[minn19]

Originally Posted by newmoon

The great thing about all of this is that it was so predictable. When the arguements went the other way and the ZL1 had the hp advantage it wasn't a problem, but now it is. Now with roll cages installed we see the same ok for Chevy, wrong for anyone else.

Did Chevy or members here claim that they only tested cars the way the were delivered to customers?

I’ll take the 600 plus HP/TQ NA V8 version MT at first claimed was sent to them by GM. Also with it already setup in track alignment configuration thank you.

I was building a GT500 and I didn’t see the factory roll bar option?

Kidding aside this is one test/track that favors high HP cars where FYI the R got obliterated by the ZL1 1LE. Then they went to tighter more regular tracks and that huge gap shrunk quite a bit. We will see the same thing in tests between the C8 and GT500 at other tracks.

These are all meaningless in the real world, but fun to banter about.

[TreedYou]

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

I'm gonna call you out and say that nobody here made that argument.

Cool made up story bro.

Ok. When has the ZL1 in testing varied by almost a full second? When has any Camaro or Corvette varied by that much?

The 18 GT when it first came out was a mid 12. Then someone got 11.9 while others could not break into the 11s even with DRs and some damn good quality air. So it varied from 11.9 to 12.6. The GT500 was a 10.6 but then they couldn't get better than 11.3 and 11.5. Mustangs are extremely dependent. More so than any other car that I know of.

And for the record, you guys are the ones who keep making statements about how it ran X only because of the track and how it was hot in LV when they ran it and it'll do much better with blah blah blah. I'm saying exactly what you guys have been saying since that car all this time.

I still can't believe how you are arguing that DA is not a universal thing and affects every car.
That is a fact, not an opinion. EVERY ENGINE on the planet has less power in positive DA, you're literally arguing against air molecules.
You sit there and confidently say that density altitude is a ford problem.. I can't find a face palm emoji big enough for this...

You're clearly not a drag racer, which is fine but don't talk like you are.

[Chadicus]

Originally Posted by TreedYou

I still can't believe how you are arguing that DA is not a universal thing and affects every car.
That is a fact, not an opinion. EVERY ENGINE on the planet has less power in positive DA, you're literally arguing against air molecules.
You sit there and confidently say that density altitude is a ford problem.. I can't find a face palm emoji big enough for this...

You're clearly not a drag racer, which is fine but don't talk like you are.

Part of the issue here is that a few periodic publications have tested the GT without standardized atmospheric value adjustments and the times have varied greatly. Cars.com got an 11.9 out of a GT* Mustang. The same GT* then lost a drag race to a Kia on an unprepped surface.

These publications that do not bother standardizing their tests have not tested a Camaro as far as I know.

[minn19]

Originally Posted by TreedYou

I still can't believe how you are arguing that DA is not a universal thing and affects every car.
That is a fact, not an opinion. EVERY ENGINE on the planet has less power in positive DA, you're literally arguing against air molecules.
You sit there and confidently say that density altitude is a ford problem.. I can't find a face palm emoji big enough for this...

You're clearly not a drag racer, which is fine but don't talk like you are.

I’m not getting in the middle of this, but the only thing I can think of this isn’t true when it is FI vs NA. I can’t remember the discussion, but I remember on the M3/4 forums that the S55 ECU would up boost (and other thing IIRC) in lower density environments (high altitudes etc) to maintain rated power. Assuming the car had the right octane gas to do this. I’m not sure if the Pred or LT4/does similar things or not. Regardless I’m guessing most any NA is going to be destroyed by FI cars on a drag strip anyway.

Carry on.

[Chadicus]

Originally Posted by minn19

I’m not getting in the middle of this, but the only thing I can think of this isn’t true when it is FI vs NA. I can’t remember the discussion, but I remember on the M3/4 forums that the S55 ECU would up boost (and other thing IIRC) in lower density environments (high altitudes etc) to maintain rated power. Assuming the car had the right octane gas to do this. I’m not sure if the Pred or LT4/does similar things or not. Regardless I’m guessing most any NA is going to be destroyed by FI cars on a drag strip anyway.

Carry on.

Only other thing I will add to the dragstrip discussion is this: The Mustang of all kinds seems to be very dependent on track prep to put power down effectively. Track prep matters to my Camaro of course but not as much as it did my Mustang.

[BlaqWhole]

Originally Posted by TreedYou

I still can't believe how you are arguing that DA is not a universal thing and affects every car.
That is a fact, not an opinion. EVERY ENGINE on the planet has less power in positive DA, you're literally arguing against air molecules.
You sit there and confidently say that density altitude is a ford problem.. I can't find a face palm emoji big enough for this...

You're clearly not a drag racer, which is fine but don't talk like you are.

You know exactly what I mean. We discussed this before. You are not that forgetful. I fully explained what I meant back then. You played like you had no idea what I was talking about. Then 3 or 4 others chimed in and explained it to you again. So now you're just resorting to trolling and I'm not going to explain it all again.

[BlaqWhole]

From back when we were discussing this.

Originally Posted by lt4camaro

Absolutely going to be the case. And the base C8 will be beating it to 60 mph and 100 mph with ease and consistency on the street and on average prepped tracks in average DA conditions. Even better the C8 very consistently will be running 11.2 and 11.1 in the 1/4 right there with the mighty GT500 that is also dynoing closer to 780 horses.

Originally Posted by lt4camaro

The GT500 will be a 10.6 car but only in extremely favorable conditions, not on the street , in average DA on less than perfectly prepped tracks or in other words the real world. The GT500 also is underrated by two different dyno tests so far making that car 130 horses stronger than the ZL1. Ford had to go way overboard and spend so many years building the GT500 to out 1/4 mile mile the OLD ZL1. Lets see what it does against the Old ZL1 1LE A10 on the well known road course tracks for a closer comparo. Oh yeah, Ford doesnt chase track times

Originally Posted by shaffe

I think Blaq fairly hit the nail on the head here. What we have seen in somewhat limited data is a wide range of times.

We have two passes in the 10.6 range at drag strips in lets say above average conditions

Ford Claims 10.7 on strip in ideal conditions

We have the times from the Press event where people had 1-3 passes in cars that were being hotlapped with times ranging from 10.80s to 11.4s on a drag strip

Then we have the first mag test on unprepped surface at 11.4

So to me, that tells me the GT500 will put the power down fine on the track. I don't think 10.6s will be the norm but I think at the track we will see more than a handful of 10 second passes. But on the street, like many other high powered RWD cars doesn't put it down as effectively. What we have seen is that it puts down better than the RE and Hellcat based on C&D times only, and that out in the wild the ZL1 has as good of a fighting chance as possible as does the C8.

The C8 we see, puts the power down insanely well no doubt thanks to the ME layout and the DCT and weighing 700 pounds less. Lets not forget that part when we praise the C8 lol.

So basically in short GT500 should be just fine at strip, its on the street where it will struggle.

Now lets get to see some lap times!



You mean to say theres a difference between strip and street! /end sarcasm lol

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

I'm talking more about control and balance. The GT500 is fast no doubt. But it is not as balanced as the Corvette and Camaro. Not even close. It requires many different conditions to be met to run it's claimed "10.6" or "10.7". Remove one variable and those times fluctuate heavily. So what about locations where track prep is not possible? Or where DA will never be as good as it is in late year Northeast? That "10.7" becomes mid 11s. Or slower. And it will struggle and lose against cars with better control and balance.


Not necessarily. Traction (AWD) and less weight can do the trick. There are lots of mid 10 sec GTRs and Bimmers out there with very little mods.

Originally Posted by NW-99SS

Unprepped shows how much better the Corvette ZR1 puts power down than the GT500.

Mustang struggles to run low 11's, Corvette runs 10's while putting less HP down on the dyno.

Originally Posted by NW-99SS

ZR1 is a C7 - Front engine. Still runs faster with less power on an unprepped surface. Weight is the obvious advantage here for the Vette.

Originally Posted by shaffe

The ZR-1 does put the power down incredibly well, as seen in the 0-60 times. Almost every review says the launch control and traction management works wonders. But lets not forget when we look at the whole picture the ZR-1 is also 600 pounds lighter than the GT500

[BlaqWhole]

More content...

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

The ZL1 is just a much better balanced car. It gets that 650 HP to the pavement more efficiently than the GT500 can get it's 760 HP under control. GM went the route of conservative HP but they put it in a package that can utilize it to the point where it can battle cars with much more HP. And the price you pay for that performance is still much better than anything that the competition can offer. That is why we have SLEs that can bang heads with Shelbys and ZL1s squaring off against cars with well over 100 more HP in the quarter mile. And even when the competition is faster it ain't by much despite the huge gap in price and HP.

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

I think the main thing with the GT500 is if the chassis can live up to the expectations. The car has the power and the braking. And the trans. But were they actually able to build everything else to support all that? That will be the deciding factor. Ford is ahead based on a numbers game. But we know it comes down to much more than that.

To me GM built a very solid and capable chassis. Then they gave it a decent engine and a really good trans. And it was built with enough balance that nothing overpowers anything. If anything, I think the chassis might be too much for the LT4's power. Like, this car might have been under powered...which isn't a comment against the LT4, that is just how good the chassis actually is. With Ford tho, it seems that the S550 chassis is limited and always has been. Even with the GTs that chassis never felt solid enough for the HP. I thought my 15 GT was similar to my 5th Gen SS when I had both. And the GTs I test drove back then, it felt like all Ford ever did was throw Frankenstein parts at it like 3.73s in the rear...meanwhile the car couldn't grip. I drove one out the dealership parking lot and all it wanted to do was spin the wheels. I think the GT500's limitations in this regard will be evident. I do think they stepped it up and it is better as compared to the 15s. Maybe the GT350s are a bit better now. But I don't see the GT500 being able to control itself well enough to keep up with the ZLE around a track.

Originally Posted by whiteboyblues2001

I say it's both a 10.6 and 11.4 car. All data points are important, but you have to know the context. 11.4 on an unprepped surface and stock everything including tire pressures, the 10.6 is on a prepped surface with non-stock tire pressures set for the conditions. To me, the more data the better, but I have to know the whole context of those numbers to make them informative. And yes, high HP cars are hard to get to hook up, that's obvious.

BUT, there is a difference between the car being hard for PEOPLE to get it to hook up because of high power, and the CAR's ability to put power down to the ground regardless of the driver. The GT500 has a pretty fancy traction management system, and it will really make it easier for the driver to get the car to hook up as optimally as possible. But, that doesn't necessarily mean it will put the power down well.

To me, the fact that the ZL1 has the same 1/4 mile time as the GT500 on an unprepped surface, tested under the same standards and methodologies, and corrected for the environment by the magazine, means the ZL1 puts the power down a bit more efficiently (at least from a launch). This usually means that the ZL1 will put the power down coming out of a turn better as well, but not always. We will still have to see the results of a road course to be sure...

This is most likely because the GT500 has a mechanical limited-slip differential (Torsen), but the ZL1 has an eDiff (electronic torque vectoring differential). So, I predict that the ZL1 will put the power down coming out of a turn better than the GT500. This is where the eDiff really makes a difference. But again, let's wait for the testing.

Not sure why Ford didn't go with some type of torque vectoring diff on this car, they had enough time, and it really helps on the road course (as well as the 1/4 mile strip). But, it certainly not that big of a deal either, a Torsen is great for a mechanical diff.

[BlaqWhole]

Interesting!! C8 Ring time of 7:28.30!!

https://www.thedrive.com/news/31572/...s-728-3-report

[13vertss]

Originally Posted by newmoon

So are we now discounting every run made with a roll cage installed, that would include every prized Ring run layed down bu the Camaro and Vette correct? I remember the arguements in here that it was strictly for driver safety and offered no additional performance, in fact the added weight hurt it. I just want to make sure you are being clear and consistent with the criticism.

The point being made about cages, is if Ford had them installed for the track test, you really think they didn't have the car setup for the track? Also, where are you guys getting all this extra weight. The bars according to Tomster on M6g said they only weigh 42lbs and Ford bought 10 to install in the GT500. Then you take out the back seat in the base and would be about even.

[wnta1ss]

Originally Posted by 13vertss

The point being made about cages, is if Ford had them installed for the track test, you really think they didn't have the car setup for the track? Also, where are you guys getting all this extra weight. The bars according to Tomster on M6g said they only weigh 42lbs and Ford bought 10 to install in the GT500. Then you take out the back seat in the base and would be about even.

BINGO. Only a moron believes that Ford did not mod their cars for that 'test'.

[JB'sZL1]

Right. If they took the time and expense to install a custom roll cage, and remove the rear seats, what else did they modify (so that time is unattainable by all except those that perform the same mods)?

And to fail to reveal it is deceptive.

[BlaqWhole]

So when the C8 Z06 shows up, let's say they test it against the GT350R. We know what will happen. Will the crowd here beat their chests like the M6G guys are probably doing? LOL! Or is it just that they are eager for a win so they'll take anything? How anyone can be satisfied with this sort of win is beyond me. But the Mustang guys have been losing horribly for years now. So winning against anything is a win. They'd probably hoot and holler if the GT500 raced and won against the SS.

[TheRealJA105]

Originally Posted by newmoon

I can spin it like this had the Mustang gotten this unusual advantage as stated by MT this forum would be loosing its mind. Funny thing even with this advantage it still lost in the category it was designed to excel in to a 4 seat 4100 lb Mustang. Add in the disappointment with Ring times and the C8s shine is quickly fading.

Originally Posted by Martinjlm

I was with you until the part in bold. Anyone who follows Corvettes or who likes track driving knows that the Stingray is not designed to excel on track. It’s designed to excel on the street and be competent on the track. 2.8s 0 - 60 and 11.1 1/4 mile pretty much say mission accomplished. Track beasts come next.

Originally Posted by hotlap

Funny. They chose the Full VIR with a 4000' back straight, and a 3000' front straight as the venue. How unusual. Advantage GT500 (+265 HP).

How do you think a ZL1 vs GT350R match would go on that track?

Originally Posted by ST1LE

Nobody cares about the roll cage, or thinks it helped. It was mentioned to point out your painful hypocrisy in your defense of MT and what a great job they do testing cars the way the consumer buys them.

Originally Posted by RobbyBeefcake87

What unusual advantage? The roll cage prepped gt500s? Or the extra 250 hp? You are a fanboy, so you're one of the delusional people we talk about when talking about fanboys who can't see how VIR Full favored a high hp car. Even Ford guys, and Ford tuners who aren't fanboys concede to that.

Btw No one cares or brought up the roll cage till the ford shills started talking about the "unfair" track spec alignment that the car is designed to accept.

It's shine is only fading to the gt500 fanboys who can't comprehend that a 760hp car beat a 495 hp by a second and hope for the c8 hype to die down.

The gt500 lost the thing it was designed to do, acceleration.

Originally Posted by RobbyBeefcake87

You really don't get it, people only bring up the cage because you fanboys bring up the track alignment like it's something unfair.

The zl1 1le ring time was also done by Chevy not MT. Lots of ring prepped cars have roll cages. Look some up.

So much went on here last night that I agree with. Newmoon is such a blind fanboi, but we all know that.

Originally Posted by RobbyBeefcake87

Agreed. Engine is in the back, I honestly don't think the c8 z51 beats a c7 GS at most tracks.

Only because tires...