[minn19]

Originally Posted by TreedYou

I think it makes universal sense for internet arguments, but I see nobody has brought it up.

And like I said I don't frequent there.

Why not, you should, I'd love to see you drop that nugget on them................

By the way, Millhouse and Boss 2013 on M6G are asking people here to say stuff to you @BlaqWhole (and others), but apparently people are to afraid to sign up and do it themselves.

[shaffe]

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

No I'm not talking about driver error. If you wanna seriously discuss this then I will oblige. I'll repeat what I said before.

The GT500 is affected by conditions more so than the ZL1. It isn't about defying physics. We have already seen it. Ford claims 10.7 on a prepped track in optimal conditions. Usually when a Mustang runs we hear "oh well if the DA was better" or "well in cooler late year temps" and similar comments all alluding to the fact that if it is run in better conditions then it will do much better. And it has done that. Remove those conditions and it is an 11.3-11.5 sec car as we have seen. The ZL1 regardless of conditions (not conditions like rain in case someone wants to be a smartass) has maintained mid 11s in testing. In those runs we often are not told what the DA or temps were. And it is not often on a prepped track from what I understand although I could be wrong on that point. In any case we have typically seen it run 11.3 to 11.6 with even the M6 equipped versions running 11.6-11.8 I believe. So we are seeing around a 7-9 tenths difference with the GT500. Some are even saying the 500 could run 10.4s bone stock which would be a 1.1 sec difference all based on conditions. With the ZL1 we are seeing more of a 2-4 tenths difference. The testing we are discussing now showed 11.3 (GT500) and 11.6 (ZL1). Now if you were to put both cars on a prepped track and run them in optimal conditions then apparently you could shave almost a full second off the 500 based on claims of 10.4 to 10.6. With the ZL1 it might be more around 3-4 tenths.

Now this is open to debate. But when a pro runs a 10.6 and then a kid who claims to have never driven on a track before runs 10.6 both on prepped tracks...but other pro-level drivers on an unprepped track and in hotter climates run 11.5 (all Base 500s), then that kinda proves the point. We are seeing much wider ranges in GT500 times as opposed to ZL1 times. (See the comment I quoted from shaffe who typically disagrees with me).

Now I hate trying to explain things to Mustang guys because all you guys do is troll. But I am not saying that the GT500 is not the faster car. I am saying that if it is not in conditions that are to it's advantage, then it will suffer. The ZL1 in those same conditions will not be affected as largely. Again, see the examples above.

Also of note is that on an unprepped track the C8 (not a Camaro of course) was able to run faster than the GT500. 11.1 (CF) to 11.3 (CF 500) and 11.5 (Base 500). It isn't about defying physics. Rather, physics would explain why this happens.

Yes and no. Yes I would have to agree that based on manufacturer claims, the ZL1 is less susceptible to different conditions than the GT500 is.

However in THIS particular test, we see the conditions affected both cars by +/- a half second almost. Ford claims 10.7 on prepped surface, GM claims 11.3 on unprepped surface. This test showed a 6/10th difference for the Ford and 4/10th difference for the Chevy based on manufacturer claims.

Other tests show a similar 6/10th to almost 8/10th difference in the Mustang vs only maybe a 1/10th or 2 for the ZL1. So based on that I would have say conditions affect the ZL1 less at least in magazine testing. I mean once you cross a certain power point, running on prepped is just going to be difficult

Originally Posted by TreedYou

Related question about the whole un-prepped/prepped surface thing that comes up a ton.


Where else but a drag strip can you get a 1/4 time for you car?

Saying "ran the 1/4 on an un-prepped surface" doesn't make any sense because where else are you going to run the quarter mile?

I mean you're at the drag strip to begin with to get the best time out of the car you came there with so I'm a bit confused about that whole line.

At the drag strip there is never an un-prepped surface, you're at a drag strip.
And on the street there is no tree with time traps...


------


Also to pepper in something else, talking about times on these cars that have automatically shifting transmissions can't you just take any driver skill out of the conversations?

All you really have to do is keep your hands on the steering wheel. So saying "pro-driver" in an automatic car that does all the works sounds a bit off, nah mean jelly bean?
What can one driver in an automatic possibly do that a trained monkey can't do? hold the steering wheel straighter?

To this point I agree. To me when a manufacturer makes a performance claim like 1/4 it should be done on a track not an unprepped surface. Looks like Ford and Dodge do that, GM still goes unprepped - or at least they don't mention on prepped surface.

But for the most part the unprepped surface shows what the cars would be capable of on the street. Dumb place to run them, but that is the point of the unprepped surface.

[TreedYou]

Originally Posted by shaffe

But for the most part the unprepped surface shows what the cars would be capable of on the street. Dumb place to run them, but that is the point of the unprepped surface.

But my point is the street doesn't have a tree or time traps.
So what even is a 1/4 mile run on the street?


Trying to wrap my head around the whole logic of "run's xx.xx on the street" where there is actually no 1/4 drag strip.
If we are talking street we get into some other lingo like "bus lengths" and "put 2 cars on him" but there are no times.

[TreedYou]

Originally Posted by minn19

Why not, you should, I'd love to see you drop that nugget on them................

By the way, Millhouse and Boss 2013 on M6G are asking people here to say stuff to you @BlaqWhole (and others), but apparently people are to afraid to sign up and do it themselves.

That's OK I'm already here, I am free to chat with anyone.

[BlaqWhole]

Originally Posted by TreedYou

Related question about the whole un-prepped/prepped surface thing that comes up a ton.


Where else but a drag strip can you get a 1/4 time for you car?

Saying "ran the 1/4 on an un-prepped surface" doesn't make any sense because where else are you going to run the quarter mile?

I mean you're at the drag strip to begin with to get the best time out of the car you came there with so I'm a bit confused about that whole line.

At the drag strip there is never an un-prepped surface, you're at a drag strip.
And on the street there is no tree with time traps...


------


Also to pepper in something else, talking about times on these cars that have automatically shifting transmissions can't you just take any driver skill out of the conversations?

All you really have to do is keep your hands on the steering wheel. So saying "pro-driver" in an automatic car that does all the works sounds a bit off, nah mean jelly bean?
What can one driver in an automatic possibly do that a trained monkey can't do? hold the steering wheel straighter?

Since your last statements prove that you are incapable of holding an intellectual conversation this will be my last reply to you.


There are plenty of places where you can race legally that are not a drag strip. This was discussed several times in the past here as well. On top of different strips having different levels of prep. Also like I said, it isn't just ONE variable but several variables including temps/DA, heat soak...20 MPH headwinds LOL!! Even on prepped drag strips the typical claim from the Mustang crowd goes back to DA and other factors. Nah mean jelly bean? Or do you need a trained monkey to further explain this to you? Also, exactly how many more times will I have to write this all out for one of you who wander over here? You know, for people who profess to be such track rats you guys need an awful lot of explanations on factors that you yourselves make claims of.


EDIT: I actually had no intentions of replying to you. I saw the reply and thought I was replying to Last standard. But since I already wrote and sent this I will leave it up.

Originally Posted by shaffe

Yes and no. Yes I would have to agree that based on manufacturer claims, the ZL1 is less susceptible to different conditions than the GT500 is.

However in THIS particular test, we see the conditions affected both cars by +/- a half second almost. Ford claims 10.7 on prepped surface, GM claims 11.3 on unprepped surface. This test showed a 6/10th difference for the Ford and 4/10th difference for the Chevy based on manufacturer claims.

Other tests show a similar 6/10th to almost 8/10th difference in the Mustang vs only maybe a 1/10th or 2 for the ZL1. So based on that I would have say conditions affect the ZL1 less.

Shaffe, 10.7 to 11.3 for the 500 is 6 tenths. But 11.3 to 11.6 for the ZL1 is 3 tenths. That is half the time difference. Plus were those claims from Ford not for the Base 500? And it has done 11.5 which is a 9 tenths difference. Am I right? The GT500 has been all over the place from 10.6 to 11.5.

[TreedYou]

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

Since your last statements prove that you are incapable of holding an intellectual conversation this will be my last reply to you.


There are plenty of places where you can race legally that are not a drag strip. This was discussed several times in the past here as well. On top of different strips having different levels of prep. Also like I said, it isn't just ONE variable but several variables including temps/DA, heat soak...20 MPH headwinds LOL!! Even on prepped drag strips the typical claim from the Mustang crowd goes back to DA and other factors. Nah mean jelly bean? Or do you need a trained monkey to further explain this to you? Also, exactly how many more times will I have to write this all out for one of you who wander over here? You know, for people who profess to be such track rats you guys need an awful lot of explanations on factors that you yourselves make claims of.

Ouch, lucky I don't have feelings. Can we still be friends?



I am just saying you can't claim 1/4 times if you're not on a drag strip because that doesn't make sense, there is no timing equipment.



And also the whole "better driver" is a moot point in automatics.

So saying that in cars that drive themselves doesn't make much sense either.

[shaffe]

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

Shaffe, 10.7 to 11.3 for the 500 is 6 tenths. But 11.3 to 11.6 for the ZL1 is 3 tenths. That is half the time difference. Plus were those claims from Ford not for the Base 500? And it has done 11.5 which is a 9 tenths difference. Am I right? The GT500 has been all over the place from 10.6 to 11.5.

Yes you are correct. I was not paying attention to the correct part of the video in the edmunds test. ZLE ran 11.6, had it paused on the ZLE taillights but the time on screen was for the RE. Paused it a click to late.

Either way yes you are confirming my point which was agreeing with you lol. Guess we are so used to just arguing you didn't see that haha.

[TheRealJA105]

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

No I'm not talking about driver error. If you wanna seriously discuss this then I will oblige. I'll repeat what I said before.

The GT500 is affected by conditions more so than the ZL1. It isn't about defying physics. We have already seen it. Ford claims 10.7 on a prepped track in optimal conditions. Usually when a Mustang runs we hear "oh well if the DA was better" or "well in cooler late year temps" and similar comments all alluding to the fact that if it is run in better conditions then it will do much better. And it has done that. Remove those conditions and it is an 11.3-11.5 sec car as we have seen. The ZL1 regardless of conditions (not conditions like rain in case someone wants to be a smartass) has maintained mid 11s in testing. In those runs we often are not told what the DA or temps were. And it is not often on a prepped track from what I understand although I could be wrong on that point. In any case we have typically seen it run 11.3 to 11.6 with even the M6 equipped versions running 11.6-11.8 I believe. So we are seeing around a 7-9 tenths difference with the GT500. Some are even saying the 500 could run 10.4s bone stock which would be a 1.1 sec difference all based on conditions. With the ZL1 we are seeing more of a 2-4 tenths difference. The testing we are discussing now showed 11.3 (GT500) and 11.6 (ZL1). Now if you were to put both cars on a prepped track and run them in optimal conditions then apparently you could shave almost a full second off the 500 based on claims of 10.4 to 10.6. With the ZL1 it might be more around 3-4 tenths.

Now this is open to debate. But when a pro runs a 10.6 and then a kid who claims to have never driven on a track before runs 10.6 both on prepped tracks...but other pro-level drivers on an unprepped track and in hotter climates run 11.5 (all Base 500s), then that kinda proves the point. We are seeing much wider ranges in GT500 times as opposed to ZL1 times. (See the comment I quoted from shaffe who typically disagrees with me).

Now I hate trying to explain things to Mustang guys because all you guys do is troll. But I am not saying that the GT500 is not the faster car. I am saying that if it is not in conditions that are to it's advantage, then it will suffer. The ZL1 in those same conditions will not be affected as largely. Again, see the examples above.

Also of note is that on an unprepped track the C8 (not a Camaro of course) was able to run faster than the GT500. 11.1 (CF) to 11.3 (CF 500) and 11.5 (Base 500). It isn't about defying physics. Rather, physics would explain why this happens.

If affected less by the conditions you mean it's easier to hook up in a car with less horsepower and the car with less horsepower loses less horsepower with DA (because percentages) then sure, but that is not what you are saying. You literally are defying physics in your head. If you were a drag racer you would know that even Camaro guys are searching for low DA and good prep. Wait till the C8 finds negative DA and runs a 10. You have said it will, but guess what? It's going to take ideal conditions, because every car is affected by them.

Originally Posted by TreedYou

Related question about the whole un-prepped/prepped surface thing that comes up a ton.

Where else but a drag strip can you get a 1/4 time for you car?

Saying "ran the 1/4 on an un-prepped surface" doesn't make any sense because where else are you going to run the quarter mile?

I mean you're at the drag strip to begin with to get the best time out of the car you came there with so I'm a bit confused about that whole line.

At the drag strip there is never an un-prepped surface, you're at a drag strip.
And on the street there is no tree with time traps...


------


Also to pepper in something else, talking about times on these cars that have automatically shifting transmissions can't you just take any driver skill out of the conversations?

All you really have to do is keep your hands on the steering wheel. So saying "pro-driver" in an automatic car that does all the works sounds a bit off, nah mean jelly bean?
What can one driver in an automatic possibly do that a trained monkey can't do? hold the steering wheel straighter?

Most magazines use VBox timers on unprepped surfaces. Also my shitty local drag strip is not prepped on test and tune days.
Agree mostly on the auto thing, except that you better train that monkey how to get the best launch.

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

There are plenty of places where you can race legally that are not a drag strip. This was discussed several times in the past here as well. On top of different strips having different levels of prep. Also like I said, it isn't just ONE variable but several variables including temps/DA, heat soak...20 MPH headwinds LOL!! Even on prepped drag strips the typical claim from the Mustang crowd goes back to DA and other factors. Nah mean jelly bean? Or do you need a trained monkey to further explain this to you? Also, exactly how many more times will I have to write this all out for one of you who wander over here? You know, for people who profess to be such track rats you guys need an awful lot of explanations on factors that you yourselves make claims of.

Shaffe, 10.7 to 11.3 for the 500 is 6 tenths. But 11.3 to 11.6 for the ZL1 is 3 tenths. That is half the time difference. Plus were those claims from Ford not for the Base 500? And it has done 11.5 which is a 9 tenths difference. Am I right? The GT500 has been all over the place from 10.6 to 11.5.

Look in the drag racing forum. I think there was a guy running like 12.3 in his ZLE on the first page the last I looked. Fact is you cherry pick this stuff.
All these cars can run more than 1 second slower from a botched launch and it's more difficult to launch a higher horsepower car.

[Laststandard]

Originally Posted by TheRealJA105

Look in the drag racing forum. I think there was a guy running like 12.3 in his ZLE on the first page the last I looked. Fact is you cherry pick this stuff.
All these cars can run more than 1 second slower from a botched launch and it's more difficult to launch a higher horsepower car.

12.1 something but it was also an M6 ZLE. Top 18 on the fast list for stock ZL1 range from 10.9 to 11.7.

[Roscoe1492]

Originally Posted by minn19

Why not, you should, I'd love to see you drop that nugget on them................

By the way, Millhouse and Boss 2013 on M6G are asking people here to say stuff to you @BlaqWhole (and others), but apparently people are to afraid to sign up and do it themselves.

Millhouse is one of the worst fanboys on that website.

All of his arguments sound like "the car I like, but can't afford beats the car I don't like.... that I will also never be able to afford."

It's such a crap show over there. Makes me miss my GT350 even less than I already did.

99% of the rabbid fanboys will never own a GT500. Of the 1% that will, only 1% of them are capable of driving the car to the point where it's mechanical advantage (if it even has one) will allow them to best an equally skilled driver in a ZLE or ZL1 on a track based purely off the cars capabilities.

[BlaqWhole]

Originally Posted by TreedYou

Ouch, lucky I don't have feelings. Can we still be friends?



I am just saying you can't claim 1/4 times if you're not on a drag strip because that doesn't make sense, there is no timing equipment.



And also the whole "better driver" is a moot point in automatics.

So saying that in cars that drive themselves doesn't make much sense either.

Again, it isn't just one factor but several factors. Some strips do not prep as well. Then there is different DA. Those all are factors. Did I not already say that?

Originally Posted by shaffe

Yes you are correct. I was not paying attention to the correct part of the video in the edmunds test. ZLE ran 11.6, had it paused on the ZLE taillights but the time on screen was for the RE. Paused it a click to late.

Either way yes you are confirming my point which was agreeing with you lol. Guess we are so used to just arguing you didn't see that haha.

I was in debate mode because of others...sorry bout that.

Originally Posted by TheRealJA105

If affected less by the conditions you mean it's easier to hook up in a car with less horsepower and the car with less horsepower loses less horsepower with DA (because percentages) then sure, but that is not what you are saying. You literally are defying physics in your head. If you were a drag racer you would know that even Camaro guys are searching for low DA and good prep. Wait till the C8 finds negative DA and runs a 10. You have said it will, but guess what? It's going to take ideal conditions, because every car is affected by them.

No. Incorrect. Different engine setups and power adder setups are affected differently. Cars with a better design, better cooling, better factory tuning, differences in eLSD, etc all play a role. Some engines heat soak worse than others.

For an example, look at the 370Zs. They have very inefficient oil cooling and are known to go into limp mode pretty easily. A Camaro SS would not have that same issue. Put both cars on a drag strip in the middle of July and I will bet you that the 350Z will go into limp mode and run 14s while the SS will still run pretty damn well.

Originally Posted by TheRealJA105

Look in the drag racing forum. I think there was a guy running like 12.3 in his ZLE on the first page the last I looked. Fact is you cherry pick this stuff.
All these cars can run more than 1 second slower from a botched launch and it's more difficult to launch a higher horsepower car.

If you look at my comment you would see that I used results from what the manufacturers claim and what we are seeing during testing. I then used what we have seen from the best runs. However I will omit all individual owner runs.

The 500 in testing has been stuck in the 11.3-11.5 range during testing. Ford claims that in ideal conditions it will do 10.7. So that is almost a full second. That is going by the Base 500 only. 10.7 to 11.5. On the other hand GM claims either 11.3 or 11.4 for the ZL1. I do not remember which. So I will use 11.3 to give it a wider range so as to be fair. And so nobody can accuse me of giving it the better range. Anyway. In testing we have seen the standard ZL1 anywhere from 11.4 to 11.6. That is a difference of 2 to 3 tenths. So there is a much wider variance with the 500 than there is with the ZL1.

[hotlap]

https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews...amaro-zl1-1le/

This was posted in the main section of Camaro6

TreedYou isn't going to like this.

but we pick winners here, and the winner is the Camaro. It's biggest advantage is that it's simply a better value. There's a lot we love about the GT500—the ride quality, interior design, and its more sophisticated powertrain—but the more affordable ZL1 1LE manages to match or surpass the Shelby's performance while offering a much longer list of features. Spend the stack of money saved on gas and Goodyears. You're going to need them.

[NW-99SS]

Originally Posted by hotlap

https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews...amaro-zl1-1le/

This was posted in the main section of Camaro6

TreedYou isn't going to like this.

Dammit, no lap times!

Metrics are close, as expected, but the cheaper ZLE posted higher lateral G's and better braking than the carbon fiber wheeled CFTP...

[BlaqWhole]

Originally Posted by hotlap

https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews...amaro-zl1-1le/

This was posted in the main section of Camaro6

TreedYou isn't going to like this.

Originally Posted by NW-99SS

Dammit, no lap times!

Metrics are close, as expected, but the cheaper ZLE posted higher lateral G's and better braking than the carbon fiber wheeled CFTP...

The results from this test is what I expected. Again, the 500 runs only 1 tenth faster in the quarter. 11.4 for the 500 to 11.5 for the Z!!

If I were over on another forum, say a Mustang forum, I'd be sweating in my boots at the mention of a track comparo now. LOL!! It is coming.