it was a proper driver's car. But no one expects it to be faster than a Mustang or Camaro.

Watching this Mustang PP1 drive, and hearing the comments in the video show me that this car's body movements are all over the place on a road course or a windy road. Waiting for the rear end to come around and let the car set into the turn is horrible. It gives a ton of vagueness to the steering, and no feedback. Did you see the video? That body was like it was riding on a bouncy house, not a properly set up suspension.

And don't give me any of that, "well, the Mustang is a GT car" b.s. either. Why? Because, first of all, I have driven many BMW's (and other cars) that don't have all those issues, and ride more comfortably anyway. And that is WITHOUT Magnetic Ride Control. WITH Magnetic Ride control, you can have an extremely planted and sorted suspension with great comfort AT THE SAME TIME. That is what MRC does best. But, it is kind of wasted on the Mustang.

Watching that Mustang go around the track was like seeing a pontoon boat riding in rough seas. It was making me seasick. Even the base Mustang shouldn't do that, let alone the PP1, LET ALONE something with MRC.

That was very disappointing.

Now, I looked at some of the specs of the PP2, and here is a quote:

"Custom tuned MagneRide® dampers and quicker steering calibration provide better response. Other improvements over Performance Pack Level 1 equipment include a 67 percent stiffer rear stabilizer bar, a 12 percent stiffer front stabilizer bar, 20 percent stiffer front springs and rear springs that are 13 percent stiffer, all of which contribute to a more stable ride around corners with less body roll."

Hopefully this will settle the car down, and reveal some true potential. But, why should someone have to get PP2 with tires that are not very useful on the street to get a car that doesn't ride down the road like 'sitting on a stack of phone books on a water bed"?

And please don't tell me "comfort", because you can have both.

I for one thought that the GT would have done better in the 1/4 because I thought the SS sporting 450+hp and a lower chassis weight wasn't very impressive with 12:50-12:60 times. Turns out the manual GT is even a bigger dog in the 1/4 mile than the SS is.

[whiteboyblues2001]

Originally Posted by newmoon

I for one thought that the GT would have done better in the 1/4 because I thought the SS sporting 450+hp and a lower chassis weight wasn't very impressive with 12:50-12:60 times. Turns out the manual GT is even a bigger dog in the 1/4 mile than the SS is.

The question I have about those times is: was that 1/4 mile done on the dry lake bed, or on asphalt? I doubt they could get 4.1 and 4.4 0-60 on dirt, so I am guessing it was done on asphalt.

Given the amount of 1/4 mile racing these two cars have done in their heritage, I think I would have liked to see them elaborate a bit on how the cars did in the 1/4 (even though I am not a 1/4 mile kind of guy). They kind of just glossed over that part.

[SSfriendly]

Originally Posted by ST1LE

LOL, PLENTY did!! Good that you are not one of them, but more than an acceptable amount did.

Edit: To be clear we agree, not many thought it would on the track but most if not all thought it would in the 1/4 mile.

None in any forum I frequent thought the PP1 stood a chance in hell around the track, not one.

As for 1/4 times....this is right where a majority thought the M6 would fall, about even with the SS. The biggest gains to be had is from ditching the A6 slush box for the A10.

Originally Posted by whiteboyblues2001

I don't think anyone really expected the PP1 to win against the 1LE on the track, but I bet MOST of the Mustang fans thought that it would win in the 0-60 and 1/4 mile. There was soooooo many Mustang trolls on this site arguing that the new Mustang was blowing away the Camaro in the 1/4 mile. But, once there were true same-day same-driver tests, even if it was Edmunds or on a dry lake bed, it became obvious that the Mustang closed the gap, but did not exceed the Camaro in the 1/4.

So, this H2H had a lot more to it than just Randy's lap time.

And let me give you my personal opinion on the subject: I expected a bit more out of the Mustang on track. No, I didn't expect it to beat the 1LE in a lap time, so that had nothing to do with it. You mentioned the Miata. Folks LOVE to take that to a road course, because it is fun to drive in the twistys. It almost won the Car & Driver Best Driver's car one year. But not because it was fast, but because it was a proper driver's car. But no one expects it to be faster than a Mustang or Camaro.

Watching this Mustang PP1 drive, and hearing the comments in the video show me that this car's body movements are all over the place on a road course or a windy road. Waiting for the rear end to come around and let the car set into the turn is horrible. It gives a ton of vagueness to the steering, and no feedback. Did you see the video? That body was like it was riding on a bouncy house, not a properly set up suspension.

And don't give me any of that, "well, the Mustang is a GT car" b.s. either. Why? Because, first of all, I have driven many BMW's (and other cars) that don't have all those issues, and ride more comfortably anyway. And that is WITHOUT Magnetic Ride Control. WITH Magnetic Ride control, you can have an extremely planted and sorted suspension with great comfort AT THE SAME TIME. That is what MRC does best. But, it is kind of wasted on the Mustang.

Watching that Mustang go around the track was like seeing a pontoon boat riding in rough seas. It was making me seasick. Even the base Mustang shouldn't do that, let alone the PP1, LET ALONE something with MRC.

That was very disappointing.

Now, I looked at some of the specs of the PP2, and here is a quote:

"Custom tuned MagneRide® dampers and quicker steering calibration provide better response. Other improvements over Performance Pack Level 1 equipment include a 67 percent stiffer rear stabilizer bar, a 12 percent stiffer front stabilizer bar, 20 percent stiffer front springs and rear springs that are 13 percent stiffer, all of which contribute to a more stable ride around corners with less body roll."

Hopefully this will settle the car down, and reveal some true potential. But, why should someone have to get PP2 with tires that are not very useful on the street to get a car that doesn't ride down the road like 'sitting on a stack of phone books on a water bed"?

And please don't tell me "comfort", because you can have both.

Again, with a 1/4 mile and trap comparable to the SS, this is exactly where most thought it would fall.

As for the suspension, you have to keep in mind that many older mustang owners proffered the GTs swishy suspension over the PP1. Having more options isn’t a bad thing, and the PP1 will be quite good for many. For the rest, that’s why they produced a PP2.

Originally Posted by Chadicus

These guys all thought the GT would be running low 12s and it isn't. Now we are hearing every excuse as to why it shouldn't be expected to compete with the 1LE when the fact is it was almost a second slower than the base SS. At this point I just hope the PP2 can beat the base SS around the track. I'm not sure it will to be honest.

So far with the handful of runs, most with the A10 have been very low 12’s/high 11s. Once cars start showing up at the drag strip again when they reopen, you’ll see plenty more. Hell, another stock 18 auto was posted on the mustang Facebook page and ran high 11’s.

Originally Posted by newmoon

I for one thought that the GT would have done better in the 1/4 because I thought the SS sporting 450+hp and a lower chassis weight wasn't very impressive with 12:50-12:60 times. Turns out the manual GT is even a bigger dog in the 1/4 mile than the SS is.

It’s running the same time as the SS with the same power to weight ratio. The slight manual transmission changes was more for feel and economy (now has 2 overdrives) than it was for performance.

[SSfriendly]

Originally Posted by whiteboyblues2001

The question I have about those times is: was that 1/4 mile done on the dry lake bed, or on asphalt? I doubt they could get 4.1 and 4.4 0-60 on dirt, so I am guessing it was done on asphalt.

Given the amount of 1/4 mile racing these two cars have done in their heritage, I think I would have liked to see them elaborate a bit on how the cars did in the 1/4 (even though I am not a 1/4 mile kind of guy). They kind of just glossed over that part.

I’m sure they tested and applied corrections on a dry piece of pavement as always. But you’re right, with the mustang having a new engine it woluld have been nice.

[vtirocz]

Originally Posted by whiteboyblues2001

The question I have about those times is: was that 1/4 mile done on the dry lake bed, or on asphalt? I doubt they could get 4.1 and 4.4 0-60 on dirt, so I am guessing it was done on asphalt.

Given the amount of 1/4 mile racing these two cars have done in their heritage, I think I would have liked to see them elaborate a bit on how the cars did in the 1/4 (even though I am not a 1/4 mile kind of guy). They kind of just glossed over that part.

The instrumented acceleration testing was done at their normal venue (for 0-60 and 1/4). The #s quoted were NOT on the dry lake bed.

The only # on the dry lake bed was the 1 mile race (or whatever the distance was).

[whiteboyblues2001]

Originally Posted by SSfriendly

As for 1/4 times....this is right where a majority thought the M6 would fall, about even with the SS. The biggest gains to be had is from ditching the A6 slush box for the A10.

Again, with a 1/4 mile and trap comparable to the SS, this is exactly where most thought it would fall.

Really? Yes, most SANE folks, and most CAMARO folks thought this to be true. But not the Mustang folks on both this and the other forums. There were soooooo many Mustang trolls on this forum saying that the New Mustang was blowing away the Camaro? They weren't gloating because of a tie... They thought that the new Mustang was significantly faster than the Camaro. They though it was an easy 11.x second car all day long, where the Camaro was a low 12.x. They have since calmed down a bit, but there was a significant amount Mustang folks spiking the ball even though they weren't in the endzone yet.

As for the suspension, you have to keep in mind that many older mustang owners proffered the GTs swishy suspension over the PP1. Having more options isn’t a bad thing, and the PP1 will be quite good for many. For the rest, that’s why they produced a PP2.

Again, you don't have to sacrifice comfort for performance much anymore. You can have both. Most Honda Accords don't have that much body movement, and they don't even use MRC. And no one is complaining about the harsh ride either. Accords don't have vague steering feel either. You don't have to adjust the steering after turn-in to the rear end flinging over.

That's bad.

I would have preferred this:

Base GT = better handling than the previous GT, but add MRC to sort out the comfort.

PP1 = tighten the suspension even more, make the car sorted in the turns, then use MRC to reduce the harshness. Better tires, but not Sport Cup 2's.
This would be for hooning about on a back road.

PP2 = add track tires (Sport Cup 2's), more brakes, a bit of aero, and coolers for the track rats.