[hotlap]

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

Your comment reeks of someone who is desperately trying to trigger someone. So let me correct you. The SS is not the slowest and will never be the slowest of the V8 powered Muscle Cars or Pony Cars or whatever you wanna call them so long as Dodge has that 5.7 in the Chally/Charger. Dodge holds the title as the "slowest". Second would have to go to Ford for the M6 GT which is stuck in the mid to high 12 sec range. The SS is in the middle between fastest and slowest.

And again, you keep saying that we here find it hard to accept. That is a flat out lie considering that most of us said way back before the 18 GT was released that we would not be surprised if it was faster. And most of us said that given all the extensive alterations the car needed that it damn well should be faster. So where do you get that we find it hard to accept? We all here know GM's forte. They build it the right way, fast and competitive enough that it can remain untouched for 6 years, and then they move on to the next project. Ford builds things like shit and then has to keep updating it which leaves them very little time to make the next cars, like the GT500, capable of doing what all of it's competitors can do, like going 200 MPH and being stable. None of us cares.

What is remarkable is that the SS and ZL1 showed up, kicked the snot out of everyone, and several years later the competition needed heavy renditions and new models (Widebody, Redeye, PP2, 3rd Gen Coyote engine, 1320, Bullitt, GT500) while the SS and ZL1 has not needed to change at all. And you're still getting the best performance for the buck and a car that is not a one hit wonder and can do what it does around a track indefinitely because it has the appropriate parts to keep it cool and stable. GM built a car that was 2020 fast way back in 2016. Ford is still stuck in 2013 since the GT500 is slower now than it was then. So really, what is it that you think we can't accept. Most of us said welcome to the party after the GT finally was faster than high 12s like the competition had been doing for years at that point.

Well said Blaq

[BlaqWhole]

Originally Posted by Idaho2018GTPremium

I hate to have to do this in a GT500 vs ZL1 thread, but just because you say it enough times it doesn't make it true. So, here we go again with the published figures from independent testers:

2018 Mustang GT A10:
11.83 @ 119.5 mph (Hot Rod mag stock car on prepped drag strip)
11.9 @ 119 mph 0-60 in 3.9 (Cars.com)
12.1 @ 120 mph and 0-60 in 3.8 (Car and Driver)
12.1 @ 118.8 mph and 0-60 in 3.9 (Motor Trend)
Average: 11.98 @ 119.3 mph


Camaro SS 6th gen:
12.2 @ 118 mph and 0-60 in 3.9 (A10, Car and Driver)
12.3 @ 116 mph and 0-60 in 3.9 (A8 SS Car and Driver)
12.4 @ 116 mph and 0-60 in 4.1 (M6 1LE Car and Driver)
12.5 @ 115 mph and 0-60 in 4.1 (M6 1LE Motor Trend)
Average auto: 12.25 @ 117 mph
Average M6: 12.45 @ 115.5 mph

FYI The M6 GT ran 12.6 @ 115 mph in the same motor trend test as the M6 above. We all know the M6 is slower than the A10 so that's nothing new.

The trap speeds should tell you everything. The fastest SS trap speed is not even in the top 4 of the Mustang, considering #4 of the GT was 118.8 mph.

The A10 SS has "closed the gap" as you say, but still accelerates slower than the A10 GT. That said, it is no slouch. 0-60 in 3.9 seconds is supercar fast 20 years ago.

I do not consider Evan's run as anything official. And for the record, if you wanna do an averaging test completely fairly, then you must add in the worst runs with the best runs. When the 18 GT first arrived it was run in 2 tests where they did a 12.6 and that was the A10. Evans got one that somehow did an 11.8...what was suspicious was that he had to travel across the country for a specific GT with specific options which tells us that only when opted a certain way will the GT run these times. The SS on the other hand, well, just pick one.

So anyway, back to the point. Take the 12.6, take the 11.9, and that puts the average at 12.25 for the GT. What is that average for the SS? Hmm...I wonder...so take the 12.5, and then take the 12.2, and you get an average of 12.35. So the GT has an average of 12.25 while the SS has a 12.35 average. I mean, I didn't wanna do that but you brought up averages and that is how averages work.

1-2 tenths is a driver's race. You Mustang guys are the ones who say that. So at best the SS and GT are a driver's race. On average the SS and GT are a driver's race. That is a completely re-done for 2018 GT vs a relatively unchanged SS from 2016.

To add...through history we have consistently seen that when Ford is faster it is still a driver's race. The SS is never more than 2 tenths behind when they are behind which is rare. When the Camaro is faster, it is by leaps and bounds. We saw that with the IROC vs the GTs until Ford has to modify the GT to be faster in the early 90s. We saw it with the Z28 vs the GT for 8 years (93-02). We saw it again in 2010. The GT was then 2 tenths faster after needing a heavy re-work in 2011 to which the SS stayed the same for those 6 years. Then we saw it again in 2016 until the GT again needed a major re-design after it just had a major re-design 2 years prior. And that will continue to be the trend. The Camaro being much faster until the Mustang catches up and just ever soo slightly squeaks by.


EDIT: Actually the auto equipped SS average would be 12.30. That is because the auto SS from what I can recall has run a slowest time of 12.4. The 12.6 I used was for the M6 SS which was not fair if all we're considering is autos. But it still is notable that using the worst possible times for the SS with the M6 times thrown in against the times from only the A10 GT the difference is only 1 tenth of a second.

[hotlap]

Car & Driver also reported that the ran 12.2 in a 2019 SS M6.

[newmoon]

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

Your comment reeks of someone who is desperately trying to trigger someone. So let me correct you. The SS is not the slowest and will never be the slowest of the V8 powered Muscle Cars or Pony Cars or whatever you wanna call them so long as Dodge has that 5.7 in the Chally/Charger. Dodge holds the title as the "slowest". Second would have to go to Ford for the M6 GT which is stuck in the mid to high 12 sec range. The SS is in the middle between fastest and slowest.

And again, you keep saying that we here find it hard to accept. That is a flat out lie considering that most of us said way back before the 18 GT was released that we would not be surprised if it was faster. And most of us said that given all the extensive alterations the car needed that it damn well should be faster. So where do you get that we find it hard to accept? We all here know GM's forte. They build it the right way, fast and competitive enough that it can remain untouched for 6 years, and then they move on to the next project. Ford builds things like shit and then has to keep updating it which leaves them very little time to make the next cars, like the GT500, capable of doing what all of it's competitors can do, like going 200 MPH and being stable. None of us cares.

What is remarkable is that the SS and ZL1 showed up, kicked the snot out of everyone, and several years later the competition needed heavy renditions and new models (Widebody, Redeye, PP2, 3rd Gen Coyote engine, 1320, Bullitt, GT500) while the SS and ZL1 has not needed to change at all. And you're still getting the best performance for the buck and a car that is not a one hit wonder and can do what it does around a track indefinitely because it has the appropriate parts to keep it cool and stable. GM built a car that was 2020 fast way back in 2016. Ford is still stuck in 2013 since the GT500 is slower now than it was then. So really, what is it that you think we can't accept. Most of us said welcome to the party after the GT finally was faster than high 12s like the competition had been doing for years at that point.

This is all great and thank you for the history lesson my question is what has Chevy done for the SS lately, A10 upgrade didn't help?

You keep harping on everyone has been playing catch up to the SS, isn't the SS now doing the same? The GT has been faster for the past 2-years, the 1320 will flat out embarass it on the strip, the new 500 will make the present ZL1 look downright slow very soon. So what is Chevy's next move, 7th Gen in 2021?

[bobby35ny]

ZL1/GT500 banter back and forth is pretty popular among the fanbases.
One thing needs to be addressed if your comparing cars.
PRICE!!!!
Lets say the GT500 does most things better than the ZL1.
Now you have to justify the price.
Most people know, you can get a loaded ZL1 certain times a year for 60k or lower.
If Ford dealers are selling the GT for 75 or 80k then you have to say to yourself.
Is an extra 100Hp worth the 15-20k MORE?
That's the way I see it.

I'm willing to bet some ford guys might come to the dark side because of the price.

[shaffe]

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

Well Ford is never gonna admit something like that. I mean if they said they had to do it to keep the costs down so they could price it in line with what their core buyers will pay then that is fine. And I'm thinking that is what it amounts to. So I won't knock them too hard for that. But it's just a shame if they go to all these cost saving measures to keep the car affordable just for the dealerships work the price up to what the car would have been if they didn't cut costs. So in a way you'll be paying for all the extra stuff without ever getting it. It isn't Ford's fault but it is still a factor. But anyway, if they went cheap for those purposes then fine. GM does it, FCA does it, all manufacturers do it. If they cut costs because they just wanted to cheap out on the car then that is messed up.

While I agree they will never admit it, it is something that should be easy to decipher once the car is out and reviewed. I just think that saying the cut corners or cheaped out when there is no evidence to suggest that to me isn't fair to toss that out there.

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

Your comment reeks of someone who is desperately trying to trigger someone. So let me correct you. The SS is not the slowest and will never be the slowest of the V8 powered Muscle Cars or Pony Cars or whatever you wanna call them so long as Dodge has that 5.7 in the Chally/Charger. Dodge holds the title as the "slowest". Second would have to go to Ford for the M6 GT which is stuck in the mid to high 12 sec range. The SS is in the middle between fastest and slowest.

And again, you keep saying that we here find it hard to accept. That is a flat out lie considering that most of us said way back before the 18 GT was released that we would not be surprised if it was faster. And most of us said that given all the extensive alterations the car needed that it damn well should be faster. So where do you get that we find it hard to accept? We all here know GM's forte. They build it the right way, fast and competitive enough that it can remain untouched for 6 years, and then they move on to the next project. Ford builds things like shit and then has to keep updating it which leaves them very little time to make the next cars, like the GT500, capable of doing what all of it's competitors can do, like going 200 MPH and being stable. None of us cares.

What is remarkable is that the SS and ZL1 showed up, kicked the snot out of everyone, and several years later the competition needed heavy renditions and new models (Widebody, Redeye, PP2, 3rd Gen Coyote engine, 1320, Bullitt, GT500) while the SS and ZL1 has not needed to change at all. And you're still getting the best performance for the buck and a car that is not a one hit wonder and can do what it does around a track indefinitely because it has the appropriate parts to keep it cool and stable. GM built a car that was 2020 fast way back in 2016. Ford is still stuck in 2013 since the GT500 is slower now than it was then. So really, what is it that you think we can't accept. Most of us said welcome to the party after the GT finally was faster than high 12s like the competition had been doing for years at that point.

Pretty much spot on. I have said it numerous time I think the alpha Camaro caught everyone off guard with how good it was/is. I am sure Ford/Fiat knew it would be better than gen 5 but I think they got caught with their pants down, and fell over trying to pick them back up lol.

I think you and me will just have to agree to disagree on the top speed thing so we don't clutter this up hahaha

[Ethanolic]

Originally Posted by bobby35ny

I'm willing to bet some ford guys might come to the dark side because of the price.

From what I’ve seen at the drag strip over the last few years is that it seems like a lot of Mustang guys have switched to Dodge cars. I see an equal number of 392/ Hellcats at the track these days as I do either Mustangs or Camaros and Before the Hellcat came out a 392 was a rarity while Mustangs were all over.

[BlaqWhole]

Originally Posted by newmoon

This is all great and thank you for the history lesson...

You're welcome.

Originally Posted by newmoon

my question is what has Chevy done for the SS lately, A10 upgrade didn't help?

Not for nothing, but let's look at the facts. The GT got an entirely new engine that is soo far away from the 15-17 5.0 that it is now the G3n 3 Coyote engine. They also had the A10 which is far and away from the A6 they were stuck with. They also had drag modes added in (some of them). That made for a drastic change to the GT. What did the SS get? An A10 trans. It didn't do much but that just shows how good the A8 already was. And since you missed my point I'll repeat. We all know that GM's forte is to build it correctly the first time and move on to the next project. Ford had soo much re-working to do that they spread themselves too thin to get the GT500 ready for war. Between PP2s and G-3 Coyote engines and Bullitts and GT350s they were soo tightly wound that the GT500 kept getting pushed back which led to the entire Gen being pushed back and ultimately a 180 MPH cap on their flagship Mustang. So the real question is why didn't Ford do what they did in 2018 way back in 2015? If all those changes amounted to nothing more than a driver's race between the GT and the unchanged SS, then why was the SS as fast as it was in 16 and the GT was as slow as it was in 15?

Originally Posted by newmoon

You keep harping on everyone has been playing catch up to the SS, isn't the SS now doing the same? The GT has been faster for the past 2-years, the 1320 will flat out embarass it on the strip, the new 500 will make the present ZL1 look downright slow very soon. So what is Chevy's next move, 7th Gen in 2021?

No the SS is not "catching up". Neither is the ZL1. GM built them, they slapped the shit out of everyone, then GM moved on to the next project. The SS has no reason to catch up because they set the bar. If the 18 GT came out and magazines tested it and they ran 11.6 then yea GM would have to catch up. But why the hell do they need to catch up to a car that is at best 2 tenths of a second faster officially. Unofficially we have seen instances of both cars running high 11s. Or so these people claim they are doing in stock SSs and GTs.

So no, GM does not need to do anything and those of us here are ok with that. You want us to be bothered with a 1-2 tenth of a second difference and that much is obvious. But again, it doesn't matter at this point because we are still competitive to the GT unlike the GT has been up until 2018...and 2018 1/2 with the PP2 even if for only 1 lap...and 2020 with the GT500 unless you're going over 180 MPH which I do quite often. The GT was 2 tenths faster from 11-15 and not one of us cared. On the contrary it has many times been over half a second faster than the GT to which you all had every excuse in the book. "Camaros are too expensive", "the dealership wouldn't sell me one for $25K OTD", "sales", "well who leaves these cars stock anyway", "wah wah wah". Sound about right??

Originally Posted by newmoon

You keep harping on everyone has been playing catch up to the SS, isn't the SS now doing the same? The GT has been faster for the past 2-years, the 1320 will flat out embarass it on the strip, the new 500 will make the present ZL1 look downright slow very soon. So what is Chevy's next move, 7th Gen in 2021?

1320 ain't out yet skippy. Neither is the GT500. And from the looks of it, the GT500 won't be doing much of anything except for in the quarter mile. So what? The 650 HP $63K ZL1 from 2017 loses in the quarter mile to the 2020 GT500 that has well over 700 HP and will cost over $80K and will have markups attached to it and that has been benchmarking the ZL1 for years and even still can't do more than straight line work and only up to 180 MPH?? OK. Congrats I guess.

[rocket403]

1320 is out and we have one gent that has his 1st pass in the 1/8 mile that the SS would have a hard time matching. This with a car that has less the 500 miles on it.

[BlaqWhole]

Originally Posted by shaffe

While I agree they will never admit it, it is something that should be easy to decipher once the car is out and reviewed. I just think that saying the cut corners or cheaped out when there is no evidence to suggest that to me isn't fair to toss that out there.

I agree that I am speculating. But I am critical of the S550 Mustangs as I think they have been a failure and this is just the icing on the cake. The most anticipated Mustang in a long time is finally reappearing after a 6 year hiatus and it now has a 180 MPH cap on it? That is very disappointing. So yea I'm gonna pretty much think the worst.

Originally Posted by shaffe

Pretty much spot on. I have said it numerous time I think the alpha Camaro caught everyone off guard with how good it was/is. I am sure Ford/Fiat knew it would be better than gen 5 but I think they got caught with their pants down, and fell over trying to pick them back up lol.

I think you and me will just have to agree to disagree on the top speed thing so we don't clutter this up hahaha

Yes you have said that and I appreciate that you can admit it when others can't. Ford showed that they can build a fast car. But the problem is that their customers want fast Mustangs, which technically Ford gives them, but then want Camaro-fast Mustangs at Mustang prices which leaves Ford somewhat betwixt. Do you give people a "fast" Mustang at a low price even if it is slower than the Camaro? Do you make the Mustang as fast as the Camaro and subsequently have to charge a bit more for it? What do you do? None of this would even be a debate if Ford had built the 18 GT back in 2015. At that point we'd be arguing more about build quality, options, reliability, and stuff of that nature. But here we are...they got caught with their pants down. Their goal was to add IRS, additional options, and keep the GT in the same range as it was. It got slower but it was still in the same range. GM did it accept they made vast changes all for the sake of performance. What Ford should have done was focused on the Bullitt and GT500 and left the GT alone. But them trying to modify the GT is what led to everything else suffering.

[DevilsReject97]

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

1320 ain't out yet skippy.

They're already out.... Smoking has one...

[Idaho2018GTPremium]

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

I do not consider Evan's run as anything official. And for the record, if you wanna do an averaging test completely fairly, then you must add in the worst runs with the best runs. When the 18 GT first arrived it was run in 2 tests where they did a 12.6 and that was the A10. Evans got one that somehow did an 11.8...what was suspicious was that he had to travel across the country for a specific GT with specific options which tells us that only when opted a certain way will the GT run these times. The SS on the other hand, well, just pick one.

So anyway, back to the point. Take the 12.6, take the 11.9, and that puts the average at 12.25 for the GT. What is that average for the SS? Hmm...I wonder...so take the 12.5, and then take the 12.2, and you get an average of 12.35. So the GT has an average of 12.25 while the SS has a 12.35 average. I mean, I didn't wanna do that but you brought up averages and that is how averages work.

1-2 tenths is a driver's race. You Mustang guys are the ones who say that. So at best the SS and GT are a driver's race. On average the SS and GT are a driver's race. That is a completely re-done for 2018 GT vs a relatively unchanged SS from 2016.

To add...through history we have consistently seen that when Ford is faster it is still a driver's race. The SS is never more than 2 tenths behind when they are behind which is rare. When the Camaro is faster, it is by leaps and bounds. We saw that with the IROC vs the GTs until Ford has to modify the GT to be faster in the early 90s. We saw it with the Z28 vs the GT for 8 years (93-02). We saw it again in 2010. The GT was then 2 tenths faster after needing a heavy re-work in 2011 to which the SS stayed the same for those 6 years. Then we saw it again in 2016 until the GT again needed a major re-design after it just had a major re-design 2 years prior. And that will continue to be the trend. The Camaro being much faster until the Mustang catches up and just ever soo slightly squeaks by.


EDIT: Actually the auto equipped SS average would be 12.30. That is because the auto SS from what I can recall has run a slowest time of 12.4. The 12.6 I used was for the M6 SS which was not fair if all we're considering is autos. But it still is notable that using the worst possible times for the SS with the M6 times thrown in against the times from only the A10 GT the difference is only 1 tenth of a second.

Huh? I didn't use the worst possible times for the SS. I found two auto runs (12.2 and 12.3) and averaged them (12.25). Not bad at all. Those are the two best published times that I saw. I didn't cherry pick. I also found 4 GT runs that average 11.98. It is what it is. It's your long comments like this that make us believe you can't accept it. On one post you say "yes the GT is faster", on another you say basically "use the slowest and the fastest times and the SS is barely slower than the GT" but alluding that you can't accept it. Nobody uses the slowest times for comparison. Ever. And the 11.9 sec GT is not some obscurely configured fairy dust car. It's an auto PP1. By the way, American Muscle ran 11.97 bone stock but I didn't even use that one in my top 4 above.

[BlaqWhole]

Originally Posted by rocket403

1320 is out and we have one gent that has his 1st pass in the 1/8 mile that the SS would have a hard time matching. This with a car that has less the 500 miles on it.

Ok cool. I wasn't aware that it was out yet.

So Dodge built a car in 2019 specifically for the quarter mile that has more HP than the SS and costs more than the SS and it turns out to be faster than the SS that has been pretty much unchanged since 2016...should we be impressed?? All this does is just prove my point.

[BlaqWhole]

Originally Posted by Idaho2018GTPremium

Huh? I didn't use the worst possible times for the SS. I found two auto runs (12.2 and 12.3) and averaged them (12.25). Not bad at all. Those are the two best published times that I saw. I didn't cherry pick. I also found 4 GT runs that average 11.98. It is what it is. It's your long comments like this that make us believe you can't accept it. On one post you say "yes the GT is faster", on another you say basically "use the slowest and the fastest times and the SS is barely slower than the GT" but alluding that you can't accept it. Nobody uses the slowest times for comparison. Ever. And the 11.9 sec GT is not some obscurely configured fairy dust car. It's an auto PP1. By the way, American Muscle ran 11.97 bone stock but I didn't even use that one in my top 4 above.

Because you don't understand what it means to "average" something. You brought up averages and you did it incorrectly. I simply corrected you and your math. When you average something you take the worst or lowest, add it to the best or highest, then divide by two. That gives you an average. If you're not using the slowest times then you cannot possibly average something. You're the one who brought it up.