[hotlap]

Originally Posted by Idaho2018GTPremium

I still think you're quoting the wrong person. I said none of those things.

I've conflated the two of you. It was in fact Ethanolic that I was addressing.

To say the GT* is from .03 to 0.5 sec faster than a SS is a ridiculous. The capability of SS is known.

Originally Posted by Ethanolic

Never ending string of excuses, LOL.
It’s not even about the 1 run ....take all the runs for each car and look at them as a whole. The GT*11.83-12.1 from what 6 sources, 3 of them being independent reviewers. the SS 12.3-12.4 from every source?

[NW-99SS]

Originally Posted by shaffe

Back on topic I think Martin is pretty fair in his guess here. The thing where the GT500 might have an advantage over the Redeye is through it's electronic wizardry and the DCT will it be able to put the power down more effectively than the Redeye and it's electornic wizardry and the A8.

I don't think the GT500 CFTP will best the ZLE. Maybe on a track where it can use it's power advantage but I would expect on a track like Laguna Seca the ZLE to still come out on top. The ZLE is just that good.

DCT isn't any faster in a drag race than an auto with launch control like all Redeye's have. I'm more surprised the Redeye doesn't get the transbrake options that the 1320 Scat Packs do.

Agreed Martin is fair - the full track pack GT500 may be a toss up with a ZLE, but remains to be seen. I suppose this is why GM is now offering the A10, so the comparison can really be as close as possible.

[shaffe]

Originally Posted by NW-99SS

DCT isn't any faster in a drag race than an auto with launch control like all Redeye's have. I'm more surprised the Redeye doesn't get the transbrake options that the 1320 Scat Packs do.

Agreed Martin is fair - the full track pack GT500 may be a toss up with a ZLE, but remains to be seen. I suppose this is why GM is now offering the A10, so the comparison can really be as close as possible.

That is also true.

[DevilsReject97]

Originally Posted by newmoon

Why do you continue to discount and smear this run, other publications have run 11s and other 12:00s and 12:10s, the car has mph'd very close to 120. Do you really think that the car isn't capable of 11:80s under good conditions with a great driver. Stop with the BH it is that fast now get over it.

Now lets take the SS, we have one publication running a 12:20s thats is it.

First, Evans run is so suspect that NO ONE has come close to that time. Even when Evan ran a time like that in the F-body cars....the Ford guys bashed him left and right. The guy has routinely released info on how to game/cheat the system. I'm not calling him a cheat, but even the situation regarding how he got the car was suspect. He had to go all the way to Detroit to get it from Ford, not some local dealer....

More to the point, NO ONE, and I repeat, NO ONE, has ever tried to do a max effort run with a Camaro at the drag strip like Evan or some of these tuners did. They all just ran with the basics and called it a day. Show ME any single tuner or magazine that did what Evan did with a Camaro....

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

Let me ask you this. If I had made several posts about how I lie and cheat in racing and how I know all the tricks to hide mods and how I race my modded car in stock competitions and nobody knows and all that shit...if I all of a sudden traveled half way around the country to get a Camaro and then ran a time that nobody else could do or has done and I claimed I was stock...would you believe me? Just curious.

No, I would not buy it unless I could go over the car with a fine tooth comb. We had people releasing videos (tuners) claiming the car was bone stock only to find out it had this missing or that missing...or it wasnt using the full seats, etc etc..

Originally Posted by Ethanolic

I forgot about the American Muscle 11.97 pass, so that makes 3 bone stock 11 second passes we have to ignore and AM’s 11.97 on 235 all seasons blows the GT* nonsense out of the water also.

LaLa land.

See, most of us arent even arguing against AM's run... it's the Evans number that we all dispute. However, as I said earlier, these guys all made the point of going for max effort passes...and had time to do this or that to the cars... most of the GM stuff just was basic passes with no tire pressure changes...or even quality DA in most cases.. and what happens... no one tries to do the same. I'm not even saying the Camaro is faster... but you can't argue that more effort was made on the Mustangs side..

Originally Posted by Chadicus

Dont forget the PP1 and Bullitt going into limp mode after less than two laps during MT Car of the Year testing.

Hell, don't forget the GT500 basically losing it's brakes all together after 3 laps against the Z28... and that was a super expensive car..

[newmoon]

Originally Posted by Martinjlm

It's difficult to understand because in the real world, non-professional drivers are doing better than 12:20. But again, the P-O-I-N-T of the article was the ability of the Camaro SS to run all day on track or strip because Chevrolet equipped it with coolers to allow it to do so.

This is not a valid argument. Any non reviewed time is not verified, we do not know if the vehicle was modified. Way to simple to hide mods these days and call the vehicle stock (Tune, E85, Exhaust, etc, etc.) I'm sure you can agree on that, if not you are very naive. This can be applied to both Camaro and Mustang camps.

Also I guess you are implying that a GT isn't capable of running all day at the strip? Do you have any data to back this claim up, or are you simply assuming?

[DevilsReject97]

Originally Posted by Martinjlm

You're missing the point. They ran 25 passes with a stock vehicle with no prep and no signs of overheating (looking at you, PP2)

Bingo...the car replicated the passes virtually nonstop in arguably the toughest conditions you could ask for....on top of not having anything manipulated on the car (gas tank full/quarter tank, tire pressures, etc)..

Originally Posted by newmoon

Jeff Lutz as the driver on the drag strip best pass was 12:20s. That is all the car has in it. Multiple automotive reviews indicate the same outcome. Why is this difficult to understand.

If you really think 12.2 is the best it has in it....I got some beach front property in Montana you can buy..



https://ls1tech.com/forums/drag-raci...stock-11s.html

Those are normal people...and while I can't confirm/deny any mods...it's not like its all magic..

Originally Posted by Martinjlm

Thanks for this. We all needed the reality check.

Personally, I think the GT500 (non CFTP) will be more strip focused and will come close to the RedEye, but I don't see it beating it. Ford has said "700+" hp. That makes me think they are not totally certain they can claim 750+ or, more directly, 755+. 755 is the hp rating of the Corvette ZR1. Even with the weight disparity, it's hard to see a 750-ish hp taking down a 797 hp RedEye on the strip.

I think the GT500 with CFTP will be a better track dog than the GT350R, especially on long tracks. Will it clip the ZLE? I'm gonna say it depends on the track. Tracks with long straights are definitely gonna favor the GT500. How it compares to ZLE on shorter tracks will likely be a matter of gauging how well this car brakes in corners. Carbon Fiber wheels + Magnaride + their Brembo setup just might be enough to get the job done. Too close to call.

Good point about the tracks mattering, because long straights will certainly favor the higher HP car....however... the only known time (not certified) released for the ZR1 on the Ring was like 7:08 or something close...and the unconfirmed fastest lap of the ZLE on the same track....was 7:13...officially, it was 7:16.. which despite a weight and HP advantage....the ZLE was never really left behind..

I think the GT500 will be a fast car in a straight line, similar to the last generation. I think it will track similar to the GT350...but again, you'll be paying 25-40k more for the same performance you could get out of a ZL1 1LE in most cases..

Also, we have yet to see any official performance times released on the newly added A10 1LE...which could be significant..

[DevilsReject97]

Originally Posted by newmoon

This is not a valid argument. Any non reviewed time is not verified, we do not know if the vehicle was modified. Way to simple to hide mods these days and call the vehicle stock (Tune, E85, Exhaust, etc, etc.) I'm sure you can agree on that, if not you are very naive. This can be applied to both Camaro and Mustang camps.

Also I guess you are implying that a GT isn't capable of running all day at the strip? Do you have any data to back this claim up, or are you simply assuming?

I'll agree we can't verify... but when we were going back and forth about this earlier IN THIS VERY THREAD, lots of Mustang tuner videos were used where they were LITERALLY lying through their face... and claiming bone stock.

Evan has a history of performing completely fast times that no one else can seemingly match...and I am sorry, but I highly doubt he is the god of the drag strip...

[shaffe]

Originally Posted by DevilsReject97

Good point about the tracks mattering, because long straights will certainly favor the higher HP car....however... the only known time (not certified) released for the ZR1 on the Ring was like 7:08 or something close...and the unconfirmed fastest lap of the ZLE on the same track....was 7:13...officially, it was 7:16.. which despite a weight and HP advantage....the ZLE was never really left behind..

I think the GT500 will be a fast car in a straight line, similar to the last generation. I think it will track similar to the GT350...but again, you'll be paying 25-40k more for the same performance you could get out of a ZL1 1LE in most cases..

Also, we have yet to see any official performance times released on the newly added A10 1LE...which could be significant..

I think we have had this conversation before but 6+ seconds on a road course is an eternity.

VIR the ZR1 did a 2:39.5 and teh ZLE did a 2:45.7. To say the ZLE wasn't left behind with a 6 second difference is a stretch if you ask me.

[newmoon]

Originally Posted by DevilsReject97

I'll agree we can't verify... but when we were going back and forth about this earlier IN THIS VERY THREAD, lots of Mustang tuner videos were used where they were LITERALLY lying through their face... and claiming bone stock.

Evan has a history of performing completely fast times that no one else can seemingly match...and I am sorry, but I highly doubt he is the god of the drag strip...

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

Were you doubting his times when he was running record passes for GM products as well, or is the doubt only associated with Ford product reviews? Lets review this what do we know, 1. the GT is capable of sub 4-sec 0-60 times, 2. the GT is capable of trapping 117-120 mph in the 1/4, and a very fast shifting A10. With that data I am not sure why you would doubt his times. The data is there to back it up.

I on the other hand have much more confidence in his claimed times backed up by HR magazine, than I have in a private owners unverified claims. We have to look no further than this forum and any Mustang forum to find the folks who may not be telling the whole story.

[BlaqWhole]

Originally Posted by shaffe

How is that any different than my examples? You won't answer the question because you know it will validate my point. You keep saying it doesn't matter because those cars arent meant for that or people won't care. How is that any different than the shelby example? It is the same thing. The trackhawk example is literally the exact same example just in a different setting. Nobody should watch a Shelby get beat in the 1/4 and think bad about it because that car wasn't built for the 1/4 mile.

Just explain your logic to me. You just said it is ok for those other cars to only be good in the venues they were designed for and no one should look down on them if they don't do well in other areas but for some reason you can look down on the shelby. I am not trying to defend the Shelby, I am not trying to convince you it's a better car than you think it is. If you think it's an overpriced POS that's fine by me, you want to say its a rattle trap that drinks oil as fast gas go ahead. The only thing I don't agree with you on is how you look down it for it's 1/4 performance when it's not built for that. I just don't think that is a fair criticism is all.

It isn't that one fault of the GT350. It is that combined with everything else that makes it a crappy car. The earlier ones had cooling issues, then they had fire hazard issues and needed to all be recalled, then they had NVH issues, then they had oil consumption issues, then the non-R got matched by the SLE, then the SLE matched the R's time on a different track, then the ZL1 beat the R, then the 18 GT showed up and is faster in a straight line. All of that for a $63K+ Mustang. If it was just the fact that it loses to the GT in a straight line, I still wouldn't buy one but I might have some respect for it. Actually I wouldn't but I probably wouldn't bash it as much. But when you look over everything surrounding this disaster of a vehicle, losing to a GT in the quarter mile just looks really bad. I would never buy any car that costs that much and loses to a GT (or SS or SRT 392 for that matter) in a straight line. It is stupid. I don't care how anyone wants to rationalize it or try to explain it. It loses to a $30K GT. And I'll be damned if I pay over $60K for a car that can't beat a base model GT in a straight line.

Originally Posted by shaffe

To the shops, I did not deny they were posting their best times. you and a few others said they were getting hero runs that no one else was getting. Third party magazine testing verified those times as being doable. Others wanted to say the only way they could get those times was becuase it was track rental, or ideal conditions, or some behind the scenes trickery. Again 3rd party testing has validated that the times the performance shops achieved were doable.

All I was saying that from a business standpoint going out and getting hero times for a stock car does not make sense. Giving max effort to get the best time on a stock car when you want to sell performance parts doesn't make sense. What I am saying is the went out ran the cars, and just posted the best times. I am saying they didn't do any trickery or there was nothing suspicious about the times they got because that to me would make no sense.

It doesn't have to make sense. It is the reality. You can try to make sense of it all you want. The fact of the matter is that not one shop has tried your method. They all do the exact opposite and those packages they offer fly off the shelves. So maybe Mustang world doesn't make sense. Maybe you're more of a Camaro person after all. I mean, markups don't make any damn sense to me but the dealerships all make tons of money.

And I never said they did any trickery. I said I don't take Evans run as legit. He is the only one I said that about. Not anyone else. How many times do I have to repeat myself shaffe?

And not for nothing, we all sat here way back when and most of us said the SS had nothing to lose and the GT should by all intents and purposes be faster than the SS after all that time and all the renovations to it. You were here when we all said that. I and others said that if the GT beats the SS then so what, it should...if it lost then that would be bad. So nobody is discrediting anything or saying that the GT isn't faster in testing by 1-2 tenths. That is a driver's race anyway. But when comparing the two cars the GT has to be optioned specifically and the SS is just any one out there. And that is how it is every time the Mustang manages a win. They needed an extra tier level with the PP2 to match the SLE and even that was just for a hero lap. They needed an extra re-do for the GT to match the SS. (Going off on a tangent here...)The GT350 can't match the ZL1, the GT350R can't either, despite the fact that as you claim those cars are built for the track, yet the excuse there is that it isn't the natural competitor for the ZL1. And now they have the GT500 coming out which has been 3 MYs that the ZL1 has been unchanged and it will need an overwhelming amount of HP against the 650 HP ZL1 and it still might not even beat the standard ZL1 around a track. So every time a Mustang wins at anything it requires some sort of advantage or something extra that not all GTs come with or it has to be optioned a certain way or it needs way more HP and even when all the cards are stacked in their favor at best they can only manage a driver's race or not win at all. Rant over.

[whiteboyblues2001]

Originally Posted by Martinjlm

Thanks for this. We all needed the reality check.

Personally, I think the GT500 (non CFTP) will be more strip focused and will come close to the RedEye, but I don't see it beating it. Ford has said "700+" hp. That makes me think they are not totally certain they can claim 750+ or, more directly, 755+. 755 is the hp rating of the Corvette ZR1. Even with the weight disparity, it's hard to see a 750-ish hp taking down a 797 hp RedEye on the strip.

I think the GT500 with CFTP will be a better track dog than the GT350R, especially on long tracks. Will it clip the ZLE? I'm gonna say it depends on the track. Tracks with long straights are definitely gonna favor the GT500. How it compares to ZLE on shorter tracks will likely be a matter of gauging how well this car brakes in corners. Carbon Fiber wheels + Magnaride + their Brembo setup just might be enough to get the job done. Too close to call.

One aspect no one seems to mention is aero. Aero is making a huge differnence and even a deciding factor in road course performance now. I was wondering before the relase of the GT500 that we saw, was how much aero and did Ford go with active aero. I haven't heard anything mentioned about active aero, so I don't think they went that route. But there does seem to be some significant aero on the CFTP version. Big splitter, dive planes, wide skirts, large wing (looks adjustable) on the back. These things make huge differences in lap times on a road course as they increase speed in the turns (and hinder top speed a bit).

SO, even though we can guess a bit about power, weight, etc., I think the biggest determining factor in whether this thing can beat the ZLE is aero. If it has enough aero, combined with more power than the ZLE, it may best the ZLE, or at least come close enough to be respectable.

[newmoon]

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

It isn't that one fault of the GT350. It is that combined with everything else that makes it a crappy car. The earlier ones had cooling issues, then they had fire hazard issues and needed to all be recalled, then they had NVH issues, then they had oil consumption issues, then the non-R got matched by the SLE, then the SLE matched the R's time on a different track, then the ZL1 beat the R, then the 18 GT showed up and is faster in a straight line. All of that for a $63K+ Mustang. If it was just the fact that it loses to the GT in a straight line, I still wouldn't buy one but I might have some respect for it. Actually I wouldn't but I probably wouldn't bash it as much. But when you look over everything surrounding this disaster of a vehicle, losing to a GT in the quarter mile just looks really bad. I would never buy any car that costs that much and loses to a GT (or SS or SRT 392 for that matter) in a straight line. It is stupid. I don't care how anyone wants to rationalize it or try to explain it. It loses to a $30K GT. And I'll be damned if I pay over $60K for a car that can't beat a base model GT in a straight line.

It doesn't have to make sense. It is the reality. You can try to make sense of it all you want. The fact of the matter is that not one shop has tried your method. They all do the exact opposite and those packages they offer fly off the shelves. So maybe Mustang world doesn't make sense. Maybe you're more of a Camaro person after all. I mean, markups don't make any damn sense to me but the dealerships all make tons of money.

And I never said they did any trickery. I said I don't take Evans run as legit. He is the only one I said that about. Not anyone else. How many times do I have to repeat myself shaffe?

And not for nothing, we all sat here way back when and most of us said the SS had nothing to lose and the GT should by all intents and purposes be faster than the SS after all that time and all the renovations to it. You were here when we all said that. I and others said that if the GT beats the SS then so what, it should...if it lost then that would be bad. So nobody is discrediting anything or saying that the GT isn't faster in testing by 1-2 tenths. That is a driver's race anyway. But when comparing the two cars the GT has to be optioned specifically and the SS is just any one out there. And that is how it is every time the Mustang manages a win. They needed an extra tier level with the PP2 to match the SLE and even that was just for a hero lap. They needed an extra re-do for the GT to match the SS. (Going off on a tangent here...)The GT350 can't match the ZL1, the GT350R can't either, despite the fact that as you claim those cars are built for the track, yet the excuse there is that it isn't the natural competitor for the ZL1. And now they have the GT500 coming out which has been 3 MYs that the ZL1 has been unchanged and it will need an overwhelming amount of HP against the 650 HP ZL1 and it still might not even beat the standard ZL1 around a track. So every time a Mustang wins at anything it requires some sort of advantage or something extra that not all GTs come with or it has to be optioned a certain way or it needs way more HP and even when all the cards are stacked in their favor at best they can only manage a driver's race or not win at all. Rant over.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hmmm thinking about that statement. The ZL1 needed an extra 124-hp, and 221-tq advantage to slighty beat the GT350R in H2H. No advantage there right. So when the GT500 comes in at 750-hp and smokes the ZL1 you will not be crying that it has a HP/TQ advantage right?

[BlaqWhole]

Originally Posted by DevilsReject97

First, Evans run is so suspect that NO ONE has come close to that time. Even when Evan ran a time like that in the F-body cars....the Ford guys bashed him left and right. The guy has routinely released info on how to game/cheat the system. I'm not calling him a cheat, but even the situation regarding how he got the car was suspect. He had to go all the way to Detroit to get it from Ford, not some local dealer....

More to the point, NO ONE, and I repeat, NO ONE, has ever tried to do a max effort run with a Camaro at the drag strip like Evan or some of these tuners did. They all just ran with the basics and called it a day. Show ME any single tuner or magazine that did what Evan did with a Camaro....

See, most of us arent even arguing against AM's run... it's the Evans number that we all dispute. However, as I said earlier, these guys all made the point of going for max effort passes...and had time to do this or that to the cars... most of the GM stuff just was basic passes with no tire pressure changes...or even quality DA in most cases.. and what happens... no one tries to do the same. I'm not even saying the Camaro is faster... but you can't argue that more effort was made on the Mustangs side..

The reason is that the 6th Gen SS came out and the first few testers all did low 12s against the GT's 12.9-13.1 and that was enough. It's kinda like if I race some kid and I'm 5 car lengths ahead of him the race is already won. I might just come off the gas because there is no need to keep going at that point. But when the 18 GT came out they had a score to settle and every effort was made to get the absolute best time possible. Hence there were full day track rentals with people running it, trying different tire pressures, recording the intake temps, recording the DA and temps at the track and what times they had the best conditions, head wind, how much gas is in the tank, what RPM to launch at and which modes to try, when to shift, etc. They put every emphasis into running the absolute best time possible in that car. And fine, the GT ran a faster time than the SS did. By 1-2 tenths. But if there had been that much attention to detail and that much effort put into the SS, then one has to wonder what it would have run. We will never know. But in all honesty I do not fault or discredit the GT. But it's kinda like if your kid beats the neighbor's kid in a casual friendly not serious foot race at a park bbq so your neighbor sends his kid to a special trainer for 3 years and loads him up with all kinds of race gear specifically to win and then he just edges your kid out at the next bbq, lol!! You'd have to wonder if given the same treatment, which one would be faster? I think it's obvious...

[shaffe]

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

It isn't that one fault of the GT350. It is that combined with everything else that makes it a crappy car. The earlier ones had cooling issues, then they had fire hazard issues and needed to all be recalled, then they had NVH issues, then they had oil consumption issues, then the non-R got matched by the SLE, then the SLE matched the R's time on a different track, then the ZL1 beat the R, then the 18 GT showed up and is faster in a straight line. All of that for a $63K+ Mustang. If it was just the fact that it loses to the GT in a straight line, I still wouldn't buy one but I might have some respect for it. Actually I wouldn't but I probably wouldn't bash it as much. But when you look over everything surrounding this disaster of a vehicle, losing to a GT in the quarter mile just looks really bad. I would never buy any car that costs that much and loses to a GT (or SS or SRT 392 for that matter) in a straight line. It is stupid. I don't care how anyone wants to rationalize it or try to explain it. It loses to a $30K GT. And I'll be damned if I pay over $60K for a car that can't beat a base model GT in a straight line.

It doesn't have to make sense. It is the reality. You can try to make sense of it all you want. The fact of the matter is that not one shop has tried your method. They all do the exact opposite and those packages they offer fly off the shelves. So maybe Mustang world doesn't make sense. Maybe you're more of a Camaro person after all. I mean, markups don't make any damn sense to me but the dealerships all make tons of money.

And I never said they did any trickery. I said I don't take Evans run as legit. He is the only one I said that about. Not anyone else. How many times do I have to repeat myself shaffe?

And not for nothing, we all sat here way back when and most of us said the SS had nothing to lose and the GT should by all intents and purposes be faster than the SS after all that time and all the renovations to it. You were here when we all said that. I and others said that if the GT beats the SS then so what, it should...if it lost then that would be bad. So nobody is discrediting anything or saying that the GT isn't faster in testing by 1-2 tenths. That is a driver's race anyway. But when comparing the two cars the GT has to be optioned specifically and the SS is just any one out there. And that is how it is every time the Mustang manages a win. They needed an extra tier level with the PP2 to match the SLE and even that was just for a hero lap. They needed an extra re-do for the GT to match the SS. (Going off on a tangent here...)The GT350 can't match the ZL1, the GT350R can't either, despite the fact that as you claim those cars are built for the track, yet the excuse there is that it isn't the natural competitor for the ZL1. And now they have the GT500 coming out which has been 3 MYs that the ZL1 has been unchanged and it will need an overwhelming amount of HP against the 650 HP ZL1 and it still might not even beat the standard ZL1 around a track. So every time a Mustang wins at anything it requires some sort of advantage or something extra that not all GTs come with or it has to be optioned a certain way or it needs way more HP and even when all the cards are stacked in their favor at best they can only manage a driver's race or not win at all. Rant over.

We are just going to have to agree to disagree

Yes the ZL1 out did Ford's track car. Bravo GM well done. Seriously they built an awesome car.

yes GT needs to be optioned to be drivers race with SS.

The original post about speed shops that brought that back was this

Originally Posted by 13vertss

Why does it take companies that deal with Mustangs on prepped tracks the only ones that get these times?

To which I said it wouldn't be beneficial for a speed shop to go max effort hero run on a stock car. 13vertss was implying it was only speed shops that got good times with the Mustang. MT, C&D and cars.com then all validated those early times that shops like AM, Steeda, and others got that it wasn't some coincidence that only performance shops on rented tracks got good times.

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

Right...and they just so happen to sell shit for the GT also. How convenient. And it just so happens that nobody else can do it on 235s either. Figures. The funny thing is how gullible people become when someone who just so happens to sell products always have ghost results. Keep chasing.

This ^ here implies you are not taking the AM run as legit or there is something off about it.