[SlitherByU]

Originally Posted by whiteboyblues2001

When a manufacturer decides to post numbers, they have some choices. Do they publish hero times, prepped/unprepped, average times, etc. Some choose to go with a hero time, like Dodge did with the Demon. I am pretty sure the Demon is capapble of doing under 10 seconds, but it has to be ideal conditions with a very expeirienced driver. Under 10 seconds is a big WOW factor, but it leaves actual buyers with a little salt, since they won't be able to reproduce that time try after try.

Or, it can be done like Chevy does, and publish a more average time that a normal user can expect to see, and a similar number to what the magazines will publish. This gives less WOW factor, but seems more legit in the real world, as all the magazines pretty much confirm what Chevy claims, and real buyer get that number and better all over the country.

OR, you can do like Ford, and not (typically) publish numbers, and get someone like Evan to put up a hero time. No one can say Ford made a bogus claim of a number that no one can reporoduce, but they will get credit for that number anyway (it's a way that Ford can have it's cake and eat it too). It's a pretty smart strategy for a manufacturer as better numbers will generate more buzz, and no one can say Ford published some BS.

But, I prefer the Chevy way. Let me know a reproduceable number, and I will know that it's possible to beat that in good conditions, but buyers can achieve that number and even better. It's more real world. Plus, all these cars have 0-60 and 1/4 mile timers built into the infotainment systems. You know the first thing guys are going to do is test the car out and see if they can get the numbers they think they can get. And with Ford and Dodge, the buyers are going to be dissapointed testing these fancy timers out on an empty back road somewhere.

But, either way, all numbers need their context, and without, you might as well just make some crap up. SO, I really don't care whether a company uses a hero time on a prepped surface or not, I just need to know the exact circumstances that the test was produced. That way, I have the proper context.

I don't think Ford put Evan up to anything. Evan put Evan up to something. I'm sure Fords claim of 10.7's will be seen more than Dodge's claim of 9.65 has been seen.

At the end of the day all this talk about who spent more for what and the better buy and all other financial economics goes away when folks are lookin at tail lights in the real world.

[RobbyBeefcake87]

Originally Posted by SlitherByU

I don't think Ford put Evan up to anything. Evan put Evan up to something. I'm sure Fords claim of 10.7's will be seen more than Dodge's claim of 9.65 has been seen.

At the end of the day all this talk about who spent more for what and the better buy and all other financial economics goes away when folks are lookin at tail lights in the real world.

I agree that the ford 10.7 will be more repeatable than the demon 9.6, being that the demon 9.6 never happened again and Evan allegedly got 10.6 in a showroom stock gt500 (most likely messed with tire pressure, who knows if it had any weight removal since it was a hero run attempt, and it may have been a preproduction car).

I would say that ford put him up to it being that the run was in April in what could have been a preproduction car that he had all day to run and tinker with before anyone else was granted access to the car.

[LostM]

Originally Posted by RobbyBeefcake87

You have done so much racing yet fail to see that the 11.1 the c8 did was not on a prepped track with multiple cars being ran over and over to get the best times.

The gt500 should be able to beat the c8, but to think the c8 can't win is retarded. For every 10.8 and 10.9 there were more than twice as many 11.2+ times ran as well.

I understand 60fts and trap speeds. I understand HP/weight. I understand what the cars were built for. I dont understand why blaqwhole claims to understand these things, yet claims the C8 will beat the 500..

if you think launching the gt500 because of dct is hard, id ask to explain how the c8 will fair with the same dct and difficulty.

[Evansa22]

Originally Posted by LostM

I know more than you, can prove it, and have placed the bet. WILL YOU ACCEPT?

If your scared , just say so.

I sold my "race" car when I decided to buy the 500.

Please, accept this bet. there are plenty of Camaro owners wanting you to leave and stop making them look bad

Pretty sure all us camaro owners want you to leave, not him. But whatever.

Also in reference to launching the dct in the gt500 to the c8, I believe the answer you're looking for is because its mid engine and will have more weight over the drive tires giving better traction when hitting the skinny pedal. But again whatever...

[newmoon]

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

Typical Ford. Give us an extra $20K and we'll somehow manage to give you a car that is slower at something.

Exactly. Which is why newmoon has to rely on manufacturer claimed times all of a sudden. Because he talked his shit. He better hope it gets back up when both cars are lined up together.

Truth.

There is nothing wrong with using a prepped track. What gets called out is when a troll suddenly decides that using a time gained on a prepped track should be compared to a magazine time which is gained thru testing in a completely different manner. And then that person insists that there is a 7 tenths difference. If you're going to claim prepped times, then compare it to prepped times. If you're going to use magazine times, then compare it to magazine times.

Magazines like MT and C&D test cars in a specific manner. They are closer to what you'd come across at a stop light. They represent what a car can do in everyday driving conditions. What Evans and Ford did was completely different. Heating a track, spraying tire treatments on the tires, lowering the tire pressure, and other tricks are used on prepped track. Those same tricks are not used in magazine testing to my knowledge. So the discussion is that if you aren't testing the cars in the same or a similar manner then the results are invalid. It would be like comparing a YT video of a stock run to a magazine stock run which, as you know, is ridiculous and unfair.

Ok please explain to me how Chevy's approach to Ring times compares. Teams of engineers, tire manufacturer reps, shipping the car thousands of miles, installing roll cages, pro drivers. Does this represent what an average owner will achieve with the car. Let's hear it. I'd say you have a hell of a lot better chance of matching or bettering the 10.61 time than you do of Chevys claim to fame Ring times.

If your upset that the Camaro doesn't get tested the way other cars do try asking the testers instead of getting angry, throwing personal insults, and bad mouthing the competition.

[hotlap]

Originally Posted by SlitherByU

I don't think Ford put Evan up to anything. Evan put Evan up to something. I'm sure Fords claim of 10.7's will be seen more than Dodge's claim of 9.65 has been seen.

At the end of the day all this talk about who spent more for what and the better buy and all other financial economics goes away when folks are lookin at tail lights in the real world.

REVan Evan (Smith) is a paid media consultant. From his site under “REVan Up The New”...

In addition to creating content, REVan media Inc. has an excellent client list and consistently works with top media outlets to expose your brands.

He also posted this video of the GT500 at Grattan.

2020 Shelby GT500 vs GT350!!! We think it set the Grattan Lap Record beating Dodge Viper SRT-10 ACR.

[hotlap]

Originally Posted by newmoon

Ok please explain to me how Chevy's approach to Ring times compares. Teams of engineers, tire manufacturer reps, shipping the car thousands of miles, installing roll cages, pro drivers. Does this represent what an average owner will achieve with the car. Let's hear it. I'd say you have a hell of a lot better chance of matching or bettering the 10.61 time than you do of Chevys claim to fame Ring times.

If your upset that the Camaro doesn't get tested the way other cars do try asking the testers instead of getting angry, throwing personal insults, and bad mouthing the competition.

It compares in that Chevy’s effort are identical to what every other team that competes at the Ring does. Apples and apples.

[BlaqWhole]

Originally Posted by shaffe

Pretty sure everyone knew that the base GT500 would be the better 1/4 car. It makes sense given the aero and other bits that set the car up ford ROAD COURSE

Funny how after the fact I'm hearing about how everyone knew this. Nobody knew anything. If anything people made guesses. And the general guess was that the lighter car with CF components would be faster everywhere. Not one person before the testing came out said anything about the Base being faster at anything. In fact in most of the debates I and others clearly expressed our thoughts that the CF would be faster. I don't remember you or anyone chiming in to say how the Base would actually be faster in the quarter mile. Correct me if I'm wrong. Or perhaps you guys knew but just decided to keep it to yourself (yea right).

Originally Posted by shaffe

The ZL1 is a better 1/4 car than the ZLE is, the base C8 has a higher all important top speed than the Z51

Actually GM's posted times for the ZLE in the quarter mile are faster than the ZL1 when both have the same trans (A10 to A10 and M6 to M6). The only place the ZL1 is faster is top speed which makes sense. Same with the C8.

Originally Posted by shaffe

Just so we can all get on the same page. the 7tenths difference is based on what Ford claims and GM claims.

Do we know for sure if GM gives it's 1/4 times on unprepped surfaces? I do not know, so I am asking

The ZL1's times that newmoon likes to use are all magazine times that were not on a prepped track nor was it with using the tricks that Evans and others use or used to get those GT500 times. I refer to the ZL1 as being 11.3-11.4 with A10 trans. Private owners on prepped tracks using tricks that are common with people like Evans have been able to do high 10s. For the record, Hellcats have gone mid 10s and faster using those same tricks. And some in the Hellcat community claim that the Redeyes have seen low 10s and high 9s when using the same methods that Evans is known to use.

Originally Posted by shaffe

This is from the C&D article that came out months ago when we found out about the 180MPH top speed

"The base GT500 gets by with no downforce-aiding elements but the prize of being the quickest GT500 in a straight line, says Ford"

And good to know on the GM claim. Makes no sense to me, but still good to know.

Again, brought up way after the fact. When we all debated this for months not one person made mention that the Base would be faster. Not even you shaffe.

Originally Posted by ST1LE

I thought the A10 ZLE was the faster of the 2? Should I say quicker as we are talking 1/4 mile haha.

It is. By 1 tenth or so. Just like the C8 Z51 is quicker than the Base C8. Ford is the only one who offers a $20K package that makes your car slower.

[BlaqWhole]

Originally Posted by LostM

I know more than you, can prove it, and have placed the bet. WILL YOU ACCEPT?

If your scared , just say so.

I sold my "race" car when I decided to buy the 500.

Please, accept this bet. there are plenty of Camaro owners wanting you to leave and stop making them look bad

If anyone wants me to leave then I'm pretty sure they wouldn't be hiding thru a little boy. And I already declined your little bet. Like I said, your chances of dictating terms of anything to me do not exist. And what exactly am I supposed to be "scared" of in the first place? You aren't even on my level. I wouldn't have to sell anything to get a GT500 if I wanted one.

Here is some mature advice for you. You got a GT500 coming right? You got it for $3500 under MSRP right? It is the most amazing and most impressive car on the planet to you right? Then why TF does it matter to you what I think about it? Go brag to your Mustang friends about how you sold your "race" car (probably an import) to get your GEETEE500.

Originally Posted by hotlap

It compares in that Chevy’s effort are identical to what every other team that competes at the Ring does. Apples and apples.

Thank you for answering that. I'm getting tired of him playing ignorant.

[newmoon]

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

Funny how after the fact I'm hearing about how everyone knew this. Nobody knew anything. If anything people made guesses. And the general guess was that the lighter car with CF components would be faster everywhere. Not one person before the testing came out said anything about the Base being faster at anything. In fact in most of the debates I and others clearly expressed our thoughts that the CF would be faster. I don't remember you or anyone chiming in to say how the Base would actually be faster in the quarter mile. Correct me if I'm wrong. Or perhaps you guys knew but just decided to keep it to yourself (yea right).

Actually GM's posted times for the ZLE in the quarter mile are faster than the ZL1 when both have the same trans (A10 to A10 and M6 to M6). The only place the ZL1 is faster is top speed which makes sense. Same with the C8.

The ZL1's times that newmoon likes to use are all magazine times that were not on a prepped track nor was it with using the tricks that Evans and others use or used to get those GT500 times. I refer to the ZL1 as being 11.3-11.4 with A10 trans. Private owners on prepped tracks using tricks that are common with people like Evans have been able to do high 10s. For the record, Hellcats have gone mid 10s and faster using those same tricks. And some in the Hellcat community claim that the Redeyes have seen low 10s and high 9s when using the same methods that Evans is known to use.

Again, brought up way after the fact. When we all debated this for months not one person made mention that the Base would be faster. Not even you shaffe.

It is. By 1 tenth or so. Just like the C8 Z51 is quicker than the Base C8. Ford is the only one who offers a $20K package that makes your car slower.

Please post where the ZLE-A10 has posted a better 1/4 time than what the standard ZL1 A10 has, I must have missed that article. From what I recall it is slower in time and mph than the base but maybe I am wrong.

[newmoon]

Originally Posted by hotlap

It compares in that Chevy’s effort are identical to what every other team that competes at the Ring does. Apples and apples.

You are proving how biased you are with this statement. If you are giving a green light to a max big dollar effort by Chevy utilizing max resources including Chevy engineers on site to showcase the performance of the Camaro 1/2 way around the world, but you are upset a journalist took a GT500 to a local dragstrip for an afternoon and ran a number you dislike proves you can't be rational. You can't have it both ways.

I don't see an issue with either, nor did I have an issue with the independent testing of the HC which proved it to be an 11:00s car. Again if Chevy thinks their cars are faster than their advertised times why not do the same. Why not urge a independent review of the cars in a similar method. Both Dodge and Ford are doing it. I'd argue the method that the Dodge and Ford cars are being tested and reviewed make much more sense as they do represent what actually can be done with the cars.

Wouldn't you like to see the SS and ZL1 reviewed in the same manner? Also note that the times gotten for the HC was right on what the manufacturer claimed, the time received for the 500 was only 1-tenth quicker than advertised, hardly hero runs for either. Its not like they are claiming the car was 4-tenths faster than advertised.

[LostM]

Originally Posted by whiteboyblues2001

When a manufacturer decides to post numbers, they have some choices. Do they publish hero times, prepped/unprepped, average times, etc. Some choose to go with a hero time, like Dodge did with the Demon. I am pretty sure the Demon is capapble of doing under 10 seconds, but it has to be ideal conditions with a very expeirienced driver. Under 10 seconds is a big WOW factor, but it leaves actual buyers with a little salt, since they won't be able to reproduce that time try after try.

Or, it can be done like Chevy does, and publish a more average time that a normal user can expect to see, and a similar number to what the magazines will publish. This gives less WOW factor, but seems more legit in the real world, as all the magazines pretty much confirm what Chevy claims, and real buyer get that number and better all over the country.

OR, you can do like Ford, and not (typically) publish numbers, and get someone like Evan to put up a hero time. No one can say Ford made a bogus claim of a number that no one can reporoduce, but they will get credit for that number anyway (it's a way that Ford can have it's cake and eat it too). It's a pretty smart strategy for a manufacturer as better numbers will generate more buzz, and no one can say Ford published some BS.

But, I prefer the Chevy way. Let me know a reproduceable number, and I will know that it's possible to beat that in good conditions, but buyers can achieve that number and even better. It's more real world. Plus, all these cars have 0-60 and 1/4 mile timers built into the infotainment systems. You know the first thing guys are going to do is test the car out and see if they can get the numbers they think they can get. And with Ford and Dodge, the buyers are going to be dissapointed testing these fancy timers out on an empty back road somewhere.

But, either way, all numbers need their context, and without, you might as well just make some crap up. SO, I really don't care whether a company uses a hero time on a prepped surface or not, I just need to know the exact circumstances that the test was produced. That way, I have the proper context.

yes, makes sense. I always see performance advertisements that always state that their products are mediocre at best. That you will remain average in whatever attribute you are trying to improve upon, by buying their product over the competitors..

makes total logical sense. Dont show what can actually be achieved, show mediocrity
If that is the case. its no wonder GM cant sell them at sticker, or even below.. and has to offer more $$ off to switch sides

[LostM]

Originally Posted by Evansa22

Pretty sure all us camaro owners want you to leave, not him. But whatever.

Also in reference to launching the dct in the gt500 to the c8, I believe the answer you're looking for is because its mid engine and will have more weight over the drive tires giving better traction when hitting the skinny pedal. But again whatever...

and how did those results end up, which car was quicker and faster?

[Evansa22]

Originally Posted by LostM

and how did those results end up, which car was quicker and faster?

I believe your comprehension skills are lacking, your asking why it's harder to launch the gt500 over the c8 even with the same trans no? Or do you not understand your own comments/questions? Not sure of the results you're claiming. I dont know what metric you will use to measure "quicker" but it does 0-60 under 3 seconds and that's down 260 hp to the 500. Gt500 is what 3.3-3.5 seconds? Also "faster"? Again if we're using top speed then c8 is 190? To the gt500's 180?
Anyway quicker or faster was never mentioned, I believe your question was why it would be any different launching the 2 cars. As a race car driver I thought that would be obvious to you.

To you newmoon, like he said, apples to apples. Their ring run was on par with other manufacturers efforts. Same cant be said for fords or Evan's 1/4 mile times. That's not bias, its reality.