New Motor Trend article: Getting to Know Our 2016 Car of the Year (Camaro SS) - Page 2

SuperSound · 07-13-2016, 04:38 PM

Everyone missed the fact this is the first MRC car on the skidpad and it turned a better time than the prior review of a '16 SS. Looks like MRC has measurable performance increases over the standard suspension.

Bobfly · 07-18-2016, 02:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fraxum

Not really lame for a M6. This is just about the best you can get in bad air or with only a little seat time. Try it.

I've run mine at the track twice. 5 runs each time and my best time was a 12.82 @110 mph. I'm not a pro but I'm not without skills either. I learned to drive a stick about 48 years ago. Granted it was hot and humid but I expected a much better time and speeds near 115. Some cars just won't run...

GreaseMonkey83 · 07-18-2016, 03:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bobfly

I've run mine at the track twice. 5 runs each time and my best time was a 12.82 @110 mph. I'm not a pro but I'm not without skills either. I learned to drive a stick about 48 years ago. Granted it was hot and humid but I expected a much better time and speeds near 115. Some cars just won't run...

Do you know the date and an approximate time that you ran your car? You can go to dragtimes.com and find out what the DA was at the time you made your pass. That can have a huge affect on times. I recently went 12.46@114 in my stock '16 2SS M6 on a day where the DA was at a horrible 3350ft!! At first i was upset but after checking the corrected time (11.95@119) i was pleased with my run. It would be nice to know the day/time/place of these magazine runs as well.

AZCamaroFan · 07-18-2016, 03:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SuperSound

Everyone missed the fact this is the first MRC car on the skidpad and it turned a better time than the prior review of a '16 SS. Looks like MRC has measurable performance increases over the standard suspension.

No the blue 2SS they tested vs. a BMW a couple months ago had MRC. they said they prefered the standard suspension in that article.

SuperSound · 07-18-2016, 03:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AZCamaroFan

No the blue 2SS they tested vs. a BMW a couple months ago had MRC. they said they prefered the standard suspension in that article.

Just went back and reread that. What's odd they said the both had the same times on the figure 8 in that H2H but in this review the MRC car posted a better one. Think optimistically there is very little performance difference between the two on the track.

AZCamaroFan · 07-18-2016, 03:56 PM

i've always thought of them more to benefit ride than handling.

SuperSound · 07-18-2016, 04:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AZCamaroFan

i've always thought of them more to benefit ride than handling.

Agreed, but with the dampening being stiffer and reacting faster than the standard dampers, there would be some tangible benefits. Just wondering if different test times/environment conditions are the cause here, or if it was a different lot they used altogether (one bumpy vs. smooth).

C6J · 07-18-2016, 04:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GreaseMonkey83

Do you know the date and an approximate time that you ran your car? You can go to dragtimes.com and find out what the DA was at the time you made your pass. That can have a huge affect on times. I recently went 12.46@114 in my stock '16 2SS M6 on a day where the DA was at a horrible 3350ft!! At first i was upset but after checking the corrected time (11.95@119) i was pleased with my run. It would be nice to know the day/time/place of these magazine runs as well.

My car is loaded like yours except auto. Ran a 12.2 @114 with 1100km on the car. Location where these car run would be good to know.

SS 1LE · 07-18-2016, 06:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bobfly

I've run mine at the track twice. 5 runs each time and my best time was a 12.82 @110 mph. I'm not a pro but I'm not without skills either. I learned to drive a stick about 48 years ago. Granted it was hot and humid but I expected a much better time and speeds near 115. Some cars just won't run...

Nothing to do with the cars, build tolerances on SAE engines is very tight.

It comes down to three things really on equal cars...

1- Driver skill
2- Track prep
3- DA

prod · 07-18-2016, 07:41 PM

I see nothing wrong with a second test and reporting the honest numbers, people know the variables and that time difference really isnt much...

jonny5cam · 07-19-2016, 08:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aestil

If you guys had read the article they commented that they assume because it was a fresh engine it's running a little slower. They said they plan on going back and doing the measurements again once the engine had loosened up.

Do you guys not read the words and only look at the numbers? The whole article reads almost like a love letter with the only complaints being that the seat belt can be hard to find and that they don't like the 1->4 skip shift feature [which I think every dislikes].

Yeah, LS engines really start to wake up after about 5k to 10k miles.

SS 1LE · 07-19-2016, 09:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jonny5cam

Yeah, LS engines really start to wake up after about 5k to 10k miles.

The new Camaro SS doesn't have an LS engine though.

AZCamaroFan · 07-19-2016, 11:47 AM

they had the manual SS at 12.4 in the quarter in the first two tests they did of it last year including car of the year.

ForgedReality · 07-19-2016, 03:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SS 1LE

The new Camaro SS doesn't have an LS engine though.

Maybe it SHOULD. Isn't the LT1 an iron block instead of aluminum like actually fast engines?

07-13-2016, 04:38 PM	#15
SuperSound Drives: '17 Camaro 2SS A8 Join Date: Jan 2015 Location: Eastern NC Posts: 5,063 View My Garage	Everyone missed the fact this is the first MRC car on the skidpad and it turned a better time than the prior review of a '16 SS. Looks like MRC has measurable performance increases over the standard suspension. __________________ Current: '17 2SS Hyper Blue, A8, MRC, NPP Past: '99 SS Camaro A4, '73 Camaro 383 A3 "Voices in your head are not considered insider information." 3800 Status - 6/16/16 (Built!) 6000 status - 6/29/16 (Delivered!)

07-18-2016, 03:56 PM	#20
AZCamaroFan Camaro6 2016-2018 Drives: sometimes Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Phoenix Posts: 18,468	i've always thought of them more to benefit ride than handling.

07-18-2016, 07:41 PM	#24
prod Drives: HHR Join Date: Dec 2015 Location: GTA ON CA Posts: 452	I see nothing wrong with a second test and reporting the honest numbers, people know the variables and that time difference really isnt much...

07-19-2016, 11:47 AM	#27
AZCamaroFan Camaro6 2016-2018 Drives: sometimes Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Phoenix Posts: 18,468	they had the manual SS at 12.4 in the quarter in the first two tests they did of it last year including car of the year.

User Name		Remember Me?
Password