[SSfriendly]

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

I never jumped on any bandwagon. I was the first person on this forum to say that he removed the swaybar.

So you were the first person than to make up lies about the run...brilliant defense on your behalf.

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

That is an old Mustang trick. And for the record there were several YTers who also said the same thing.

And again, so you fail to believe a trusted magazine writer and instead align yourself with like-minded YTers who make shit up?

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

My gripe was that people like yourself tried to compare Evans run to the magazine times of the SS because it made the GT look good.

Never, not once have I compared a 1/4 mile run done on a dragstrip to runs done by magazines. Man you're great at making things up.

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

I flat out told you that if you consider Evans run then you have to consider it in comparison to the Camaro runs on YT also in which case there were some in the 11.8 range.

No one is arguing with you on this...you didn't "flat out tell" anyone.

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

The GT turned around and did exactly what I said it would do much to your chagrin.

The GT did exactly as everyone was expecting...it ran neck and neck and only a 1/10th slower than a camaro with an M6.

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

And I don't GAF about Evans. I don't know him. I never heard of him before he did the 18 GT runs. And I don't care how respected he is in Mustang world or what he accomplished. It means nothing to me.

LOL, he's not just respected in the mustang world, he's also respected throughout the camaro community and has written for both ford and chevy magazines as well as hot rod. He has set record times in camaro's and corvettes. You not knowing of him shows how disconnected you are from the automotive community.

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

WTF are you talking about? I just said that the GT was slower and that it did a 12.6. You're losing your marbles kid. I said that if you take the fastest SS run (12.3), then it is faster than the best GT run (12.5 if I remember) as both were officially tested.

What you did was take the fastest run done by car and driver for the SS and compare it against the only run done by any reputable magazine for the mustang. Not only do they not use the same pavement for the runs, but the don't necessarily even correct for the same conditions.

On the same day, with the same magazine...the SS and GT are 0.1 seconds apart. Quit trying to manipulate data.

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

And again, you had no issues comparing modded GT runs on different days and at different tracks to our ZL1 fast list runs.

Who brought the ZL1 vs modded GT argument back up? Who still hasn't admitted that a tune/tire GT is capable of running ZL1 times based off of proof?

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

So now all of a sudden when it doesn't suit you it isn't fair right?

I can't believe you can't see the difference in comparison. I'll explain it to you. A tune/tire MY18 GT has never line up against a stock ZL1. The only numbers we can compare are from the ZL1 fast list. A stock GT and SS has actually been run head to head...and you chose to NOT use the head to head numbers and instead use numbers from completely different magazines to make your argument look better. Sad really.

[SSfriendly]

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

Then why is it only doing 12.5 and 12.6 when officially tested? Answer that. Why are shops and tuners and pro independent guys getting low 12s and high 11s but then when it gets tested it does soo poorly in comparison? And why were 2 other shops only able to manage a 12.3 on DRs? Even if it did a 12.3 in the mag tests I could see maybe it doing a bit better. But from an alleged 11.8 to a 12.6? That is 8 tenths of a second among pro drivers and that type of variance is unheard of.

How in today's day and age do you not understand the difference between a 1/4 mile run down a dragstrip and corrected 1/4 mile runs done by magazines on a standard stretch of (non dragstrip) pavement?

Why are you conveniently leaving out all of the 12.0 runs done by others on the dragstrip? LMR did one as did several others. Again with the cherry picking data tomfoolery.

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

And you sound like someone who will drink whatever gets served up so long as it makes your precious GT look good. I have no problem calling bullshit on all these hero runs. Because that is exactly what they are.

Gotcha, call bullshit on a recorded run by a magazine editor/driver but accept every camaro hero run done on your fast list...no questions asked.

[BlaqWhole]

Originally Posted by SSfriendly

So you were the first person than to make up lies about the run...brilliant defense on your behalf.

Like I care what you think. Removing sway bars is the first thing these guys do when they wanna run a good time on a "stock" Mustang. Go on the YT video. Even one of his close buddies and several other Mustang guys thought he removed the sway bar. Were they all lying too?

Originally Posted by SSfriendly

And again, so you fail to believe a trusted magazine writer and instead align yourself with like-minded YTers who make shit up?

I don't believe a GD thing out of MM&FF. I had a subscription to that mag for about 5 or more years. I had boxes of articles sitting around. Everything out of that magazine was either a lie, an exaggeration, made up, or complete bullshit. So no, I don't believe any enthusiast mag. How many times do I have to tell you that? And where did I align myself? They thought along the same lines as I did and some of them were close to the source.

Originally Posted by SSfriendly

Never, not once have I compared a 1/4 mile run done on a dragstrip to runs done by magazines. Man you're great at making things up.

You did. You declared the GT would be faster because Evans ran an 11.8 and Lund did a 12 flat despite all the SS guys who had done those times. You were comparing those times to the mag runs where the SS did 12.3-12.4 and that was the info you went off of. I told you it would do mid 12 at best which you argued against. What did it run again?

Originally Posted by SSfriendly

No one is arguing with you on this...you didn't "flat out tell" anyone.

I flat out said that to you and every troll on here every time you said I ignored Evans runs. I straight up told you that if you consider that run then it has to be compared to the YT and fast times and NOT the mag times. I said that time and time again on here.

Originally Posted by SSfriendly

The GT did exactly as everyone was expecting...it ran neck and neck and only a 1/10th slower than a camaro with an M6.

It ran a 12.6 which is NOT what you were expecting. You were expecting a low 12. And others were expecting high 11s to low 12s. It was nowhere close. The SS ran a best of 12.3 and that is more than a tenth faster than the best 18 GT time. In fact the A10 GT hasn't even beat the M6 SS. And I'm betting the M6 GT will do a high 12.

Originally Posted by SSfriendly

LOL, he's not just respected in the mustang world, he's also respected throughout the camaro community and has written for both ford and chevy magazines as well as hot rod. He has set record times in camaro's and corvettes. You not knowing of him shows how disconnected you are from the automotive community.

I. Don't. Give. A. Flying. FK. This ain't Mustang world bro. I'm sure all you little cheerleaders over there have pompoms and go jumping for joy and chanting his name whenever he drives a Mustang. I don't care.

Originally Posted by SSfriendly

What you did was take the fastest run done by car and driver for the SS and compare it against the only run done by any reputable magazine for the mustang. Not only do they not use the same pavement for the runs, but the don't necessarily even correct for the same conditions.

On the same day, with the same magazine...the SS and GT are 0.1 seconds apart. Quit trying to manipulate data.

Which is exactly what you did when you compared modded and tuned GT times to our fast ZL1 list. I at least acknowledged that the GT and SS are a driver's race several times. Challenge me on that PLEASE so I can prove your ass wrong again. But driver's race or not, the SS still tested faster than the GT and that was the M6 SS to the A10 GT. The A8 SS WILL be faster. And it HAS gone 12.3 at best.

Originally Posted by SSfriendly

Who brought the ZL1 vs modded GT argument back up? Who still hasn't admitted that a tune/tire GT is capable of running ZL1 times based off of proof?

Point proven yet again. So the only time it is acceptable to manipulate the data is when you do it or only when it makes the GT look better eh? Well the SS ran a 12.3 which is 1 tenth off from the 12.2 that the GT350R did. How bout dat? And it matched the WS times of the GT350R too. Since we're using Mustang math. Or does it not count when the Mustang looks bad?

Originally Posted by SSfriendly

I can't believe you can't see the difference in comparison. I'll explain it to you. A tune/tire MY18 GT has never line up against a stock ZL1. The only numbers we can compare are from the ZL1 fast list. A stock GT and SS has actually been run head to head...and you chose to NOT use the head to head numbers and instead use numbers from completely different magazines to make your argument look better. Sad really.

Right. And a SS 1LE has never lined up against a GT350R. So we have to go by the times at WS which the SS 1LE matched the GT350R. And they never lined up on the track. So we have to go by the times and say they are within 1 tenth of each other. And the A8 SS has not been lined up against the A10 GT. So we have to go by the 12.3 SS against the 12.6 GT which is more than a driver's race.

Originally Posted by SSfriendly

How in today's day and age do you not understand the difference between a 1/4 mile run down a dragstrip and corrected 1/4 mile runs done by magazines on a standard stretch of (non dragstrip) pavement?

Why are you conveniently leaving out all of the 12.0 runs done by others on the dragstrip? LMR did one as did several others. Again with the cherry picking data tomfoolery.

Why are you conveniently ignoring that 2 testers on DRs could not do better than a low 12? Why are you ignoring that something is fishy as hell with the Evans run and the rest of the runs? Why are you ignoring that even Lund's run was suspect?

Originally Posted by SSfriendly

Gotcha, call bullshit on a recorded run by a magazine editor/driver but accept every camaro hero run done on your fast list...no questions asked.

Got me? LOL! What's there to get. I call bullshit on the run. Just like I call bullshit on 95% of the content from MM&FF. The dude writes magazine articles and the purpose is to sell magazines. And the whole thing was a Mustang press/fluff circus anyway.

[FastCarFanBoy]

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

Point proven yet again. So the only time it is acceptable to manipulate the data is when you do it or only when it makes the GT look better eh? Well the SS ran a 12.3 which is 1 tenth off from the 12.2 that the GT350R did. How bout dat? And it matched the WS times of the GT350R too. Since we're using Mustang math. Or does it not count when the Mustang looks bad?The 350R has been tested at 12.1@119.5...at least cherry pick the right stats.


Right. And a SS 1LE has never lined up against a GT350R. So we have to go by the times at WS which the SS 1LE matched the GT350R. And they never lined up on the track. So we have to go by the times and say they are within 1 tenth of each other. And the A8 SS has not been lined up against the A10 GT. So we have to go by the 12.3 SS against the 12.6 GT which is more than a driver's race.



Why are you conveniently ignoring that 2 testers on DRs could not do better than a low 12? Why are you ignoring that something is fishy as hell with the Evans run and the rest of the runs? Why are you ignoring that even Lund's run was suspect? Because what other testers were unable to do has no bearing on what has been done. It would be like me saying that because you could not do better than an 11.86 in a ZL1 then people claiming they have gone low 11's are full of shit. We even have people claiming 10.8's now in stock ZL1's which is what .7 faster than any magazine was able to get and according to you those kind differences in stock cars is unprecedented. C&D who corrects to zero d/a could only muster an 11.5 from the ZL1.

in red , enjoy

[kttxz06]

Originally Posted by FastCarFanBoy

moronic drivel? At least get your facts straight. Both LMR and Lund went 12.0x 100% stock, Ecobeast went 12.1x and Evan ran as many 11.9's as he did 11.8s


My car went 13.0@109.9 stock I guess that makes MT's 12.7@112 car a ringer and the guys that have gone mid 12's stock are liars.

The outliers are LMR and Lunds and even Ecobeast. Those are the outliers. 12.6 will be the norm.

Same goes with the SS's runs. The outliers will always be the hero runs. Not the norm. That's why they call them hero runs. Cus, they are the true outliers. But, what it does is it gives us what the true potential of each car can do, which is a good thing. But, what the Mustang Fanboys do is take those hero runs and claim them as out of the box, stock........straight to the track, no prep high 11, 12 sec cars. Then, it gains traction and before you know it, every GT is a 11 second GT. haha.

See what I did there. I gave you what you wanted. Let's see how you respond.

[SSfriendly]

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

Like I care what you think. Removing sway bars is the first thing these guys do when they wanna run a good time on a "stock" Mustang. Go on the YT video. Even one of his close buddies and several other Mustang guys thought he removed the sway bar. Were they all lying too?

Yes! Just as you did!

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

I don't believe a GD thing out of MM&FF. I had a subscription to that mag for about 5 or more years. I had boxes of articles sitting around. Everything out of that magazine was either a lie, an exaggeration, made up, or complete bullshit. So no, I don't believe any enthusiast mag. How many times do I have to tell you that? And where did I align myself? They thought along the same lines as I did and some of them were close to the source.

How about Hot Rod magazine?

http://www.hotrod.com/articles/drag-...rd-mustang-gt/

You have some serious trust issues.

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

You did. You declared the GT would be faster because Evans ran an 11.8 and Lund did a 12 flat despite all the SS guys who had done those times. You were comparing those times to the mag runs where the SS did 12.3-12.4 and that was the info you went off of. I told you it would do mid 12 at best which you argued against. What did it run again?

There you go making stuff up again. Go ahead, find where where I declared the GT would be faster. You'll be a while...and will come up empty.

Ditto with comparing the 11.8 to SS mag runs. Never happened.

In M6 form, everyone (myself included) thought it would go mid 12's when tested by the popular magazines. Low 12's will be had with the A10. You're just pulling things out of every orifice now aren't you?

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

I flat out said that to you and every troll on here every time you said I ignored Evans runs. I straight up told you that if you consider that run then it has to be compared to the YT and fast times and NOT the mag times. I said that time and time again on here.

And again, no one is arguing this. Evans runs absolutely should be compared to the fast list here....they are both dragstrip runs. Why are you even arguing this?

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

It ran a 12.6 which is NOT what you were expecting. You were expecting a low 12. And others were expecting high 11s to low 12s.

Total BS. Myself and nearly everyone on M6G was expecting mid 12's from the M6, as the horsepower alone wasn't going to be enough to drop it past that. Again, I don't know where you're getting your info, but you're dead wrong.

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

It was nowhere close. The SS ran a best of 12.3 and that is more than a tenth faster than the best 18 GT time.

Dude, stop using BS comparisons of car and driver 1/4 mile times to 18 GT times when motortrend did an actual same day test of the two. M6 vs M6 they are 0.1 apart...get over it already.

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

In fact the A10 GT hasn't even beat the M6 SS. And I'm betting the M6 GT will do a high 12.

WTF dude lol, motortrend already tested the M6 GT to mid 12's. A stock 15-17 did high 12's. Too funny.

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

Point proven yet again. So the only time it is acceptable to manipulate the data is when you do it or only when it makes the GT look better eh?

And still you don't fundamentally understand the difference. And you still have yet to pony up that a tire and tune 18GT can run Zl1 times.

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

Why are you conveniently ignoring that 2 testers on DRs could not do better than a low 12? Why are you ignoring that something is fishy as hell with the Evans run and the rest of the runs? Why are you ignoring that even Lund's run was suspect?

None are ignore them, they are ALL data points. Some suck at driver, others have bad days, bad track prep etc. As for Lund's run, they were perhaps the most documented 1/4 runs I have ever seen. Why would I doubt the most reputable tuner in the mustang community? What does he have to gain by running a fantastic stock 1/4 mile? If anything else, he would sandbag and make his tune look better.

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

Got me? LOL! What's there to get. I call bullshit on the run. Just like I call bullshit on 95% of the content from MM&FF. The dude writes magazine articles and the purpose is to sell magazines. And the whole thing was a Mustang press/fluff circus anyway.

Funny, all magazines sole purpose is to sell more magazines. You conveniently discredit what you want to in a vein attempt to argue.

[SSfriendly]

Originally Posted by kttxz06

The outliers are LMR and Lunds and even Ecobeast. Those are the outliers. 12.6 will be the norm.

Same goes with the SS's runs. The outliers will always be the hero runs. Not the norm. That's why they call them hero runs. Cus, they are the true outliers. But, what it does is it gives us what the true potential of each car can do, which is a good thing. But, what the Mustang Fanboys do is take those hero runs and claim them as out of the box, stock........straight to the track, no prep high 11, 12 sec cars. Then, it gains traction and before you know it, every GT is a 11 second GT. haha.

See what I did there. I gave you what you wanted. Let's see how you respond.

With 6 data points you can't throw away the 3 lowest as outliers when they are all within 0.2 of each-other. 12.6 could be the norm, but considering non-dragstrip runs seem to be in the 12.6 range I would venture to say most at the dragstrip will be quicker.

[kttxz06]

Originally Posted by SSfriendly

With 6 data points you can't throw away the 3 lowest as outliers when they are all within 0.2 of each-other. 12.6 could be the norm, but considering non-dragstrip runs seem to be in the 12.6 range I would venture to say most at the dragstrip will be quicker.

And I'm with you on this. I was just giving examples.

I don't take someone's SS 11.8 hero run and claim it as the norm. Mustang Fanboys do. They all run to the dealership thinking they themselves will be running a high 11 sec quarter mile car. It's just in their nature.

Just like when the Lund run came out, it stirred up the...........oh boy. We just need a tune/fuel/and tire and we'll slay Zl1's. That's the point. The fanboyism is out of control on Mustang front when it comes to the 18.

I honestly think they should of given the GT the Bullitt HP bump and called it a day. There would be no argument. haha.

[SSfriendly]

Originally Posted by kttxz06

And I'm with you on this. I was just giving examples.

I don't take someone's SS 11.8 hero run and claim it as the norm. Mustang Fanboys do. They all run to the dealership thinking they themselves will be running a high 11 sec quarter mile car. It's just in their nature.

Just like when the Lund run came out, it stirred up the...........oh boy. We just need a tune/fuel/and tire and we'll slay Zl1's. That's the point. The fanboyism is out of control on Mustang front when it comes to the 18.

I honestly think they should of given the GT the Bullitt HP bump and called it a day. There would be no argument. haha.

Maybe I’m a bit blind, but from my end those claiming 11.8 being the norm is few and far between. I’ll have to pay a bit more attention.

I personally think 11.8 will be attainable (much like the SS) at the right track at the right time of the year...but defiantly not the norm.

[FastCarFanBoy]

Originally Posted by kttxz06

The outliers are LMR and Lunds and even Ecobeast. Those are the outliers. 12.6 will be the norm.

Same goes with the SS's runs. The outliers will always be the hero runs. Not the norm. That's why they call them hero runs. Cus, they are the true outliers. But, what it does is it gives us what the true potential of each car can do, which is a good thing. But, what the Mustang Fanboys do is take those hero runs and claim them as out of the box, stock........straight to the track, no prep high 11, 12 sec cars. Then, it gains traction and before you know it, every GT is a 11 second GT. haha.

See what I did there. I gave you what you wanted. Let's see how you respond.

I agree with you. "Hero runs" show what some cars will be capable of, nothing more and nothing less.

[kttxz06]

Originally Posted by SSfriendly

Maybe I’m a bit blind, but from my end those claiming 11.8 being the norm is few and far between. I’ll have to pay a bit more attention.

I personally think 11.8 will be attainable (much like the SS) at the right track at the right time of the year...but defiantly not the norm.

Just go to YouTube and FB and you'll see hundreds, if not thousands of comments. I think it's comical is all. See, we've had 3 yrs on this SS platform to know what it can. So, when we see a 11.8 run, we know it's an outlier. We don't claim it's the norm.

What happened was real simple. Ford took forever to come out with this refresh. Which led the heard to think what they want. The FIRST............The very first run that came out was Lund ripping off a what? 12.0, 11.9? Tuned. I don't care what he says, it was tuned. It wasn't stock. So, that started it. Everyone said, hell yea. Ford finally built us a 11 sec GT. Well, then the real world happened. Mag test shows it 12.6, 12,5 at best with the A10 which ties the SS M6. So, that hurt the feelings a little bit. Then the excuses came out. Tire, who was driving, blah blah blah. All the while, forgetting their new platform is up against a 3 yr old platform now that is about to get a refresh. Eh, anyways. Both sides have them. I don't give a rats ass. I have 10.46 Zl1 that I'm pleased with. But, I won't go claim that as a hero run, then run off to the McLaren forums to blast off that I can run with a 720S.

Anyhow, I'm just waiting on that 500 to drop so I can check it out. Hopefully it is what I want it to be so I can buy one. Yea, blasphemy. I know. I'd get rid of my Zl1 for a 500 any day if it's as advertised.

[kttxz06]

Originally Posted by FastCarFanBoy

I agree with you. "Hero runs" show what some cars will be capable of, nothing more and nothing less.

Agreed. And there is nothing wrong accepting them and giving everyone an idea of what the car car do. That's on both sides. I'm with that. But for heavens sake, they need to pipe it down a bit. haha. I digress.

If they would of put the Bullitt HP bump in the GT, Ford could of squashed all the Camaro vs Mustang comparisons. At least for now. But, they didn't. Now, they have to sell a $60k Bullitt to just run heads up with a SS. And to me, that's unfortunate.

But, as I'm in the mod camp, I mod all my cars so. I can't really claim this or that as there will always be some Mustang out there that is gonna kick my ass. I know, cus I got rolled the other night by a 1000 hp 500. Of course, I had no idea he had 1000 hp, but I should of known better. Purging while spooling, while on DR's. On the street. But, I don't care. I'll run anything. Needless to say, he blew me away. haha

[hotlap]

Originally Posted by newmoon

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What has been established is the fastest independent pass for the 18 A10 GT is 11:80s, with several other 12:00s achieved in a 3-month period. The fastest independent pass for the SS is 12:20s, until somebody can show me otherwise. Again we are not talking about private owners making unverified supposed stock passes.

Folks can cry about driver/conditions all you want but the SS has had 2.5 years and endless reviews to get the same done.

If you want to believe that the best a stock SS can do is 12.2, all I’ve got to say is...”bring it”.

[hotlap]

Originally Posted by SSfriendly

How about Hot Rod magazine?

http://www.hotrod.com/articles/drag-...rd-mustang-gt/

You have some serious trust issues.

Funny, all magazines sole purpose is to sell more magazines. You conveniently discredit what you want to in a vein attempt to argue.

Ford gave Evan a car that he tested as a freelance writer associated with Mustang rags. He then sold the story to HotRod

HotRod didn’t do shit except print it.