[DaveC113]

Hard to say WRT alignment vs tires, I can say in my SLE the track alignment made a really big difference in autox, but I can't estimate how much time it would equate to on Big Willow in a ZLE. Randy is saying tires are worth at least 1 sec, maybe some folks can make an educated guess on how much time an alignment is worth?

[ZRacerLE]

Originally Posted by DaveC113

Hard to say WRT alignment vs tires, I can say in my SLE the track alignment made a really big difference in autox, but I can't estimate how much time it would equate to on Big Willow in a ZLE. Randy is saying tires are worth at least 1 sec, maybe some folks can make an educated guess on how much time an alignment is worth?

I estimate 1s based on the 1.77s shaved off the C8's VIR full 2 minute lap from the track alignment.

[Mountain]

Originally Posted by ZRacerLE

I estimate 1s based on the 1.77s shaved off the C8's VIR full 2 minute lap from the track alignment.

VIR is 0.75 longer than Willow. Let’s call it 0.50-sec and lets give the GT500 1.5-sec.

1:26.70 - ZL1 1LE
1:26.65 - GT500 CFTP
1:32.59 - Red Eye

[LSA]

The tire argument is made up.

[Lafourche1]

There must be some reason why there hasn't been some major publication doing a 3 / 4 way comparison. I thought when we saw a 911 in some reviews that maybe we were going to see a host of different match-ups. I don't think that GM is too concerned about letting the Camaro go up against most anything. I think FCA is just as willing to put their RE against anything (outcome be d@mned), it is great exposure for a centuries old platform . Ford does seem to be reluctant to bring out the GT500s for any kind of head to head to head comparison. I think the same can be said of Porsche (I am fully aware of how many Porsche owners view us as knuckle-dragging Camaro / Corvette owners). I would love to see a shoot-out against an AMG GT-C or GT-R. Same for any Audi RS or BMW M series.

[LSA]

Originally Posted by Lafourche1

Ford does seem to be reluctant to bring out the GT500s for any kind of head to head to head comparison.

Unfortunately that seems to be the case.

[RobbyBeefcake87]

Originally Posted by Lafourche1

There must be some reason why there hasn't been some major publication doing a 3 / 4 way comparison. I thought when we saw a 911 in some reviews that maybe we were going to see a host of different match-ups. I don't think that GM is too concerned about letting the Camaro go up against most anything. I think FCA is just as willing to put their RE against anything (outcome be d@mned), it is great exposure for a centuries old platform . Ford does seem to be reluctant to bring out the GT500s for any kind of head to head to head comparison. I think the same can be said of Porsche (I am fully aware of how many Porsche owners view us knuckle-dragging Camaro / Corvette owners). I would love to see a shoot-out against an AMG GT-C or GT-R. Same for any Audi RS or BMW M series.

You gotta give it to dodge, they're willing to put the redeye up against anyone. While it's speculation, seems the gt500 isn't getting the same treatment.

[TheRealJA105]

Originally Posted by RobbyBeefcake87

You gotta give it to dodge, they're willing to put the redeye up against anyone. While it's speculation, seems the gt500 isn't getting the same treatment.

Dodge marketing is amazing and they know everyone knows the Redeye isn't a track car. It won the race it should have, the roll race. Didn't Ford say something about Venom killing Demons one time????

I have read rumors of Dodge working on a Redeye ACR. It will be interesting to see how many of those 5 seconds they can knock off if they are. Hell throw G3Rs on the boat and you get at least 2 seconds right there. The other 3 will be waaaayyyy harder to gain though.

[ST1LE]

Originally Posted by Lafourche1

There must be some reason why there hasn't been some major publication doing a 3 / 4 way comparison. I thought when we saw a 911 in some reviews that maybe we were going to see a host of different match-ups. I don't think that GM is too concerned about letting the Camaro go up against most anything. I think FCA is just as willing to put their RE against anything (outcome be d@mned), it is great exposure for a centuries old platform . Ford does seem to be reluctant to bring out the GT500s for any kind of head to head to head comparison. I think the same can be said of Porsche (I am fully aware of how many Porsche owners view us knuckle-dragging Camaro / Corvette owners). I would love to see a shoot-out against an AMG GT-C or GT-R. Same for any Audi RS or BMW M series.

Originally Posted by LSA

Unfortunately that seems to be the case.

THIS^^

Even tying the ZLE is a blackeye for the $94K GT500 CFTP. Ford is just not willing to let the world see exactly what the buyer gets for the $18K package, because it would likely impact sales of that package negatively.

Only a fanboi would choose to pay $100K for peformance that is matched by a $74K car.

Randy chose the ZLE based on price, 'nuff said.

[shaffe]

Originally Posted by ST1LE

THIS^^

Even tying the ZLE is a blackeye for the $94K GT500 CFTP. Ford is just not willing to let the world see exactly what the buyer gets for the $18K package, because it would likely impact sales of that package negatively.

Only a fanboi would choose to pay $100K for peformance that is matched by a $74K car.

Randy chose the ZLE based on price, 'nuff said.

With how few CFTP cars will be made I don't think any review would really have an effect on sales.

I agree I think only true ford die hards would want the CFTP.

[Bhobbs]

Ford has always been reluctant to give our test cars. They didn’t want the Boss 302 LS being tested against the SS 1LE either.

[radz28]

Originally Posted by Bhobbs

Ford has always been reluctant to give our test cars. They didn’t want the Boss 302 LS being tested against the SS 1LE either.

I don't disagree. That in my perception, too.

But - I think Ford has, perhaps, found the better balance of performance, in that they want the consumer to feel like they've got high performance, even though, objectively, they might not have. They don't need to necessarily beat Camaro performance - they just have to make it feel like it's the same, or close enough.

Pretty much every bit of the 6th Gen is as much a no-compromise effort as Team Camaro could make it. For example - maybe they took out every millimeter of roof line as they could and shrunk the windows as small as they could be, maybe both for looks and for mass control. But - that no-compromise effort was for performance at the sake of comfort and ergonomics. Team Camaro made a car for enthusiasts, not consumers (yes - we're consumers, but we are the minority). Everyone who's not a Camaro person, or appreciates performance and style bleets-on about the stupid pill box view and all that crap. I can understand their argument, and I can even agree to an extent. I think the general consumer is proving they agree, too.

So - Ford built a Mustang that didn't offend customers as much. Dynamically - on the whole, the Mustang isn't as good as Camaro. However - it is easier to live with every day and that will sell more cars (especially when Chevy couldn't advertise for crap, unlike MOPAR, for example) than having to put up with the compromises you have with Camaro. If they tried to beat Camaro benchmarks (at least that have to do with everyday-type stuff), they'd have a harsher-riding car that would beat the customer up, rather than be just harsh enough that if feels fast, really but isn't. Because Ford is better at presenting the perception of performance, at least this time. They couldn't make a car that could perform better than Camaro without making it like Camaro, thereby scaring away consumers that just weren't that serious about actual performance.

JMO.

[shaffe]

Originally Posted by radz28

I don't disagree. That in my perception, too.

But - I think Ford has, perhaps, found the better balance of performance, in that they want the consumer to feel like they've got high performance, even though, objectively, they might not have. They don't need to necessarily beat Camaro performance - they just have to make it feel like it's the same, or close enough.

Pretty much every bit of the 6th Gen is as much a no-compromise effort as Team Camaro could make it. For example - maybe they took out every millimeter of roof line as they could and shrunk the windows as small as they could be, maybe both for looks and for mass control. But - that no-compromise effort was for performance at the sake of comfort and ergonomics. Team Camaro made a car for enthusiasts, not consumers (yes - we're consumers, but we are the minority). Everyone who's not a Camaro person, or appreciates performance and style bleets-on about the stupid pill box view and all that crap. I can understand their argument, and I can even agree to an extent. I think the general consumer is proving they agree, too.

So - Ford built a Mustang that didn't offend customers as much. Dynamically - on the whole, the Mustang isn't as good as Camaro. However - it is easier to live with every day and that will sell more cars (especially when Chevy couldn't advertise for crap, unlike MOPAR, for example) than having to put up with the compromises you have with Camaro. If they tried to beat Camaro benchmarks (at least that have to do with everyday-type stuff), they'd have a harsher-riding car that would beat the customer up, rather than be just harsh enough that if feels fast, really but isn't. Because Ford is better at presenting the perception of performance, at least this time. They couldn't make a car that could perform better than Camaro without making it like Camaro, thereby scaring away consumers that just weren't that serious about actual performance.

JMO.

I was thinking about this on the drive home the other day. Ford concentrated on building a better coupe first, then performance car. Chevy built a better performance car first then coupe

[radz28]

Originally Posted by shaffe

I was thinking about this on the drive home the other day. Ford concentrated on building a better coupe first, then performance car. Chevy built a better performance car first then coupe

You said that SO much better than I did, HAHAHA.

I saw something a while ago that speculated that GM was going to spin Corvette-off, kind-of on it's own. That would leave Camaro as the RWD performance car (i.e. also, affordable) for Chevy, perhaps opening up some performance potential that, maybe before, wasn't completely allowed to matriculate down from Corvette (because it was the RWD Chevy performance car). Maybe, with Corvette moving into supercar country (i.e. not as affordable, duh), Camaro could be elevated into 'Vette's old position, and gain some more backing. We see $70k-plus models now, so maybe, with 'Vette moving into more expensive waters, Camaro might start seeing models that get into RE and GT500-prices. That could open the door to more power and technology. C8 engines - Gen IV MRC, etc.