[shaffe]

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

I would say the C7s reached the limits of FE RWD as opposed to the GT500. The GT500 might be at the limits of what Frod can do with FE RWD. But they are very far behind for the price. And Frdo seems to be ducking and hiding. One minute it's "Venom kills Demons" and "Supercar killer" and next minute Frdo is packing up their toys and going home.
.

Supercar killer was MT words, not Fords. Not sure you can really slam Ford for something a third party said.

Venom Kills demons - I am just guessing, but I bet the guy From Ford that said that wished he had back the second it left his mouth lol.

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

For trucks I'll say that Ford would be my go to. At least they were. I think the Ram 1500 looks better than the Silverado and the F150. But I would probably go with a Silverado if I were to get a truck.

Cant go wrong with the big 3. I would agree the ram is best looking.

[oldman]

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

So perhaps MRC was just a bit more fancy schmancy. I personally like MRC for DD street driving with aggressive performance. But I'm guessing it would not be the first preference for those who want more.

The MRC was meant for a DD that can be adjusted for other usages vs the DSSV which is a track damper that can be adjusted not to require a kidney belt to driven on the street.. just maybe. There is no free launch, it is an expensive, heavy, and track performance is compromised because:
1) weight
2) not alignment adjustable
3) does not feature jounce and rebound turning anywhere along the path, for instance, it can be tuned to be soft for the first 1/4 inch and then very stiff for 3/4 inch and as the tires are starting to give up due to predicted load they can softer up for 2" and then get really really firm to prevent the suspension from bottoming out.

I understand the DSSV itself is more expensive, I've pointed out there are guys spending $500 just to have their MRC removed. The DSSV was not out for 1LE production and may or may not have been chosen. From what I can see, the 6th gen DSSV used on the ZLE and over-the-counter by Chevy Performace is probably too stiff even with Cup2, the setup looks to be very jiggly and not in a good way.



Note the ZLE is "only" .5 faster than a 1LE or Cup2.


Sorry I was with the Challenger guys before this so I have NO experience with the DSSV and the 5th gen, much less the 6th gen.

From a customer standpoint, the MRC is far more useful on 99.9% of the Camaros sold.

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

They're not the most friendly tire...money-wise and for DD use. And they definitely do not last long. Not on something as heavy as the GT500 apparently. It's an expensive one lap setup where a great driver can do a great lap but only once. So for the tires alone that is a $1600+ lap. That doesn't even include other costs. And when something blows up you're stuck with the bill. Meanwhile other cheaper cars are running more than 1 hero lap. No thank you. If that car wasn't as mismatched and thrown together as it was then maybe it would be a different story.

Heavy car, lots of HP, and probably a really aggressive track alignment all conspired to help the demise. IMO, this was not a myth busters test, nobody went out there and measured as delivered and post lap tread depth (or temps). Visually these shallow type tires look worn right from the factory. Any subjective comment is just that. For all, we know the aggressive alignment can, conditions of the day, the weight of car et were just running the tire hot. Maybe that is actually all the tire can deliver and that is just the way it feels. Yes RP is an expert, but one seat time drive in the car does not equal actual data.

[BlaqWhole]

Originally Posted by shaffe

Supercar killer was MT words, not Fords. Not sure you can really slam Ford for something a third party said.

Venom Kills demons - I am just guessing, but I bet the guy From Ford that said that wished he had back the second it left his mouth lol.





Cant go wrong with the big 3. I would agree the ram is best looking.

I'm didn't say it was Ford's words. But still those words were spoken even if they were when the car first got in reviewer hands and before it was actually lined up against anything. Like I said before, Mustangs are awesome when they are by themselves and not being compared to worthy rivals. Once you line them up you start to see that they are overpriced for the performance and maybe not as awesome as you initially thought they were.

[BlaqWhole]

Originally Posted by RobbyBeefcake87

I agree with the bulk of your point, but a v8 test car the TFL guys just had ran a 3.3 0 to 60 with a passanger on a regular road surface somewhere in the desert while cruising around. This was a non z51 car and it seemed like they maybe didn't even use LC. I think its a safe bet that the c8 will be pretty consistent in acceleration. As for reliability and all of that, obviously remains to be seen, but I can't imagine the lt2 will give many issues.

That dude (the one you were replying to) is completely clueless. I omit runs with driver error when that error is obvious. If these guys were out there running 10s the entire day then you bet your ass we'd see a string of 10s posted up with them outlining which one was the best run. But all we're seeing is these guys post the one good run and nothing else. So if in an entire day these GT500s are getting good runs only once then these are not consistent. In an entire day at a rented track you should be able to get a lot of runs in. Heck I've gotten 6-8 runs in a 4 hour period on a non-rental night. So if an entire day is full of screwups and then a bunch of runs in the 11s and only one 10 then something is wrong with that car. It is not running consistently or drivers are struggling with it and having lots of errors.

Any idiot can look at my runs and tell the screw ups and also tell that each outing resulted in going faster. So even if someone is dense enough to say I went 13.5 to 11.8 then they still could see that each time I went I got faster and that each night my good runs were within 2 tenths of each other. The same cannot be said of the GT500. Out of multiple runs most of them are well into the 11s. So to me something is off. Maybe it's the LC or the delay is throwing people off. But something is causing these GT500s to be very inconsistent.

I'm just throwing a guess in...perhaps the delay and the inconsistencies are Ford's way of controlling these cars so they don't have as many errors and accidents as we have seen from the Mustang crowds in the past. These guys were having accidents with 400+ HP Mustangs. I can only imagine how bad they could mess up in a 760 HP Mustang. So maybe Ford used this as a safety feature to keep the car under control and maybe that is causing the inconsistent runs.

[BlaqWhole]

C8s using LC. And they were hotlapping. Man I love how those things just grab n go!!

[BlaqWhole]

Here is another video detailing several aspects of the C8s. Sorry guys but I'm on my C8 vibe today!!

[oldman]

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

T
I'm just throwing a guess in...perhaps the delay and the inconsistencies are Ford's way of controlling these cars so they don't have as many errors and accidents as we have seen from the Mustang crowds in the past. These guys were having accidents with 400+ HP Mustangs. I can only imagine how bad they could mess up in a 760 HP Mustang. So maybe Ford used this as a safety feature to keep the car under control and maybe that is causing the inconsistent runs.

Same goes with the suspension setup on the Vette, Joe Chevy buyer is not used to a mid-engine car, Chevy was very lenient on the chassis tune leaving a good bit of understeer (according to testers). So IMO Chevy left that .5 seconds on the table for the first few years, till their customers get used to the layout. I have most of my "race track" experience with a Boxster, so yeah I can understand what Chevy is doing.

[BlaqWhole]

Originally Posted by oldman

Same goes with the suspension setup on the Vette, Joe Chevy buyer is not used to a mid-engine car, Chevy was very lenient on the chassis tune leaving a good bit of understeer (according to testers). So IMO Chevy left that .5 seconds on the table for the first few years, till their customers get used to the layout. I have most of my "race track" experience with a Boxster, so yeah I can understand what Chevy is doing.

Exactly. A lot of people (myself included) have 0 experience with a ME setup. And GM had the foresight to throw in understeer to prevent people from flying off the road...ass first. I felt the reviewers were unfairly harsh in their criticisms when they initially tested the C8. It's like they were just dying to find something, anything, to bash on it about and that was the best they could find. However even if it does hamper the performance it still outperforms the previous Gen by a large margin.

Judging from the videos I have seen the C8s all look very controlled. I am sure we're gonna see some very consistent runs in these cars. As I said before concerning the ZL1, GM made these cars so that they are very well controlled. A little seat time and these cars are gonna fly. I think we'll be seeing high 10s bone stock once they are out.

[RobbyBeefcake87]

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

That dude (the one you were replying to) is completely clueless. I omit runs with driver error when that error is obvious. If these guys were out there running 10s the entire day then you bet your ass we'd see a string of 10s posted up with them outlining which one was the best run. But all we're seeing is these guys post the one good run and nothing else. So if in an entire day these GT500s are getting good runs only once then these are not consistent. In an entire day at a rented track you should be able to get a lot of runs in. Heck I've gotten 6-8 runs in a 4 hour period on a non-rental night. So if an entire day is full of screwups and then a bunch of runs in the 11s and only one 10 then something is wrong with that car. It is not running consistently or drivers are struggling with it and having lots of errors.

Any idiot can look at my runs and tell the screw ups and also tell that each outing resulted in going faster. So even if someone is dense enough to say I went 13.5 to 11.8 then they still could see that each time I went I got faster and that each night my good runs were within 2 tenths of each other. The same cannot be said of the GT500. Out of multiple runs most of them are well into the 11s. So to me something is off. Maybe it's the LC or the delay is throwing people off. But something is causing these GT500s to be very inconsistent.

I'm just throwing a guess in...perhaps the delay and the inconsistencies are Ford's way of controlling these cars so they don't have as many errors and accidents as we have seen from the Mustang crowds in the past. These guys were having accidents with 400+ HP Mustangs. I can only imagine how bad they could mess up in a 760 HP Mustang. So maybe Ford used this as a safety feature to keep the car under control and maybe that is causing the inconsistent runs.

Gt500s are consistent low to mid 11 second cars, depending on traction and how percect things are they can obviously get into the high to mid 10s. There's a lot of guys running them and putting it out there, sometimes they mess up their launch with too much rpm as well, just as you have messed up your runs before. Some of the gt500 inconsistencies can also be attributed to driver error.

Zl1s aren't super consistent either, from high 11s to to high 10s (like any high hp rwd car), but atleast the zl1 doesn't vary as much from drag strip to street surface. I don't believe the gt500 is super inconsistent but it does seem to have a wider spread than most other performance cars, even in the hands of experienced folks. I see zl1's run terrible times but its usually in the hands of rookies. Gt500s seem to have a wide varience even in experienced hands at the strip.

I know some of it is the nature of the beast with a 760hp rwd car(though to be noted, the better built zr1 doesn't suffer as bad as the gt500), but it seems the clutch durability and dct lead to some of these inconsistencies. I also heard that even on the stock tune the knock sensors are very active so it could be pulling timing and be extremely sensitive to enviromental and fueling variables. So while motortrend tried to say the gt500 didn't heat soak as much as the vette when they were fan girling over it, it obviously has its own inconsistency issues. Having said that, while they might exist, I haven't seen any 12+ second gt500s on any run.

We're mostly in agreement, gm clearly engineers superior overall products and ford routinely leaves a lot to be deaired on that front. I just dont think the gt500 is as crappy as you think it is, but I am also for the most part unimpressed lol.

[RobbyBeefcake87]

At about 5:30 he down shifts quickly and lives on the rev limiter for about 3 to 5 seconds lol.

https://youtu.be/B85SaCFNqgM

Gt500 would have probably blown up lol.

[ZRacerLE]

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

Here is another video detailing several aspects of the C8s. Sorry guys but I'm on my C8 vibe today!!

Great video Blaq. Pretty sure I won't be able to live without a C8Z now.

[BlaqWhole]

Originally Posted by RobbyBeefcake87

Gt500s are consistent low to mid 11 second cars, depending on traction and how percect things are they can obviously get into the high to mid 10s. There's a lot of guys running them and putting it out there, sometimes they mess up their launch with too much rpm as well, just as you have messed up your runs before. Some of the gt500 inconsistencies can also be attributed to driver error.

I haven't seen enough evidence to suggest they are consistent low 11s. I'd say more like mid 11s based on the testing alone. And there aren't enough examples of them doing 10s. Like I said, when people are spending an entire day at a track that they rented and are only posting 1 time then something is up. If they ran multiple 10s then they would be posting them along with the best run. But all we are seeing is the one run that is the best and it is a 10. No mention of the other runs. So the point, was that can all this be contributed to driver error? If you spend an entire day at a track rental and only get one run worth publishing then can you tell me something isn't up? EVen if it is driver error, there has to be something with the actual car that drivers cannot seem to get a consistent string of runs. THAT is what I'm saying. Yes, I had my driver errors. But that was one out of 3 runs and I posted each of those runs. Take the driver error out and my runs each day was within 2 tenths. We're not even seeing what the other runs these drivers are doing. A time slip would help us tell if it is something with the driver or the car.

Originally Posted by RobbyBeefcake87

Zl1s aren't super consistent either, from high 11s to to high 10s (like any high hp rwd car), but atleast the zl1 doesn't vary as much from drag strip to street surface. I don't believe the gt500 is super inconsistent but it does seem to have a wider spread than most other performance cars, even in the hands of experienced folks. I see zl1's run terrible times but its usually in the hands of rookies. Gt500s seem to have a wide varience even in experienced hands at the strip.

This is my point. And I appreciate that you acknowledged that. It seems that the fanboys will argue everything I say. So at least someone neutral is acknowledging the truth. GT500s are showing very wide variances even when driver error is not the cause. It could be due to a number of different things. But to act like it isn't a reality is a bit naive. ZL1s do tend to show some inconsistencies as well as all cars. But that typically is from driver to driver. An excellent driver in one ZL1 might do much better than a poor driver. But the poor driver 9 times out of 10 (figure of speech before someone jumps down my throat) will run consistently even if it is far off from what we typically see. I once saw a 5th Gen ZL1 driver run a consistent string of low 13s on the same day that I was running high 12s to low 13s. He was inexperienced tho. But he ran those times consistently even if they should have been in the 12s. So I fully agree with what you're saying but just with a footnote, if you will.

Originally Posted by RobbyBeefcake87

I know some of it is the nature of the beast with a 760hp rwd car(though to be noted, the better built zr1 doesn't suffer as bad as the gt500), but it seems the clutch durability and dct lead to some of these inconsistencies. I also heard that even on the stock tune the knock sensors are very active so it could be pulling timing and be extremely sensitive to enviromental and fueling variables. So while motortrend tried to say the gt500 didn't heat soak as much as the vette when they were fan girling over it, it obviously has its own inconsistency issues. Having said that, while they might exist, I haven't seen any 12+ second gt500s on any run.

Again, thanks for acknowledging what I've been saying all along. And I agree that there has not been any 12 sec runs...that we know of. If I ran a 12 in one of those cars I would tear the slip up and never speak of it. LOL!! Even tho, I would not even consider a 12 sec in a GT500 nor would I knock it if someone posted it as it clearly is not a 12 sec car. Even if some of these trolls try to insinuate that my ZL1 in my hands is a 12 sec car...you and I both can look at things rationally. Which is why I respect your thoughts on the matter. I would definitely not criticize the GT500 if someone ran a 12. Well, maybe a little, lol...just to get shaffe rolling hahaha!! But I can give it that much that a 12 definitely shows that something went horribly wrong. Hell, my very first outing in my 5th Gen Camaro 2SS/RS resulted in a 15.5. But it was below 40 degrees that morning on a Sunday with me being hungover and it was my first time ever at the strip in a manual trans. My second time out saw 13 flats. My third time out saw 12s. That same day an 800 RWHP supercharged Roush GT was running 13 flat...but at 135 MPH. He was on street tires.

Sorry for the long write. Anyway, there are a number of issues that could contribute to the GT500 being inconsistent. Ignoring these things does nothing positive. Heat soak has been an issue with Frdo's OHC engines from the start. As well as high intake temps and timing being pulled. OHC engines typically run hotter than OHV engines and also tend to retain that heat longer. So that could be the issue. Also the GT500s with all that power is not using eLSD like the ZL1s are. And the delay could be fckuing things up as well. It just might be that it has to be timed just right and one miniscule slip could result in a loss of several tenths. These are just guesses. But it does deserve some investigation as well as people being forthcoming about what they're running and not just their best time that particular day.

Originally Posted by RobbyBeefcake87

We're mostly in agreement, gm clearly engineers superior overall products and ford routinely leaves a lot to be deaired on that front. I just dont think the gt500 is as crappy as you think it is, but I am also for the most part unimpressed lol.

Monster energy drink, vodka, rum, and Gin stepping in for Blaqwhole to write this part. BW will be back tomorrow morning with a headache...

One thing I do like about Ford is that they leave some money for the aftermarket to soak up. They definitely help keep those guys in business which leads to better parts for us to buy. GM does not leave a lot for the aftermarket to do. That is, unless you want to open the engine and replace the cam, heads, etc and spend upwards of $15K minimum. GM's products are very well engineered to the point that a blower swap or a blower install might net you a little but not much. But it will still make good use of that extra power. With Mustangs, a blower swap gets you like 200 RWHP. Tunes make a huge difference. But that power does not always seem to be efficient until around 100+ MPH. Different approaches. If I'm a tuner and modder than the Mustang is the way to go. If I want a better built car out the box and will leave it the hell alone besides little boltons then the Camaro is better.

[BlaqWhole]

Originally Posted by ZRacerLE

Great video Blaq. Pretty sure I won't be able to live without a C8Z now.

You and me both!!

[LESS1]

Originally Posted by oldman

The MRC was meant for a DD that can be adjusted for other usages vs the DSSV which is a track damper that can be adjusted not to require a kidney belt to driven on the street.. just maybe. There is no free launch, it is an expensive, heavy, and track performance is compromised because:
1) weight
2) not alignment adjustable
3) does not feature jounce and rebound turning anywhere along the path, for instance, it can be tuned to be soft for the first 1/4 inch and then very stiff for 3/4 inch and as the tires are starting to give up due to predicted load they can softer up for 2" and then get really really firm to prevent the suspension from bottoming out.


I understand the DSSV itself is more expensive, I've pointed out there are guys spending $500 just to have their MRC removed. The DSSV was not out for 1LE production and may or may not have been chosen. From what I can see, the 6th gen DSSV used on the ZLE and over-the-counter by Chevy Performace is probably too stiff even with Cup2, the setup looks to be very jiggly and not in a good way.



Note the ZLE is "only" .5 faster than a 1LE or Cup2.


Sorry I was with the Challenger guys before this so I have NO experience with the DSSV and the 5th gen, much less the 6th gen.

From a customer standpoint, the MRC is far more useful on 99.9% of the Camaros sold.



Heavy car, lots of HP, and probably a really aggressive track alignment all conspired to help the demise. IMO, this was not a myth busters test, nobody went out there and measured as delivered and post lap tread depth (or temps). Visually these shallow type tires look worn right from the factory. Any subjective comment is just that. For all, we know the aggressive alignment can, conditions of the day, the weight of car et were just running the tire hot. Maybe that is actually all the tire can deliver and that is just the way it feels. Yes RP is an expert, but one seat time drive in the car does not equal actual data.

DSC Sport controller provides near limitless MRC tuning potential. Something not possible with DSSV setups. But as you said MRC is for the multi-use crowd whereas DSSV is really track-focused (road course) with limited uses. I went with SS 1LE for the MRC specifically for the ability to use DSC controller. I haven't jumped in just yet since I'm still getting up to speed with the overall 1LE package. Next season or possible towards the end of this season I will move to a DSC controller and create my own damping tables. Which can be customized for each track and also environmental conditions. Smooth track (again road course) stiffer settings, wet surface softer...etc. Try that with DSSV, not saying it can't be done but I for one like the precision of a one or a zero as opposed to... how many turns did you back out that side? As far as R Comp tires and street driving is concerned. Any experienced track rat (road course) isn't that worried about the spend on tires. Also we understand the potential dangers of running an R Comp tire on public streets and tend to save it for the track. What you have to keep in mind is this. The track rats (road course) are well aware of the significant costs associated with participating in HPDE, Track Days, and Racing and happily accept these costs. This is not to say the drag strip crowd is not spending the bucks (as a former NHRA license holder, running southern sportsman series for several seasons, I know the costs) to get their speed on. The difference here is I'm dropping well over 10K per season on tires, brakes, fluid... the usual consumables along with $250 and up per day for entry fees, hotels, food, gas (to track and on track) and it's not that hard to spend 1.5K or more on a track weekend. The spend is relative to the pursuit and goals.