[SpookShow'84]

Back to the quarter we go, one metric yipee!

[SuperSound]

Originally Posted by Mustang Fanboy

If the 109mph vehicle was running sticky tires, it wouldn't be running that ET. That is why I picked the example. A 109mph trap speed does not make a turd...as there is no way a turd would trap 109mph in the first place. This highlights my point where the MPH is going to give you the best metric on what a vehicle is capable of.

Would you pick a car that traps 118mph over one that traps 103mph, both running the same ET? Of course you would, because you know that if you slapped some slicks on the former that it would be an easy 11 second vehicle. I don't even have to tell you what the ET of the 118mph vehicle is to tell you that it's capable of easy 11's.

But that's just it, if we are talking same vehicle and same driver...you have eliminated most of the variables that make comparing one car's trap speed vs another useless. It definitely is a good measurement for same vehicle with different power levels (i.e. comparing an auto to manual, V6 to V8 in the same model). But once you try that with different vehicles, the variables stack up. Hell that damn 800hp Shelby GT ran the same MPH as a 6th gen SS. Trap speed is useless now because we know with a set of slicks and some tweaks to the suspension that should be a 10 sec car.

So if you have been after using trap speed in the same vehicle, I agree. But different vehicles and the variables stack against you. Which is why no one just posts a timeslip with only an ET or one with only a trap speed. Because both on their own leave too many questions. But together you can make reasonable assumptions about whether a car hooked and was driven to the best of it's ability.

[Mustang Fanboy]

Originally Posted by SpookShow'84

Back to the quarter we go, one metric yipee!

You mean the metric that the 99 percentile of the buying public care about? What exactly do you think the average mustang and camaro driver interested in? These are daily drivers afterall, not dedicated track cars.

Originally Posted by SuperSound

But that's just it, if we are talking same vehicle and same driver...you have eliminated most of the variables that make comparing one car's trap speed vs another useless. It definitely is a good measurement for same vehicle with different power levels (i.e. comparing an auto to manual, V6 to V8 in the same model). But once you try that with different vehicles, the variables stack up. Hell that damn 800hp Shelby GT ran the same MPH as a 6th gen SS. Trap speed is useless now because we know with a set of slicks and some tweaks to the suspension that should be a 10 sec car.

So if you have been after using trap speed in the same vehicle, I agree. But different vehicles and the variables stack against you. Which is why no one just posts a timeslip with only an ET or one with only a trap speed. Because both on their own leave too many questions. But together you can make reasonable assumptions about whether a car hooked and was driven to the best of it's ability.

I don't disagree, both together are better than one individually...however, ET's can still be misleading while the trap speed will almost always show you what you left on the table. A poor driver can absolutely demolish the ET of a vehicle while still maintaining a high trap speed....pointing to what the vehicle really is capable of. This isn't exclusive to different vehicles. Driver A is a great driver and launches a v6 camaro to a 13.4 @ 102mph. Driver B is a terrible driver and launches a v8 mustang to an 13.4 @ 112mph. What does that tell you about the respective vehicles? The mustang in this case is obviously far more capable given a better driver and or traction. Just because they turned identical ETs doesn’t make the V6 in the same realm as the v8.

[SuperSound]

Originally Posted by Mustang Fanboy

I don't disagree, both together are better than one individually...however, ET's can still be misleading while the trap speed will almost always show you what you left on the table. A poor driver can absolutely demolish the ET of a vehicle while still maintaining a high trap speed....pointing to what the vehicle really is capable of. This isn't exclusive to different vehicles. Driver A is a great driver and launches a v6 camaro to a 13.4 @ 102mph. Driver B is a terrible driver and launches a v8 mustang to an 13.4 @ 112mph. What does that tell you about the respective vehicles? The mustang in this case is obviously far more capable given a better driver and or traction. Just because they turned identical ETs doesn’t make the V6 in the same realm as the v8.

I completely agree, ET is the easiest to throw off and has more to do with the driver than trap speed does. I guess my point is really more out of context with what we are dealing with. Since we all know the specs and ranges for the cars being discussed. My point would be more with vehicles that we don't have that kind of background on. But that's not the case here to begin with.

I still agree the comparisons in terms of 1/4 between the two aren't valid. Now on track performance is another story.

[Mustang Fanboy]

Originally Posted by SuperSound

I completely agree, ET is the easiest to throw off and has more to do with the driver than trap speed does. I guess my point is really more out of context with what we are dealing with. Since we all know the specs and ranges for the cars being discussed. My point would be more with vehicles that we don't have that kind of background on. But that's not the case here to begin with.

I still agree the comparisons in terms of 1/4 between the two aren't valid. Now on track performance is another story.

Agreed.

[SpookShow'84]

If 1/4 is the most important all encompassing factor to the average Joe buyer, the SS should be dominating in sales and it is clearly not. It's the red-headed step child of the pony car world. OTHER factors do matter, price for sure.

[Mustang Fanboy]

Originally Posted by SpookShow'84

If 1/4 is the most important all encompassing factor to the average Joe buyer, the SS should be dominating in sales and it is clearly not. It's the red-headed step child of the pony car world. OTHER factors do matter, price for sure.

Hmm, you may want to re-read my previous posts chief.

[SuperSound]

Originally Posted by SpookShow'84

If 1/4 is the most important all encompassing factor to the average Joe buyer, the SS should be dominating in sales and it is clearly not. It's the red-headed step child of the pony car world. OTHER factors do matter, price for sure.

That's easy, because v8 sales are not the majority for this segment. Hence why 1/4 performance isn't a big factor for the average buyer. It would be interesting to compare v8 to v8 sales only. I bet the margins are much closer.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk

[SpookShow'84]

More deflection, specifically what post #'s.

If the 1/4 splits between the three cars are the same per C&D results, it effectively negates their ability to be a heavily weighted comparison point between the trim levels.

[Mustang Fanboy]

Originally Posted by SuperSound

That's easy, because v8 sales are not the majority for this segment. Hence why 1/4 performance isn't a big factor for the average buyer. It would be interesting to compare v8 to v8 sales only. I bet the margins are much closer.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk

It's tough to find.

This article points to 52% in the US (it's from 3rd quarter 2015)

http://www.businessinsider.com/the-f...-the-us-2015-8

Still, 52% is a bigger number than I thought.

[SpookShow'84]

Trying to slide sales into the trim level comparison has nothing to do with what is a more accurate comparison. GM has dropped the ball on many aspects of the SS, along with the dealers for the most part only ordering loaded 2SS cars, while Ford has played their hand almost perfectly. The GT350R will blow a 1SS of the track, selling a lot more 1SS car has nothing to do with trim level commonality.

Sales are not an effective measurement as to trim level comparison.

Edit; How is an article dated prior to the roll-out of the Gen6 even applicable?

[Mustang Fanboy]

Originally Posted by SpookShow'84

More deflection, specifically what post #'s.

There was no deflection.

You're a big boy, you can read. I don't feel the need to re-quite my own posts. What I can do is paraphrase. 1) People 4 and 6 cylinder mustang due because of the cheaper MSRP. 2) People will inherently be drawn to a V8 pony car over any other options.

No where did I mention that 1/4 mile determines how well the product sells. We all know that really not matter as much as 1 and 2.

Originally Posted by SpookShow'84

If the 1/4 splits between the three cars are the same per C&D results, it effectively negates their ability to be a heavily weighted comparison point between the trim levels.

I'm sorry, I have no idea what you are arguing here.



Edit: My post makes me sound like a dick...not trying to be one here. Trying to keep it civil.

[SpookShow'84]

"No where did I mention that 1/4 mile determines how well the product sells."

What about that 99% of the public caring about it in post #59? You're not offending me and I'm not trying to offend you. I am just trying to see why from your viewpoint that SS and GT are a better match.

My assertion the whole time has been not the a V6 1LE is a better car than a GT. The GT is a good car, Ford got a LOT of things about that car right.

The OP wanted a head to head list of direct trim level comparison. I just feel that with the to date published performance data, the V6 1LE is a slightly better comparison to the GT than the GT to an SS.

If the 1/4 mile time differentiation are the nearly same between the trim levels, I'm looking at the other comparison points. To me they more closely associate the V6 1LE to the GT.

[Mustang Fanboy]

Originally Posted by SpookShow'84

"No where did I mention that 1/4 mile determines how well the product sells."

What about that 99% of the public caring about it in post #59? You're not offending me and I'm not trying to offend you. I am just trying to see why from your viewpoint that SS and GT are a better match.

The context of that post was in regards to what the buying public care about, not in regards to what sells. To break it down, they care far more about "get up and go" power than they care about how well a car laps any particular road course. Price however will always be number 1. Engine size number 2.

Originally Posted by SpookShow'84

My assertion the whole time has been not the a V6 1LE is a better car than a GT. The GT is a good car, Ford got a LOT of things about that car right.

The OP wanted a head to head list of direct trim level comparison. I just feel that with the to date published performance data, the V6 1LE is a slightly better comparison to the GT than the GT to an SS.

If the 1/4 mile time differentiation are the nearly same between the trim levels, I'm looking at the other comparison points. To me they more closely associate the V6 1LE to the GT.

You are one of those in the .1%. I'm not trying to dissuade you from your opinion, but was merely pointing out what I believe to be the majorities viewpoint. I'm assuming you are making a comparison in regards to track (road-coarse) duty only. If that's the case, throw in the EB mustang, as it has shown to be quite capable on some tracks.

Don't be surprised however when someone hotlaps a 1leV6 and GTPP and finds the PP to be quicker on a road course and ridiculously quicker in the 1/4 mile. 1/4 times are easy to compare, as we have number that allow us to see through drivers abilities and weather variations. Road coarse numbers done by armatures are not so easy to interpret, especially on different days. Really, until there is more data on this...we don't know which one really would be quicker.