[Martinjlm]

Originally Posted by RobbyBeefcake87

PP2s are rare indeed but man are they nice looking. I've only ever seen one in the wild and not on the showroom floor. They have that muscular-wide-wheels sticking out the fenders look to them that I'm partial to just like the 1le.

They do look really good. GT350 is my favorite look (until GT500 hits the street), then PP2. Even though I’m still more than a little bitter with Ford over how they have outfit the PP2. Shoulda given it coolers and all-season performance tires. Let the guys who want to track it buy their own track tires and let the guys who don’t want or need to track it NOT have to tire swap just to have a balanced vehicle with reasonable tire wear. One day I’ll let that anger go.

Unrelated but fun....I’ll have a GT350 overnight this week.

[hotlap]

Originally Posted by Martinjlm

The fastest SS in any trim can be found on any dealers lot on any day. The fastest GT trim has to be special ordered because most dealers don’t stock them and most Mustang buyers don’t buy them and probably don’t even know that they need the A10 and PP1 because it’s that deep a configuration. Mustang buyers who don’t live on forums will be fine with buying a GT off the dealers lot, then wonder why they can’t outrun their neighbor’s SS like newmoon says they can.

And heaven help them if they buy an M6 and plan to outrun an SS without modding it first. I found out in a thread on M6G that my SS convertible consistently outruns a Bullitt (Getrag M6) at the same track. I know, not the same day, same driver, but why would this even be close? The Bullitt is lighter and has 480 hp to my 455.

The fastest SS in any trim is also what you’ll be rolling up to at the light. 2016 on. All with summer only performance tires, heavy duty auxiliary engine cooling, transmission and differential coolers, Brembo brakes at all corners with cooling ducts.

Starting MSRP - $37,000 with a Tremec 6-speed. Rated and warrantied for strip or track use.

No need to buy a $60k trim to get a decent transmission, tires, cooling... A fantastic performance value ...then there are the SS 1LE, ZL1, ZL1 1LE.

Despite the S550’s sales lead since 2015, the GT is seriously outnumbered

[RobbyBeefcake87]

Originally Posted by Martinjlm

They do look really good. GT350 is my favorite look (until GT500 hits the street), then PP2. Even though I’m still more than a little bitter with Ford over how they have outfit the PP2. Shoulda given it coolers and all-season performance tires. Let the guys who want to track it buy their own track tires and let the guys who don’t want or need to track it NOT have to tire swap just to have a balanced vehicle with reasonable tire wear. One day I’ll let that anger go.

Unrelated but fun....I’ll have a GT350 overnight this week.

Gt350s are definitely good looking, in my opinion better than the new 500. It has an aggressive but not too edgy or try hard grill that flows beautifully and the side fender vents separate it from any other mustang from the side profile.

There's just something about that pp2 and 1le stance that I really like. The gt350 has wider fenders and looks cleaner but the pp2 with the standard GT fender width and the 305s squared just looks muscular. Like a factory supped up gt.

I agree about you on how ford outfitted them, makes no sense except for a few good lap times for magazines but it's still a badass and capable street car. Needs ps4s asap up on purchase though. I'm a car guy in general, prefer the 1le for it's superior performance and small block, but if I didn't have an SS 1le I'd have a GT pp2 so during my car shopping experience I had already forgiven the pp2 for what it was and wasn't lol.

[Idaho2018GTPremium]

Originally Posted by hotlap

The fastest SS in any trim is also what you’ll be rolling up to at the light. 2016 on. All with summer only performance tires, heavy duty auxiliary engine cooling, transmission and differential coolers, Brembo brakes at all corners with cooling ducts.

Regarding the "any SS is capable of max. acceleration performance" mantra, generally, I have not found that to be the case. I still can't find the actual test that C&D ran an M6 SS to 12.2 @ 118 mph that is referenced in the 2018 Mustang GT article. The best actual SS M6 test I can find is the C&D M6 long term tester that ran 12.3 @ 118 mph. I still think the 12.2 mentioned in the Mustang article is a typo, and they meant to type 12.3, incorrectly referencing the long term test car results. Even if the 12.2 M6 time is true, then the SS is simply not consistent enough to be considered a 12.2 sec car in both M6 and auto form, given all the other test results by major publications (see below).

The auto/manual SS are closer in performance than the GT A10 vs GT M6, but the SS A10/A8 is generally quicker in the 1/4 mile and traps higher speeds than the SS M6. That said, I googled and found 3 other 6th gen SS M6 tests from the major publications. I did not "pick and choose", as these were the first three I clicked on for these publications:

6th gen Camaro SS M6:
R&T: 12.5 @ 113.4 mph
MT: 12.4 @ 114.6 mph
MT (different test): 12.5 @ 114.8 mph

Compare those to the 2018 Mustang GT M6 tests:
C&D 12.6 @ 115 mph
MT: 12.6 @ 115.1 mph
I couldn't find R&T's published data for the 2018 Mustang GT M6.

Given that only one M6 SS cracked 115 mph in the published times (C&D test), the 118 mph SS seems to be an outlier and not necessarily indicative of what a Mustang GT M6 owner would pull up next to at a stop light. For comparison, I believe most of the auto SS tests have come in ~12.3 @ 116-118 mph (for the A8), and the A10 with the best test: 12.2 @ 118 mph per C&D. It is worth noting that MT also ran an A10 SS and only got 12.4 @ 115.8 mph. The SS seems to be less consistent than the GT in both auto and manual trims. Also, note that the A10 GT is consistent as both MT and C&D ran a 12.1 second 1/4 mile with the GT A10.

Other evidence the GT and SS M6 versions are closer than people think is the recent SS vs GT M6 convertible tests I referenced in an earlier post with identical 0-60 and 1/4 mile times, and the GT with a 0.7 mph advantage in the 1/4 mile.

The trap speeds are pretty indicative of what would happen in a roll race, and the GT M6 will likely fair fine given equal drivers and identical starts. Most likely, the result will depend on the given start speed - in other words, which power band does the race start at for each given car - which will likely define the winner in an M6 race, given equal drivers.

[gameovergt]

Originally Posted by Chadicus

I have never seen a PP2 either at a dealer or in the wild. I have seen one or two PP1 neither had the A10. Newmoon likes to make it sound like the GT* is every Mustang on the road.

I'll probably never see a 2020 GT500 where I live either.

You guys keep harping on the GT*. All it takes is a tune from VMP, Lund, PBD, etc to unlock the potential of the A10 GT & not the modes from Ford. A PP2 purchase is not necessary.

I was hoping to get into a ZL1 for a good price but unfortunately living in Jacksonville prices aren't dropping

I am contemplating trading the GT in for an SS. I was wanting the SS in 2016 when I got the Mustang but got such a good deal on it couldn't pass it up!

[whiteboyblues2001]

Originally Posted by Idaho2018GTPremium

Regarding the "any SS is capable of max. acceleration performance" mantra, generally, I have not found that to be the case. I still can't find the actual test that C&D ran an M6 SS to 12.2 @ 118 mph that is referenced in the 2018 Mustang GT article. The best actual SS M6 test I can find is the C&D M6 long term tester that ran 12.3 @ 118 mph. I still think the 12.2 mentioned in the Mustang article is a typo, and they meant to type 12.3, incorrectly referencing the long term test car results. Even if the 12.2 M6 time is true, then the SS is simply not consistent enough to be considered a 12.2 sec car in both M6 and auto form, given all the other test results by major publications (see below).

The auto/manual SS are closer in performance than the GT A10 vs GT M6, but the SS A10/A8 is generally quicker in the 1/4 mile and traps higher speeds than the SS M6. That said, I googled and found 3 other 6th gen SS M6 tests from the major publications. I did not "pick and choose", as these were the first three I clicked on for these publications:

6th gen Camaro SS M6:
R&T: 12.5 @ 113.4 mph
MT: 12.4 @ 114.6 mph
MT (different test): 12.5 @ 114.8 mph

Compare those to the 2018 Mustang GT M6 tests:
C&D 12.6 @ 115 mph
MT: 12.6 @ 115.1 mph
I couldn't find R&T's published data for the 2018 Mustang GT M6.

Given that only one M6 SS cracked 115 mph in the published times (C&D test), the 118 mph SS seems to be an outlier and not necessarily indicative of what a Mustang GT M6 owner would pull up next to at a stop light. For comparison, I believe most of the auto SS tests have come in ~12.3 @ 116-118 mph (for the A8), and the A10 with the best test: 12.2 @ 118 mph per C&D. It is worth noting that MT also ran an A10 SS and only got 12.4 @ 115.8 mph. The SS seems to be less consistent than the GT in both auto and manual trims. Also, note that the A10 GT is consistent as both MT and C&D ran a 12.1 second 1/4 mile with the GT A10.

Other evidence the GT and SS M6 versions are closer than people think is the recent SS vs GT M6 convertible tests I referenced in an earlier post with identical 0-60 and 1/4 mile times, and the GT with a 0.7 mph advantage in the 1/4 mile.

The trap speeds are pretty indicative of what would happen in a roll race, and the GT M6 will likely fair fine given equal drivers and identical starts. Most likely, the result will depend on the given start speed - in other words, which power band does the race start at for each given car - which will likely define the winner in an M6 race, given equal drivers.

All you just said can be summed up by this:

These cars are so similar in straight line performace that straight line perfomrance is NOT a differentiating feature of these cars. Anyone talking about which one is faster is splitting atoms at this point.You have to chose some other feature where they are actually different to see which one is better for you.

If you like the seating position and visibility of a honda accord, buy the mustang. If you want to handle better than an old school M3, buy the Camaro. Straight line, they are pretty much the same.

[GuywithL86]

Originally Posted by whiteboyblues2001

All you just said can be summed up by this:

These cars are so similar in straight line performace that straight line perfomrance is NOT a differentiating feature of these cars. Anyone talking about which one is faster is splitting atoms at this point.You have to chose some other feature where they are actually different to see which one is better for you.

If you like the seating position and visibility of a honda accord, buy the mustang. If you want to handle better than an old school M3, buy the Camaro. Straight line, they are pretty much the same.

They are nowhere close to the same feel in a straight line though

It’s kinda like a drag race between a supercharged big block on slicks vs a hayabusa. They each get to the end at the same time, but it feels totally different.

[lt4camaro]

Originally Posted by Idaho2018GTPremium

Regarding the "any SS is capable of max. acceleration performance" mantra, generally, I have not found that to be the case. I still can't find the actual test that C&D ran an M6 SS to 12.2 @ 118 mph that is referenced in the 2018 Mustang GT article. The best actual SS M6 test I can find is the C&D M6 long term tester that ran 12.3 @ 118 mph. I still think the 12.2 mentioned in the Mustang article is a typo, and they meant to type 12.3, incorrectly referencing the long term test car results. Even if the 12.2 M6 time is true, then the SS is simply not consistent enough to be considered a 12.2 sec car in both M6 and auto form, given all the other test results by major publications (see below).

The auto/manual SS are closer in performance than the GT A10 vs GT M6, but the SS A10/A8 is generally quicker in the 1/4 mile and traps higher speeds than the SS M6. That said, I googled and found 3 other 6th gen SS M6 tests from the major publications. I did not "pick and choose", as these were the first three I clicked on for these publications:

6th gen Camaro SS M6:
R&T: 12.5 @ 113.4 mph
MT: 12.4 @ 114.6 mph
MT (different test): 12.5 @ 114.8 mph

Compare those to the 2018 Mustang GT M6 tests:
C&D 12.6 @ 115 mph
MT: 12.6 @ 115.1 mph
I couldn't find R&T's published data for the 2018 Mustang GT M6.

Given that only one M6 SS cracked 115 mph in the published times (C&D test), the 118 mph SS seems to be an outlier and not necessarily indicative of what a Mustang GT M6 owner would pull up next to at a stop light. For comparison, I believe most of the auto SS tests have come in ~12.3 @ 116-118 mph (for the A8), and the A10 with the best test: 12.2 @ 118 mph per C&D. It is worth noting that MT also ran an A10 SS and only got 12.4 @ 115.8 mph. The SS seems to be less consistent than the GT in both auto and manual trims. Also, note that the A10 GT is consistent as both MT and C&D ran a 12.1 second 1/4 mile with the GT A10.

Other evidence the GT and SS M6 versions are closer than people think is the recent SS vs GT M6 convertible tests I referenced in an earlier post with identical 0-60 and 1/4 mile times, and the GT with a 0.7 mph advantage in the 1/4 mile.

The trap speeds are pretty indicative of what would happen in a roll race, and the GT M6 will likely fair fine given equal drivers and identical starts. Most likely, the result will depend on the given start speed - in other words, which power band does the race start at for each given car - which will likely define the winner in an M6 race, given equal drivers.

I follow the performance of these two cars also, simple bottom line from what I can gather is the manual SS will ET a tenth or two better than the manual GT and the A10 or A8 SS is 2 or 3 tenths slower than the A10 Gt mustang all based on 1/4 mile timed passes.

[RobbyBeefcake87]

Originally Posted by Idaho2018GTPremium

Regarding the "any SS is capable of max. acceleration performance" mantra, generally, I have not found that to be the case. I still can't find the actual test that C&D ran an M6 SS to 12.2 @ 118 mph that is referenced in the 2018 Mustang GT article. The best actual SS M6 test I can find is the C&D M6 long term tester that ran 12.3 @ 118 mph. I still think the 12.2 mentioned in the Mustang article is a typo, and they meant to type 12.3, incorrectly referencing the long term test car results. Even if the 12.2 M6 time is true, then the SS is simply not consistent enough to be considered a 12.2 sec car in both M6 and auto form, given all the other test results by major publications (see below).

The auto/manual SS are closer in performance than the GT A10 vs GT M6, but the SS A10/A8 is generally quicker in the 1/4 mile and traps higher speeds than the SS M6. That said, I googled and found 3 other 6th gen SS M6 tests from the major publications. I did not "pick and choose", as these were the first three I clicked on for these publications:

6th gen Camaro SS M6:
R&T: 12.5 @ 113.4 mph
MT: 12.4 @ 114.6 mph
MT (different test): 12.5 @ 114.8 mph

Compare those to the 2018 Mustang GT M6 tests:
C&D 12.6 @ 115 mph
MT: 12.6 @ 115.1 mph
I couldn't find R&T's published data for the 2018 Mustang GT M6.

Given that only one M6 SS cracked 115 mph in the published times (C&D test), the 118 mph SS seems to be an outlier and not necessarily indicative of what a Mustang GT M6 owner would pull up next to at a stop light. For comparison, I believe most of the auto SS tests have come in ~12.3 @ 116-118 mph (for the A8), and the A10 with the best test: 12.2 @ 118 mph per C&D. It is worth noting that MT also ran an A10 SS and only got 12.4 @ 115.8 mph. The SS seems to be less consistent than the GT in both auto and manual trims. Also, note that the A10 GT is consistent as both MT and C&D ran a 12.1 second 1/4 mile with the GT A10.

Other evidence the GT and SS M6 versions are closer than people think is the recent SS vs GT M6 convertible tests I referenced in an earlier post with identical 0-60 and 1/4 mile times, and the GT with a 0.7 mph advantage in the 1/4 mile.

The trap speeds are pretty indicative of what would happen in a roll race, and the GT M6 will likely fair fine given equal drivers and identical starts. Most likely, the result will depend on the given start speed - in other words, which power band does the race start at for each given car - which will likely define the winner in an M6 race, given equal drivers.

You do this quite a bit man, you pick and chose certain magazine times and ignore others that fit your narrative.

You're citing a 12.5 for road and track when road and track recently had an SS 1le that ran 12.3 at 115.9 in the article vs the m2c. Car and driver had the long term car run 12.3 x2 (brand new and at 40k miles) at 118 and they recently had another SS 1le run 12.3 at 116 in the article vs the pp2. They also claim that 12.2 which might be a typo or it might not. That's a lot of 12.3s. All m6 cars.

You also cite a motor trend 12.4 and 12.5, you call the fastest 118mph an outlier but dont call the slowest 12.5 a possible outliar. Still the worst ss time is 12.5 still better than any m6 gt.

For some reason, on the a10 mustang you don't make mention of the Edmund test of 12.6, tie with an m6 camaro ss. Slow for both but same day same times.

I also didn't see road and track times for the 2018+ m6 GT's either, only the abysmal 13.2 for the 15-17 pp1(which it is definitely capable of more than that imo) but you are ignoring the other two m6 pp2 tests that also got 12.6 but at 113 and 114 (motortrend and CaD) respectively.

The mustang does seem to be a consistent 12.6 car, the camaro varies more but it's also a harder car to launch without an adjustable launch control m, as anyone with an m6 ss knows as well as there being a lot more m6 tests to consider which would naturally add more variables and discrepancies. The GT also varies from 113 to 116 so has no trap speed advantage, if anything irs a trap speed disadvantage as I haven't seen any publications have an SS trap 113. Regardless even the slowest m6 ss's are faster than GT m6s and usually by a good margin.

In a roll race the ss usually gets the jump on the hit and keeps it even if it doesn't gain any more afterwards, probably due to the torque. Obviously there's no published data on this but there is tons of anecdotal evidence. As well as the ss having the advantage in 0-60, 0-100, 1/4, and 5-60 rolls in instrumented tests. After 140 the mustang does have the advantage for a while as previously stated but if anyone is racing past 140 the mustang will eventually hit it's speed limiter and get passed by the ss on its way to 175/180.

The fun part is that manual races are all drivers races to some degree so really either car could win in the real world... but the ss driver should have an easier time.

[RobbyBeefcake87]

Originally Posted by GuywithL86

They are nowhere close to the same feel in a straight line though

It’s kinda like a drag race between a supercharged big block on slicks vs a hayabusa. They each get to the end at the same time, but it feels totally different.

This is true, when I drove my cousins pp1 it felt very different. The initial hit wasn't as hard as my ss but it just felt like it kept building and pulling harder amd harder, where as the ss had a hard initial hit and pulled pretty hard across the board but didn't feel like it kept pulling harder like the 5.0. The mustang felt faster.

I was worried when we raced that all the data I had about my car being faster maybe wouldn't matter, but feel is different than actual metrics. When we raced I whooped his ass every run, we did about 10 digs and rolls. We never went past 130, all 40 to 130 besides the dig races. I do understand why some people say the mustang feels faster sometimes, it does lol.

These were both m6 cars btw, pp1 vs 1le.

[RobbyBeefcake87]

Originally Posted by gameovergt

You guys keep harping on the GT*. All it takes is a tune from VMP, Lund, PBD, etc to unlock the potential of the A10 GT & not the modes from Ford. A PP2 purchase is not necessary.

I was hoping to get into a ZL1 for a good price but unfortunately living in Jacksonville prices aren't dropping

I am contemplating trading the GT in for an SS. I was wanting the SS in 2016 when I got the Mustang but got such a good deal on it couldn't pass it up!

We're talking about stock cars man. Tune or no tune, with stock parts a pp1/3.55 a10 GT is definitely a little faster than a non pp1 or 3.55 a10 GT. A tune would probably eliminate the advantage a car with drag mode has vs one without but it wouldn't negate the gearing advantage of a pp1 a10 or a10 with 3.55s.

A pp2 wouldn't even be in the convo of a gt* or GT pp1* since it's m6 only and people are referring to an a10 with 3.55 gears when talking about the gt*

[RobbyBeefcake87]

Originally Posted by lt4camaro

I follow the performance of these two cars also, simple bottom line from what I can gather is the manual SS will ET a tenth or two better than the manual GT and the A10 or A8 SS is 2 or 3 tenths slower than the A10 Gt mustang all based on 1/4 mile timed passes.

So now we only pick the slowest ss times to compare to the best GT times?

There's at least 4 manual ss tests that show 12.3, along with 12.4 and 12.5, vs the four manual GT tests that show 12.6.

The best a10 GT is only 1 tenth faster than the best a10 ss, 12.1 vs 12.2, with some 12.3s for the a8. That slow 12.4 a10 ss review is still faster then the slow 12.6 a10 GT time.

[shaffe]

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

Moving on from the troll comment...

I wonder if the GT500 will actually do a 10 sec when it is tested. Mustangs are not exactly known for getting the power to the ground effectively when stock. And I'm sure Ford chose to go the cheap route somewhere which will probably be the axles. The HP and TQ will probably overwhelm the tires and suspension when trying to launch and it'll either end up in a wall or oncoming traffic or a crowd of people or off a cliff. It will have a high MPH but probably an 11.2 or 11.2. I'm betting the C8 and ZL1 will be on it's heels due to being a much better balanced and better controlled platform. I just don't have much faith that the GT500 will be good at launching.

That will be interesting to see where it actually tests out when it gets in the hands of the major mags. They were able to get the 13/14 GT500s to hook up with the M6 and ran it to like 11.6s

I do not think Ford cheaped out on the GT500 though. I honestly think that is why it's so expensive. Normally Ford would cheap out somewhere, cooling, brakes, tires, somewhere in there where that kind of stuff would have to be had in a optional package. They didn't this time around. All that stuff is there in the base model and I think that's one of the reasons it's so expensive.

[Idaho2018GTPremium]

Originally Posted by RobbyBeefcake87

You do this quite a bit man, you pick and chose certain magazine times and ignore others that fit your narrative.

You're citing a 12.5 for road and track when road and track recently had an SS 1le that ran 12.3 at 115.9 in the article vs the m2c. Car and driver had the long term car run 12.3 x2 (brand new and at 40k miles) at 118 and they recently had another SS 1le run 12.3 at 116 in the article vs the pp2. They also claim that 12.2 which might be a typo or it might not. That's a lot of 12.3s. All m6 cars.

You also cite a motor trend 12.4 and 12.5, you call the fastest 118mph an outlier but dont call the slowest 12.5 a possible outliar. Still the worst ss time is 12.5 still better than any m6 gt.

For some reason, on the a10 mustang you don't make mention of the Edmund test of 12.6, tie with an m6 camaro ss. Slow for both but same day same times.

I also didn't see road and track times for the 2018+ m6 GT's either, only the abysmal 13.2 for the 15-17 pp1(which it is definitely capable of more than that imo) but you are ignoring the other two m6 pp2 tests that also got 12.6 but at 113 and 114 (motortrend and CaD) respectively.

The mustang does seem to be a consistent 12.6 car, the camaro varies more but it's also a harder car to launch without an adjustable launch control m, as anyone with an m6 ss knows as well as there being a lot more m6 tests to consider which would naturally add more variables and discrepancies. The GT also varies from 113 to 116 so has no trap speed advantage, if anything irs a trap speed disadvantage as I haven't seen any publications have an SS trap 113. Regardless even the slowest m6 ss's are faster than GT m6s and usually by a good margin.

In a roll race the ss usually gets the jump on the hit and keeps it even if it doesn't gain any more afterwards, probably due to the torque. Obviously there's no published data on this but there is tons of anecdotal evidence. As well as the ss having the advantage in 0-60, 0-100, 1/4, and 5-60 rolls in instrumented tests. After 140 the mustang does have the advantage for a while as previously stated but if anyone is racing past 140 the mustang will eventually hit it's speed limiter and get passed by the ss on its way to 175/180.

The fun part is that manual races are all drivers races to some degree so really either car could win in the real world... but the ss driver should have an easier time.

I was quoting the SS times, not the 1LE trim. Yes, there have been a couple of 1LEs run 12.3s. Very good times, no doubt helped by the additional traction from the stickier tires.

One M6 SS (again, non 1LE) has tested 12.3 twice, at 118 mph. I still consider that an outlier since it is the only car to have done that. 12.5 is not an outlier because two different magazines achieved that time. The 118 mph is an outlier because all of the other SS tests (again, non 1LE) have been under 115 mph. That sort of drives home my point that not every SS is a 118 mph car capable of 12.2 sec. max. performance, regardless of trans. Heck, even the A10 SS was two tenths short of 116 mph (115.8 mph) in MT's test. If you get an A10 SS, you might be driving a 12.2 sec. car, or a 12.4 sec. car. If you drive off a lot in a GT*, you're getting a 12.1 sec. car. Similar with the M6...if you drive off with an M6 SS, you might be in a 12.3 sec. car, or a 12.5 sec car. With the M6 GT, you're getting a 12.6 car that will likely trap better mph than your neighbor's M6 SS (unless you get the "juiced" M6 SS which trapped 118 mph).

I'm not going to quote the 12.6 for the A10 GT from Edmunds test because that is obviously not correct, when two major publications both got 12.1 seconds.

My point was that the M6 SS generally does not perform as well as the auto based on the times quoted contrary to what most claim on this site, unless you want to count the 12.4 MT test and not the 12.2 from C&D, then sure, the M6 is about equal to the A10 SS.

I definitely agree the M6 SS and A8/A10 SS are closer in performance than the M6 GT and A10 GT. It's pretty clear the A10 GT is consistently 0.5 seconds faster than the M6. As I've stated before, I think Ford messed up the gearing ratios for 1-4 in the M6, as they are more widely spaced than the SS gears, and in a DOHC config wider gearing is not optimal.