[jmackisback]

Originally Posted by germanicus

https://www.msn.com/en-us/autos/auto...-gt/ar-BBH51bH

Stock GT doing 11's.

"11.835 at a staggering 119.51 mph."

When all else fails, cite two week old, beaten to death news.

[jmackisback]

I'd say the % is actually lower. Comfort is something people fall back on when their muscle cars underperform. The majority of people who buy a muscle car/sports car DO care a lot about performance.

[Chadicus]

Originally Posted by newmoon

I think you are giving the general public too much credit. I'd be willing to bet 60%+ make their decision to purchase based on looks and comfort. A small segment really care about performance numbers.

I might be. I made the assumption that people who just want looks and comfort probably wouldn't be buying muscle cars to begin with. Personally I think my Camaro is more comfortable than my 15 GT was. Visibility is a legit complaint with the Camaro.

I think performance wise 99% of people would be happy with either car. I just don't want to hear anymore bullshit about "running down ZL1s" from a car that hasn't definitively caught the SS yet.

[2011shelby]

Here’s a new video recently posted.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=6ioT1xiblqo

[SpeedIsLife]

To save the time..

E85+PMAS Intake+Tune=469WHP/434WTQ

My guess is a full LT exhaust setup would likely be around 485 WHP/445 WTQ..maybe 450 WTQ

[hotlap]

Originally Posted by kttxz06

Holy crap. That is blistering fast. I have no idea what Camaro owners will do now. Watch out guys!!!!! We have an 11.8 hero run with track prep and lowered tire pressure. Remember, just tune it, add e85 and some tires and it's gonna smash the Zl1.

[germanicus]

Originally Posted by kttxz06

Holy crap. That is blistering fast. I have no idea what Camaro owners will do now. Watch out guys!!!!! We have an 11.8 hero run with track prep and lowered tire pressure. Remember, just tune it, add e85 and some tires and it's gonna smash the Zl1.

You are awfully defensive. You keep alluding to a strawman.
It speaks volumes.

However you decide to handle these issues, please don't take your family out in your car with you when you street race.

[BlaqWhole]

Originally Posted by jmackisback

I'd say the % is actually lower. Comfort is something people fall back on when their muscle cars underperform. The majority of people who buy a muscle car/sports car DO care a lot about performance.

Exactly. If people want comfort they would buy a Camry. It is a loser's defense argument. Granted they all have to have comparable levels of comfort to other Muscle Cars. A Camaro can't have a super stiff suspension while the Mustang and Challenger all have nice suspension. But the draw to these cars is the performance. Which is why we have a VS sub-forum instead of a comfort sub-forum, lol!!

Originally Posted by germanicus

You are awfully defensive. You keep alluding to a strawman.
It speaks volumes.

However you decide to handle these issues, please don't take your family out in your car with you when you street race.

Fact is that the Mustang crowd is still clinging to their ill-conceived misguided very mistaken thought that the GT can beat the likes of the Corvette and ZL1. I saw some guy on one of the YT videos claiming the C7 Vette is no match for the GT. The Mustang crowd has literally become the ricers of this segment of the auto community. And I think it is because Ford put the price of the GT soo low and left it soo underwhelming underperforming that many younger kids who know nothing about these cars or cars in general were able to get one and now they're just running around talking shit like this sentence ran on. LOL!! And what makes it worse is that they're fully convinced. Just like these kids in Civics are convinced that they can beat the GTs and SS. And then you have trolls like SS Friendly (where is he anyway?) and his troll-crew that came over here perpetuating these idiotic ideas and it gets spread even more. It is sickening to the point that I'll be hunting them down when I see them in the wild just so they'll know what's up.

[crysalis_01]

Originally Posted by jmackisback

I'd say the % is actually lower. Comfort is something people fall back on when their muscle cars underperform. The majority of people who buy a muscle car/sports car DO care a lot about performance.

[sarcasm]

It is a shame that we live in a world where there is no way to improve upon the performance metrics of reviewed ofsaid muscle/sports cars once a buyer has chosen one that they want and not one that they're told they should want.

/sarcasm




An enthusiast should really only be concerned with the performance of one vehicle... Their own. Is it fun info to read what one offers vs another? Yeah. Does it mean that one is stuck with those reported metrics? No. These reviews provide entertaining tidbits about performance specs, measurements, reviewer pov's, etc. But they don't hard lock in what these types, or any type of vehicle for that matter, can do, just what they did that day, it that particular guise.

Some will forever perform at a level lower than that of testers, some will vastly exceed it. Those happy with their vehicle won't really care, as long as they enjoy their vehicle. If any if them happen to be disappointed in any part of, or the whole of, their choice, they can change it.

At the end of the day, when John Q. Public pulls up to the line, they're probably not driving the Camaro/Mustang/Challenger that clocked the best 1/4 "hero run" they're also probably not driving the one that ran the worst fail time.

They're driving their vehicle. The one that will perform as well as they desire and/or can afford to make it. Magazine racing doesn't mean a thing once the green light shines, you run what you brung, and you chalk up a W or an L. Then you adjust and see if you can improve... If you want to.

[ST1LE]

Originally Posted by crysalis_01

[sarcasm]

It is a shame that we live in a world where there is no way to improve upon the performance metrics of reviewed ofsaid muscle/sports cars once a buyer has chosen one that they want and not one that they're told they should want.

/sarcasm




An enthusiast should really only be concerned with the performance of one vehicle... Their own. Is it fun info to read what one offers vs another? Yeah. Does it mean that one is stuck with those reported metrics? No. These reviews provide entertaining tidbits about performance specs, measurements, reviewer pov's, etc. But they don't hard lock in what these types, or any type of vehicle for that matter, can do, just what they did that day, it that particular guise.

Some will forever perform at a level lower than that of testers, some will vastly exceed it. Those happy with their vehicle won't really care, as long as they enjoy their vehicle. If any if them happen to be disappointed in any part of, or the whole of, their choice, they can change it.

At the end of the day, when John Q. Public pulls up to the line, they're probably not driving the Camaro/Mustang/Challenger that clocked the best 1/4 "hero run" they're also probably not driving the one that ran the worst fail time.

They're driving their vehicle. The one that will perform as well as they desire and/or can afford to make it. Magazine racing doesn't mean a thing once the green light shines, you run what you brung, and you chalk up a W or an L. Then you adjust and see if you can improve... If you want to.

So true! Sadly, emotion breeds rivalry and rivalries are rarely logical in nature.

Things like this get people ALL worked up. It could be worse, this could be M6G, things are very intense over there right now. Lots of threads being locked and warnings being issued all because people's emotions are very tied to their cars performance.

My car is slower than both the SS and the GT, and I cannot tell you how relieving it is to not have to worry about it HAHAHAHA.

[hotlap]

Originally Posted by crysalis_01

[sarcasm]

It is a shame that we live in a world where there is no way to improve upon the performance metrics of reviewed ofsaid muscle/sports cars once a buyer has chosen one that they want and not one that they're told they should want.

/sarcasm




An enthusiast should really only be concerned with the performance of one vehicle... Their own. Is it fun info to read what one offers vs another? Yeah. Does it mean that one is stuck with those reported metrics? No. These reviews provide entertaining tidbits about performance specs, measurements, reviewer pov's, etc. But they don't hard lock in what these types, or any type of vehicle for that matter, can do, just what they did that day, it that particular guise.

Some will forever perform at a level lower than that of testers, some will vastly exceed it. Those happy with their vehicle won't really care, as long as they enjoy their vehicle. If any if them happen to be disappointed in any part of, or the whole of, their choice, they can change it.

At the end of the day, when John Q. Public pulls up to the line, they're probably not driving the Camaro/Mustang/Challenger that clocked the best 1/4 "hero run" they're also probably not driving the one that ran the worst fail time.

They're driving their vehicle. The one that will perform as well as they desire and/or can afford to make it. Magazine racing doesn't mean a thing once the green light shines, you run what you brung, and you chalk up a W or an L. Then you adjust and see if you can improve... If you want to.

[germanicus]

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

Fact is that the Mustang crowd is still clinging to their ill-conceived misguided very mistaken thought that the GT can beat the likes of the Corvette and ZL1. I saw some guy on one of the YT videos claiming the C7 Vette is no match for the GT. The Mustang crowd has literally become the ricers of this segment of the auto community. And I think it is because Ford put the price of the GT soo low and left it soo underwhelming underperforming that many younger kids who know nothing about these cars or cars in general were able to get one and now they're just running around talking shit like this sentence ran on. LOL!! And what makes it worse is that they're fully convinced. Just like these kids in Civics are convinced that they can beat the GTs and SS. And then you have trolls like SS Friendly (where is he anyway?) and his troll-crew that came over here perpetuating these idiotic ideas and it gets spread even more. It is sickening to the point that I'll be hunting them down when I see them in the wild just so they'll know what's up.

Now we have seen examples of stock GT's in the 11's, yet they don't count (because......?) The best comeback to this waters down to "But they won't beat my ZL1?"

BTW, who is 'they'? Try not to speak for other people as much, and then apply that brush to an entire community.

As I see it, the entirety of this came about because it was pointed out that an 18 GT with an e85 tune and wheel/tire swap was putting up times that were faster than stock zl1 numbers. Not sure how this is controversial or earth shattering. Either the car did or did not run those numbers. If it did, why get so bent out of shape about it? How does that effect your enjoyment of your vehicle? The only way I see this as being so upsetting is if its important to you that you are perceived as having the fastest vehicle by total strangers to you. When I drive down the street, I don't care whether people think my car is faster than theirs or not. Its not something I lose sleep over, or become enraged about on an internet forum. I doubt that the VAST majority of either Mustang or Camaro owners give a hill of beans about this.

Even if there are people claiming (unreasonable?) results/metrics for a given vehicle, I think its sort of silly to define an entire car community by that.

Just as it would be silly for me to define all the Zl1 drivers here as immature idiots who brag about street racing Mclarens while he/she has their family in the car.

Lets make this not about selectively accepting results that fall in line with one's desired outcomes (my Car is better than your Car). Look up the term "Confirmation bias". Rather, instead of choosing to ignore results that contradict one's expectations (using specious excuses), take them as they reveal themselves.

In my opinion, classifying the GT as under-performing is sort of ridiculous. The 15-17 GT had the highest HP per dollar value of any sports/muscle production car sold at the time anywhere in the world. https://cars.usnews.com/cars-trucks/...wer-per-dollar. When you consider the only real metric that matters to carmakers (Sales), the mustang is not the under-performing pony car. It was the best selling sports car in the world last year.

Less Tribalism. Us vs. Them.
This is becoming worse than some college sports rivalries.

Marvel vs. DC.
Cowboys vs. Redskins.
Camaro vs. Mustang.
Coke vs. Pepsi.

[oldman]

Originally Posted by Chadicus

I might be. I made the assumption that people who just want looks and comfort probably wouldn't be buying muscle cars to begin with. Personally I think my Camaro is more comfortable than my 15 GT was. Visibility is a legit complaint with the Camaro.

I think performance wise 99% of people would be happy with either car. I just don't want to hear anymore bullshit about "running down ZL1s" from a car that hasn't definitively caught the SS yet.

Probably god's truth here.

[oldman]

Originally Posted by jmackisback

I'd say the % is actually lower. Comfort is something people fall back on when their muscle cars underperform. The majority of people who buy a muscle car/sports car DO care a lot about performance.

Yeah but we are talking tenths at a prep track with a hero driver. Meaningless on a daily drive. If street performance is an issue then we already eliminate the M6 in their respective categories because given reasonably skilled drivers the auto is faster, quicker, more consistent, and requires less skill.

The way I see it with the Mustang GT with PP1 or is it PP2? Dunno, add in Scat Packand SS:

It is a driver's race stock or near stock NA for all of these, the pre-18 Mustang at a disadvantage,
It is a driver's race FBO auto vs stock M6 ZL1 or m6 Hellcat
It is a racer's race stock auto with hero driver NA vs low skilled M6 (FBO or ZL1 or Hellcat).

I just got back from testing both with GTech and onboard timmer my 0 to 60 with my newish Michelin pilot S4s. I rapped off a whole slew of sub 4.0 zero to 60s. Rears set to 28 PSI, front to 34 PIS, tossed all the junk in the trunk, one passenger, 1/2 tank of E85, full bolt ons. Can Joe Average, dont' care what he has for a ride do that on his DD with 300 wear tires? Note I said "Joe Average", then all the hero guys will come in and say yea I do that all the time. Big deal even if you lived in Texas with 26 million people when will I ever get in a street fight with you? Point being "Joe Average" can't deliver a sub 4.0 0 to 60, no matter what he is driving. Go to tirerack and read the comments about the ZL1 and / or the Hellcat tires. Things like dangerous, how can the OEM put such a poor tire on a performance car etc etc. Right Joe Average thinks when he buys a performance car he just stomps and goes or and the performance is built into the car. Sorry, this is not an Audi A5 4WD. For my sbu 4.0s I'm on my third set of rear tires in 14K with 1000+ feather and apply throttle runs to 60 just because I drive it like I just stole it. I have a M6.

Joe average in an auto is a win against Joe Average in an M6 in all categories given reasonably skilled drivers. Which is the 99%.

As a complete aside it looks like the Mustang PP2 has Sprot Cups 2, with a whole whopping 100 rear rating, same as Nitto 555Z drag radials. Sorry I drove my LS1 on the Nittos and changing tires every 6 to 10 K was getting kind of expensive.