[Chadicus]

Originally Posted by Ethanolic

Accept nobody is disputing the Camaro ran X in private owners hands , but private owners are known to lie, so we use automobile journalist testing because they have no skin in the game and they use regimented testing for all vehicles. In those tests the GT has been tested .3 faster than the SS at 11.9 or do we have to throw those results out too?

If you are referring to the Cars.com time they dont correct their times and they have not tested a Camaro. MT, and C&D have recently tested both and found the GT* .1 faster. That's the tests most of us use as reference.

[Idaho2018GTPremium]

Originally Posted by 13vertss

There are a lot of mod companies that work specific with Camaro, yet you don’t see them out getting track times for the Camaro for magazines or you tube videos . They don’t need to as the Camaro speaks for themselves. Yet all the mustangs companies all come out of the woodwork to be the first, or fastest in the latest mustang. I think a lot of that is because Ford doesn’t publish numbers, so they want to be first at it. IMHO I would not be surprised if Ford didn’t ask them to do it as it was mentioned earlier. But these have been hero runs, yet everyone feels this is the norm. If it was, there would be much more talk in the drag racing section on m6 of others getting these times, yet these have been out for quite awhile now, and not much talk over there. So just shows these times are RARE.

I don't think anyone is claiming that the best published run for any car is the norm. The best time is obviously just that, all other times are slower. But in general, when comparing cars, people compare the best times. That's how it is and always has been. I'm OK with claiming 12.1 vs 12.2. It's still a win for my car (since I have, as y'all like to say, a GT*).

Just like the ZLE's Ring time - some people sort of act like it's the norm, but it's the best time anyone has achieved and properly recorded. The norm is going to be slower.

We're not dumb, everyone can distinguish the best time from a normal time. Heck, even a 12.1 and a 12.2 aren't the norm. Simply because most people who own the cars don't go to the strip nearly as often as those magazine editors/writers who do it regularly for a living.

I just think it's crazy we're spending so much energy arguing about 12.1 vs 12.2, or whatever, because my dream car as an older teenager (late 90s Viper GTS coupe) is only about that fast.

[BlaqWhole]

Originally Posted by shaffe

That argument I see on here all the time and to me it makes no sense. If anything a speed shop would benefit from sandbagging the stock car/baseline to make their packages look better. And the rented prepped track also to me doesn't make much of a difference. From my own personal experience a rented track puts in the minimum amount of effort to track prep.

No they wouldn't because it would give no ghost to chase after. If I have a shop and ran an 18 GT to a 12.5, then threw some mods on it and ran an 11.9 then what motivation would that be to someone who did a 12 flat in their 18 GT? They would not buy my product. Plus I'd lose all credibility if I'm an authority on the car but average Joes are out there pulling better times than me. That is why these shops claim such radical times that nobody else can seem to match. Because it impresses their fans. Just like what happened with Evans when he posted that 11.8. So when they post these runs that nobody can do it gives people something to chase. And then they say "oh well not only did we run an incredible quarter mile with our bone stock GT, but we threw some X mods at it to really see what we could do" and people eat that shit up. It makes them look good and helps them retain their street cred. And then it makes their products look good when they install them and do even better.

Yet nobody wonders why the shops always seem to do a little bit better than everyone else...

[hotlap]

Originally Posted by Idaho2018GTPremium

I don't think anyone is claiming that the best published run for any car is the norm. The best time is obviously just that, all other times are slower. But in general, when comparing cars, people compare the best times. That's how it is and always has been. I'm OK with claiming 12.1 vs 12.2. It's still a win for my car (since I have, as y'all like to say, a GT*).

Just like the ZLE's Ring time - some people sort of act like it's the norm, but it's the best time anyone has achieved and properly recorded. The norm is going to be slower.

We're not dumb, everyone can distinguish the best time from a normal time. Heck, even a 12.1 and a 12.2 aren't the norm. Simply because most people who own the cars don't go to the strip nearly as often as those magazine editors/writers who do it regularly for a living.

I just think it's crazy we're spending so much energy arguing about 12.1 vs 12.2, or whatever, because my dream car as an older teenager (late 90s Viper GTS coupe) is only about that fast.

I’m ok also because I own the car with the chassis that is superior in every way. There is no debate.
https://www.camaro6.com/forums/showp...5&postcount=10

12.1 is normal for a SS and the average of the Camaro6 shows it (below).

1-15 = 12.061
1-20 = 12.098
1-25 = 12.130
1-30 = 12.165

Narrow that into the top 10 and the average falls to 12.00 - flat.

That’s why it is silly to spend so much time tell you, and the long line that proceeded you, that we will be ok in our SSes. Every one ...since Nov 2015. ...has been stellar.

Chevy is on the positive side of the 4,000 years of evolution speratating the two.

[newmoon]

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

As far as Evans run at the track...if it was a MT or C&D or some other reputable outlet that was at the track and hired him to run the car then I absolutely would acknowledge it. But the circumstances surrounding that track outing as well as the publication and articles that he is associated with kinda takes away all his validity. Like I said MM&FF is hardly an official source to quote quarter mile times from. And I've seen too many articles of them instructing people how to cheat. I get it that they're an enthusiast mag. But that to me makes them more story tellers to me. I've seen many people back in my Stang days who tried to copy their cars or the results they claim to have gotten and I don't know of anyone who actually had the same success they report. Especially on the cars they claim are DD. So the fact that he just so happens to be the one who got the best time out of the 18+ GT raises all kinds of red flags. Like I said, you kinda lose all credibility when you write an article on how to fool track officials, how to hide nitrous, all the mods you can hide, etc.

Why do you continue to discount and smear this run, other publications have run 11s and other 12:00s and 12:10s, the car has mph'd very close to 120. Do you really think that the car isn't capable of 11:80s under good conditions with a great driver. Stop with the BH it is that fast now get over it.

Now lets take the SS, we have one publication running a 12:20s thats is it.

[Chadicus]

Originally Posted by newmoon

Why do you continue to discount and smear this run, other publications have run 11s and other 12:00s and 12:10s, the car has mph'd very close to 120. Do you really think that the car isn't capable of 11:80s under good conditions with a great driver. Stop with the BH it is that fast now get over it.

Now lets take the SS, we have one publication running a 12:20s thats is it.

Whew!!! I was getting worried about you!

[NW-99SS]

Originally Posted by Idaho2018GTPremium

Well, I thought it was published for Hot Rod because it's on that site. I am not familiar with Evan. Never heard of him until I read that article.

Evan has been around a long time. The sword fell into the other hand when he ran the only sub 12 sec 1/4 mile in a C5 Z06 way back in 2003 or 2004...the Ford crowd cried foul all day long. He also ran two sub 13 sec 1/4 miles in a 2002 SS which was being used for Mustangs and FFs as a comparison to the current New Edge GTs (No Cobra for 2002), and that wasn't well received either...

Great entertaining posts everyone.

It's my opinion that the GT* (the * makes me laugh), is 0.1 sec faster than the equivalent auto SS. Everything else is difference in DA, traction, driver, etc.

0.1 seconds has long been considered a driver's race - basically whoever leaves first with traction.

Until the GT*, the SS was a lot more than a tenth faster, similar to those 4th gen days as referred to above.

[rocket403]

I really think that the Camaro and Mustang are really close in times but wow lets get really selective on what times we are going to except for the Mustang because it was run by this guy or that and this other Mag never ran a Camaro so we can't take that is butt hurt in my mind.
Some of you are just bench racing blow hards I want to see these two cars go now with all this talk, kind of reminds me of when I would street race on Friday and Sat night and I would always come across someone that would say that the race was not fare so I would race again and the second time they wouldn't come back lol.

[BlaqWhole]

Originally Posted by newmoon

Why do you continue to discount and smear this run, other publications have run 11s and other 12:00s and 12:10s, the car has mph'd very close to 120. Do you really think that the car isn't capable of 11:80s under good conditions with a great driver. Stop with the BH it is that fast now get over it.

Now lets take the SS, we have one publication running a 12:20s thats is it.

Bout time you showed up. We *ahem* they were worried about you man. Where were you?? LOL!!

Anyway, I did not discount any other run except for his and that was for the reasons I stated not only this time but every time his run has popped up. I would never consider anything he does as official because of the simple fact that he worked for a company that spent an alarming amount of effort into figuring out ways to scheme and lie and deceive and trick people into thinking a particular car was stock when in fact it had nitrous or any of the myriad other mods out there. Sorry for the run-on sentence. Like I said, if C&D or MT was in charge of things and simply hired him to show up, get in the car, and run it, then I'd believe it. But coming from him I'd no sooner believe that run than I'd drink tap water in Mexico.

Originally Posted by rocket403

I really think that the Camaro and Mustang are really close in times but wow lets get really selective on what times we are going to except for the Mustang because it was run by this guy or that and this other Mag never ran a Camaro so we can't take that is butt hurt in my mind.
Some of you are just bench racing blow hards I want to see these two cars go now with all this talk, kind of reminds me of when I would street race on Friday and Sat night and I would always come across someone that would say that the race was not fare so I would race again and the second time they wouldn't come back lol.

Those are some harsh criticisms. I mean, way back in the day I disliked and disagreed with all the Mustang guys on the Mustang forums. So I left and never bothered to return. You guys have all these criticisms about how we're in "LaLa land" and we're "bench racers" and everything else yet here you all are. I take it that regardless of what you say, you and others enjoy it here debating with us and you only argue because you know there is some truth to what we're saying...you just wanna defend Frod. I thought they were all FOS over on M6G and walked away and never went back, lol!!

[BlaqWhole]

Originally Posted by newmoon

Why do you continue to discount and smear this run, other publications have run 11s and other 12:00s and 12:10s, the car has mph'd very close to 120. Do you really think that the car isn't capable of 11:80s under good conditions with a great driver. Stop with the BH it is that fast now get over it.

Now lets take the SS, we have one publication running a 12:20s thats is it.

Let me ask you this. If I had made several posts about how I lie and cheat in racing and how I know all the tricks to hide mods and how I race my modded car in stock competitions and nobody knows and all that shit...if I all of a sudden traveled half way around the country to get a Camaro and then ran a time that nobody else could do or has done and I claimed I was stock...would you believe me? Just curious.

[rocket403]

Little hard in my criticisms I agree some are more bench racers than others I'm a bench racer as my Olds would be the car I would race, and I'm not a Mustang guy because I have had my issues with Ford.

But lets call a spade a spade

[BlaqWhole]

Originally Posted by rocket403

Little hard in my criticisms I agree some are more bench racers than others I'm a bench racer as my Olds would be the car I would race, and I'm not a Mustang guy because I have had my issues with Ford.

But lets call a spade a spade

Maybe most of us are just sick of Frod's shit.

[hotlap]

Originally Posted by rocket403

Little hard in my criticisms I agree some are more bench racers than others I'm a bench racer as my Olds would be the car I would race, and I'm not a Mustang guy because I have had my issues with Ford.

But lets call a spade a spade

I had no trouble doing better than the best magazine time in my car. I hope that its ok for me to comment.

[NW-99SS]

Originally Posted by hotlap

I had no trouble doing better than the best magazine time in my car. I hope that its ok for me to comment.

It's not, because you own a Camaro and not a Mustang...