[shaffe]

Originally Posted by Martinjlm

I tend to agree with this point of view. We (my company) think that GT500 was delayed primarily because of a mid-program decision to switch from 10AT to 7DCT and the length of time it took to develop and integrate the DCT. Given that Ford was willing to wait for the DCT and also add that level of cost to the program for a few tenths of a second in a quarter mile and maybe 1.5 - 2 seconds on the track (depending on the track of course) it is very unlikely they would “cheap out” on lesser items. They without a doubt armed the GT500 to win. C8 may have taken a little wind out of their sails, but at the end of the day, Ford can always say “we weren’t gunning for the C8”. Question then becomes “then what took you so long to answer the ZL1 and Redeye?”

Thanks for the input Martin! Your reasoning pretty much backs up a lot of the bread crumbs that are out there as to why it was delayed.

Originally Posted by Chadicus

The FASTEST tested M6 GT is a 12.6. The FASTEST M6 SS is a 12.2. .4 is a big margin.

Look can end this back and forth already this should all be common knowledge by now.

M6 to M6 Camaro - there is no debating that. SS, SS1LE are all faster than the GT, PP1, PP2, Bullitt when equipped 6M

A10 to A10 depends on if its a GT* or not

end of story for GT to SS

[RobbyBeefcake87]

Originally Posted by Idaho2018GTPremium

If you're saying the SS 1LE is an SS and then claiming it's better times on average (multiple 12.3 tests for the 1LE but not SS), then I suppose we need an SS*?

I was saying the A10 GT is 0.5 sec. faster than the GT M6, not M6 SS. Sorry for not clarifying (I forgot to write GT after that particular M6).

The 2018 M6 GT consistently has trapped 115 mph, except for the PP2 which does trap lower (113-114 mph) because of the slight additional aero mods. and fat (305) front tires, hurting the aerodynamics at speed. The M6 SS or SS* has trapped from 113-116 mph (or that one car that hit 118 mph). With multiple base SS tests under 115 mph.

My whole point of all of this is to dispel the myth here that any SS is capable of max. performance. I will cede that the M6 SS will in general have a slightly better e.t. in the 1/4 mile than the M6 GT (except the convertibles, which are tied at 12.7 and the GT vert. with a better mph). But the SS is simply not consistent enough to claim that the M6 SS is just as capable as the auto SS, unless you trim it out with the 1LE. Are you buying the 12.5 @ 113.4 mph SS (per R&T; note in a previous post you said you haven't seen a published time in the 113 mph range for an SS, even though I had already quoted it), or the 12.3 @ 118 mph SS (unlikely, since there was only one of those)? It is fact that multiple major publication tests have achieved 12.5 sec for the M6 SS and multiple tests under 115 mph for the base SS M6. That is not as fast as the fastest A10 SS test (12.2 by one publication, unlike the GT* which has 12.1 from two publications). But again, 12.5 is nearly as fast as the other A10 SS test of 12.4 sec. from MT - so which do you want to choose? They are closer to each other than the GT, but there's evidence that a base M6 SS is slightly slower than an auto SS, on average, dispelling the myth that any SS is capable of max. performance.

If a 115 mph M6 GT rolls up next to a 113 mph SS, the GT will likely win that roll race unless the SS gets a big initial jump. If a 115 mph M6 GT rolls up next to a 116 mph SS in a roll race, the winner will likely be whoever gets the jump, since we know the M6 GT does better at high speeds than the SS.

And yes, I understand the trans. argument of "it is what it is". Doesn't mean there wasn't a bit of performance likely left on the table with the gearing choices in the M6 GT.

Anyway, all that to say, the SS M6 and auto are close, but maybe not identical as claimed, given the multiple test results.

And yes, the M6 GT is slower than the GT*, but let's not pretend it is a slouch. It still consistently traps 115 mph, which isn't slow.

Now I feel like I've beaten a dead horse. I like all the cars, contrary to what some of you may believe.

Here's another question: In the Olympics, if you were competing in 2 events, would you rather be 1st in one and 4th in the other, or 2nd in one and 3rd in the other? Frankly, I'd rather get the gold and settle for 4th in my 2nd race, than a silver and bronze finish, with no gold. That is sort of what we're talking about here with the GT* and M6 GT vs. A10 SS and M6 SS.

Where do you get that the 1le is the ss*? It's not any faster than an ss, 12.3 has been achieved by a major publisher for both. The ss 1le is not faster, it gets the same or slower according to MT. If anything your m6 GT times need to have a *. Which one of those 12.6 is a non pp1 or pp2 base GT m6? Zero.

No one is saying the GT m6 is a slouch, it's plenty fast but it's not as fast as an m6 ss. An m6 ss on its best day is only .1 slower than an a10 ss and .2 slower than an a10 gt*. You're trying to pick and chose times, plenty of ss's/ss 1le's have gone 12.3 by two different publications just like the a10 pp1 12.1.

You're beating a dead horse because you keep claiming cherry picked numbers to fit your narrative. The fact is that an SS or ss 1le m6 can do 12.3, a GT pp1 a10 can do 12.1, and an a10 ss can do 12.2, all proven by major publications. The a10 pp1 GT is the fastest by a small margin. The ss m6 is close to both of those autos. You say the pp2 traps less because of aero big tires but somehow think the ss 1le gets faster from extra drag and rolling resintace.

Food for thought since you like to catagorize the 1le as something extra, even though it has all the disadvatages of the pp2; the gt m6 pp1 and 2 can do 12.6, at no point have we seen what the base GT m6 can do. I'm suspecting it's not much slower but probably a tenth behind and maybe an mph or two behind.

In youre scenario, when a 116 GT m6 pp1 rolls up on a 116 ss or ss 1le it's going to lose because it's going to lose the initial hit if reaction times are equal. However when it's those 114 pp2s or unknown speed non pp GT m6s, they will lose by more.

There is no myth about all ss's being able to achieve max performance, those slower times could have been due to numerous variables. Ofcourse an m6 car will be less consistent in their times. Time of year, temps, drivers, in theory all ss's are capable of the best times because they're all built equally unlike the GTs. There's not even any data on the m6 GT non pp1 cars, you're only claiming pp1 times and trap speeds. What's gonna happen when a regular mustang rolls up.

For what it's worth, I love all the American muscle cars. I know we argue and split hairs here, but I have nothing against mustangs. Great cars, but facts are facts.

[Chadicus]

Originally Posted by shaffe

Look can end this back and forth already this should all be common knowledge by now.

M6 to M6 Camaro - there is no debating that. SS, SS1LE are all faster than the GT, PP1, PP2, Bullitt when equipped 6M

A10 to A10 depends on if its a GT* or not

end of story for GT to SS

Well I keep thinking that this GT vs SS conversation is over but it keeps coming back and I had to say something lol.

Moving on to the GT500 I am not surprised they delayed it for the DCT. Well will see what it can do pretty soon.

[Idaho2018GTPremium]

Originally Posted by Chadicus

The FASTEST tested M6 GT is a 12.6. The FASTEST M6 SS is a 12.2. .4 is a big margin.

I dispute the 12.2 for an M6 SS referenced in that Mustang article - I still contend it was a typo. There is no actual test showing the M6 SS going 12.2 that I can find. The fastest actual magazine test for an M6 SS is 12.3 @ 118 mph (C&D long term result both new and used). However, that was only one car, could have been a ringer, as no other M6 SS could duplicate it, all the other M6 SS tests are a 12.4 and multiple 12.5 tests. No other SS M6 test has even surpassed 115 mph that I referenced above (except the SLE has once, however, even though it's "slower" than the standard SS) and one was only 113.4 mph (R&T). 113 to 118 mph is a big range in trap speed for the same model car.

The 12.3 SS (not SLE) seems like a ringer SS, particularly the trap speed (118 mph). I think they have been able to duplicate the time but only with an SLE at 12.3 @ 116 mph in the recent PP2 vs 1LE C&D test. But there's also SLEs running 12.5 like Motor Trend tested.

I think if anything this proves like I said earlier, you might get a 12.3 sec SS/SLE or a 12.5 sec SS/SLE. You might get a 12.2 sec A10 SS, or a 12.4 sec A10 SS.

With the GT, the published tests have been consistent. 12.1 from both MT and C&D for A10 GT, and 12.6 for the M6 GT. Like I said, 1st and 4th, or 2nd and 3rd?

[RobbyBeefcake87]

[QUOTE=Idaho2018GTPremium;10635299]

Originally Posted by Chadicus

Multiple 1LE tests at 12.3 would argue otherwise, compared to the 12.4, 12.5, and 12.5 I've quoted above for the M6 SS.

And the 12.3 ss tests that you like to ignore. Or that fact that MT was able to get a faster time with an SS than they did with an SS 1le and said as much.

[Idaho2018GTPremium]

Originally Posted by RobbyBeefcake87

Where do you get that the 1le is the ss*? It's not any faster than an ss, 12.3 has been achieved by a major publisher for both. The ss 1le is not faster, it gets the same or slower according to MT. If anything your m6 GT times need to have a *. Which one of those 12.6 is a non pp1 or pp2 base GT m6? Zero.

No one is saying the GT m6 is a slouch, it's plenty fast but it's not as fast as an m6 ss. An m6 ss on its best day is only .1 slower than an a10 ss and .2 slower than an a10 gt*. You're trying to pick and chose times, enough plenty of ss's/ss 1le's have gone 12.3 by two different publications just like the a10 pp1 12.1.

You're beating a dead horse because you keep claiming cherry picked numbers to fit your narrative. The fact is that an SS or ss 1le m6 can do 12.3, a GT pp1 a10 can do 12.1, and an a10 ss can do 12.2, all proven by major publications. The a10 pp1 GT is the fastest by a small margin. The ss m6 is close to both of those autos. You say the pp2 traps less because of aero big tires but somehow think the ss 1le gets faster from extra drag and rolling resintace.

Food for thought since you like to catagorize the 1le as something extra, even though it has all the disadvatages of the pp2; the gt m6 pp1 and 2 can do 12.6, at no point have we seen what the base GT m6 can do. I'm suspecting it's not much slower but probably a tenth behind and maybe an mph or two behind.

If youre scenario, when a 116 GT m6 pp1 rolls up on a 116 ss or ss 1le it's going to lose because it's going to lose the initial hit if reaction times are equal. However when those 114 pp2s or unknown speed non pp GT m6s, they will lose by more.

There is no myth about all ss's being able to achieve max performance, those slower times could have been due to numerous variables. Ofcourse an m6 car will be less consistent in their times. Time of year, temps, drivers, in theory all ss's are capable of the best times because they're all built equally unlike the GTs. There's not even any data on the m6 GT non pp1 cars, you're only claiming pp1 times and trap speeds. What's gonna happen when a regular mustang rolls up.

For what it's worth, I love all the American muscle cars. I know we argue and split hairs here, but I have nothing against mustangs. Great cars, but facts are facts.

Good arguments. I'll move on.

[RobbyBeefcake87]

Originally Posted by Idaho2018GTPremium

No, not "much" faster. Multiple tests have shown the GT M6 traps 115 mph, where as multiple tests have shown the M6 SS trap under 115 mph.

Two 12.5 sec. and one 12.4 sec. M6 SS tests vs. multiple 12.6 sec. M6 GT. I would not say that is "much" faster. That is slightly faster. Otherwise, the GT* is much faster than any SS.

Also, the convertibles are identical (recent test of 12.7 seconds for both). Again, not "much" faster. Even with that tie, I'll give the slight nod to the M6 SS.

Two 12.4 and 12.5, and four 12.3 for ss's vs four 12.6 for the GT m6 pp1 and pp2. No GT m6 has ran 12.6, only pp1 cars. Get your facts straight.

[Chadicus]

Originally Posted by Idaho2018GTPremium

I dispute the 12.2 for an M6 SS referenced in that Mustang article - I still contend it was a typo. There is no actual test showing the M6 SS going 12.2 that I can find. The fastest actual magazine test for an M6 SS is 12.3 @ 118 mph (C&D long term result both new and used). However, that was only one car, could have been a ringer, as no other M6 SS could duplicate it, all the other M6 SS tests are a 12.4 and multiple 12.5 tests. No other SS M6 test has even surpassed 115 mph that I referenced above (except the SLE has once, however, even though it's "slower" than the standard SS) and one was only 113.4 mph (R&T). 113 to 118 mph is a big range in trap speed for the same model car.

The 12.3 SS (not SLE) seems like a ringer SS, particularly the trap speed (118 mph). I think they have been able to duplicate the time but only with an SLE at 12.3 @ 116 mph in the recent PP2 vs 1LE C&D test. But there's also SLEs running 12.5 like Motor Trend tested.

I think if anything this proves like I said earlier, you might get a 12.3 sec SS/SLE or a 12.5 sec SS/SLE. You might get a 12.2 sec A10 SS, or a 12.4 sec A10 SS.

With the GT, the published tests have been consistent. 12.1 from both MT and C&D for A10 GT, and 12.6 for the M6 GT. Like I said, 1st and 4th, or 2nd and 3rd?

Or the GT* could be slower than a Kia Stinger. Or the M6 could run a 12.9 like the Bullitt. Or the A10 GT could run the same time as a M6 SS (This was an Edmunds test I think).

Hotlap has already linked the 12.2 M6 SS article MULTIPLE times where they said the M6 matched the A10 SS.

[Idaho2018GTPremium]

[QUOTE=RobbyBeefcake87;10635380]

Originally Posted by Idaho2018GTPremium

And the 12.3 ss tests that you like to ignore. Or that fact that MT was able to get a faster time with an SS than they did with an SS 1le and said as much.

OK, I didn't ignore it. In fact I mentioned it first before the slower tests back in my original post about all of this. I ultimately said with the SS you might be getting the 12.3 car, or a 12.5 car. With the GT you're getting a 12.6 car. The same applies for the autos, with the GT coming out as the faster version.

I feel like people aren't getting my original point about all of this - which was the argument that all SS (M6 or auto) are equal in straight line speed, which they don't appear to be based on the e.t. range (12.2-12.5) and trap speed (113-118 mph). I'm not trying to argue which car is faster. That's all been decided already.

[RobbyBeefcake87]

Originally Posted by Idaho2018GTPremium

I dispute the 12.2 for an M6 SS referenced in that Mustang article - I still contend it was a typo. There is no actual test showing the M6 SS going 12.2 that I can find. The fastest actual magazine test for an M6 SS is 12.3 @ 118 mph (C&D long term result both new and used). However, that was only one car, could have been a ringer, as no other M6 SS could duplicate it, all the other M6 SS tests are a 12.4 and multiple 12.5 tests. No other SS M6 test has even surpassed 115 mph that I referenced above (except the SLE has once, however, even though it's "slower" than the standard SS) and one was only 113.4 mph (R&T). 113 to 118 mph is a big range in trap speed for the same model car.

The 12.3 SS (not SLE) seems like a ringer SS, particularly the trap speed (118 mph). I think they have been able to duplicate the time but only with an SLE at 12.3 @ 116 mph in the recent PP2 vs 1LE C&D test. But there's also SLEs running 12.5 like Motor Trend tested.

I think if anything this proves like I said earlier, you might get a 12.3 sec SS/SLE or a 12.5 sec SS/SLE. You might get a 12.2 sec A10 SS, or a 12.4 sec A10 SS.

With the GT, the published tests have been consistent. 12.1 from both MT and C&D for A10 GT, and 12.6 for the M6 GT. Like I said, 1st and 4th, or 2nd and 3rd?

And you might get a 12.6 a10 GT or a pp1 a10 that loses to a kia.

[RobbyBeefcake87]

Originally Posted by Idaho2018GTPremium

Good arguments. I'll move on.

I didn't see this before my last two replies.. You're right, let's move back on topic.

[BlaqWhole]

1-2 Tenths in a quarter mile race is not anything special between two competing cars. Not to me. The 1st Gen Coyotes were about 2 tenths faster than the 5th Gen Camaros due to having less weight and a SRA. However the Camaro was and is the better car. Then for 2015 the GT gained weight when it went to IRS and got slower despite a HP jump. In 16 the Camaro slayed the GT by over half a second. So the GT got heavily revamped and is back in a 1-2 tenth lead. But this is all straight lines and like I said, anyone can build a fast straight line car. That is why the WRXs, Evos, and 370Zs were keeping up with the Mustang GTs for a while. Building a car that can track well is what determines the superior car these days. More specifically, building a car that can track AND works well in the quarter mile AND you don't have to break the bank is what sets cars apart.

So if the GT is faster than the SS by 1 tenth then that is hardly praiseworthy these days. I don't care if it is a GT or GT*, the Mustang is faster. But again, it is only by 1-2 tenths if that. That means a lot to people like newmoon but ultimately it is such an insignificant amount that you'd have to be petty to even bring it up.

Ford and Dodge's problem is that they can only keep up in one aspect and that is straight lines. Once curves are throw in the Dodges are MIA and the Fords either cost a fortune, lose a significant amount of straight line performance, or overheat. The Camaros and Corvettes however continue to do everything extremely well which is notable. Which is why I say that GM really has no competition. Not when the closest thing to compare to them from Ford and Dodge usually costs several thousands more and are limited in what they can do.

[vtirocz]

Originally Posted by Idaho2018GTPremium

I dispute the 12.2 for an M6 SS referenced in that Mustang article - I still contend it was a typo. There is no actual test showing the M6 SS going 12.2 that I can find. The fastest actual magazine test for an M6 SS is 12.3 @ 118 mph....

I agree with you on the 12.2 time being a little suspicious. Until they release the full instrumented test results, I don't really count that one.

With that said, it's entirely possible. My best so far is 12.28 in my stock SS M6 and the SAE ambient corrections MT and C&D use would bring it lower.

[RobbyBeefcake87]

Originally Posted by BlaqWhole

1-2 Tenths in a quarter mile race is not anything special between two competing cars. Not to me. The 1st Gen Coyotes were about 2 tenths faster than the 5th Gen Camaros due to having less weight and a SRA. However the Camaro was and is the better car. Then for 2015 the GT gained weight when it went to IRS and got slower despite a HP jump. In 16 the Camaro slayed the GT by over half a second. So the GT got heavily revamped and is back in a 1-2 tenth lead. But this is all straight lines and like I said, anyone can build a fast straight line car. That is why the WRXs, Evos, and 370Zs were keeping up with the Mustang GTs for a while. Building a car that can track well is what determines the superior car these days. More specifically, building a car that can track AND works well in the quarter mile AND you don't have to break the bank is what sets cars apart.

So if the GT is faster than the SS by 1 tenth then that is hardly praiseworthy these days. I don't care if it is a GT or GT*, the Mustang is faster. But again, it is only by 1-2 tenths if that. That means a lot to people like newmoon but ultimately it is such an insignificant amount that you'd have to be petty to even bring it up.

Ford and Dodge's problem is that they can only keep up in one aspect and that is straight lines. Once curves are throw in the Dodges are MIA and the Fords either cost a fortune, lose a significant amount of straight line performance, or overheat. The Camaros and Corvettes however continue to do everything extremely well which is notable. Which is why I say that GM really has no competition. Not when the closest thing to compare to them from Ford and Dodge usually costs several thousands more and are limited in what they can do.

I agree with pretty much everything you said except the part about GT or gt* not mattering. They do because there is quite a large discrepancy between a GT a10 pp1 and a GT m6, over half a second no doubt. So while the "gt*" is possibly the fastest by a tenth or two it is not across the board for the mustang gt. This matters to guys who look for manual transmission cars because at that point the tables turn and the ss is 1 to 3+ tenths faster, and it matters to guys who have a a10 pp1 like Idaho because they have the fastest straight line car in the mustang line up and quite possible the whole pony car segment. That tenth or two is bragging rights, especially if the car is worse at every other performance metric lol. I have friends and family with m6 GTs and those with the pp1 vs the base know they have the bragging rights with their 3.73s, for car guys it's all about splitting hairs lol.