2013 GT500 laps the ring quicker then ZL1

[The Baron]

Lol at the idea Ford did this but kept it quiet. Lololol.

Really?

[Truck Norris]

Originally Posted by The Baron

Lol at the idea Ford did this but kept it quiet. Lololol.

Really?

Ya, really..... Here is a letter from SVT Cheif Engineer Jamal Hameedi regarding this very topic

Question-

Greetings Jamal, How are you? As I'm sure you're aware we've been busy the GT500
Nürburgring lap video that the media group included among the other track
runs. I was wondering if you could shed some light on why Ford chose to
not release an official 'Ring time for the 2013/14 GT500?
Thanks, Travis




Reply-

Ring times! Oh man don't even get me started on this topic. Our (my) view is that there is no such thing as an official manufacturer Ring time. The times being posted by many manufacturers are in my humble opinion akin to qualifying times being set at a race with no pre/post inspection (ie it would never happen). In the racing world - inspection/verification is a key part of the sport. In order for us to set an "official" time corner weights would have to be taken, calibration checksums need to be verified, engine power verified via chassis rolls, a hoist inspection, and probably a fuel sample taken by an independent 3rd party like a governing/sanctioning body. I would love to see this since everyone seems to be infatuated with Ring times. Having said that, I think it's really important that performance cars be judged against one another on the track - but the comparisons really need to be on the same day by a professional driver (just track condition from day to day puts another huge variable in comparisons). We have seen lap time spreads of over 3 sec with same car same driver different day at VIR. Now extrapolate that to a track with a 7 min lap time. Motor Trend collects cars on the same day and puts a professional driver behind the wheel - not journalists whose driving ability puts yet another huge variable in lap times - and compares vehicles same driver same day. I think they do it correctly. So does Auto Motor und Sport in Germany.

The reason we test at the Ring is because it is a fantastic venue for doing vehicle dynamics work. You get so much different content in terms of turns, elevation, etc that you would need to visit 5 different tracks to duplicate it. It's also a chance for our North American vehicle dynamics guys to cross pollinate with our Team RS guys since we are all one group now. Team RS gets a chance to offer feedback on the RWD cars and the SVT guys offer perspective on the FWD cars. That's really powerful and worth spending the money to send cars and engineers over there. Renting the Ring exclusively ($$$$$!) to make a video - not so much. I'd rather put that money into the car.

I know this isn't what the internet bench racers want to hear. As soon as there is a standard for measuring lap times - our performance vehicles will be the first in line to get tested. Until then - it's just marketing and a total free for all. They are very cool to watch though. Lol. The 2013/2014 GT500 sold just fine without a published Ring time (who could have imagined!). Actually we spent a lot of time trying to figure out how to make more GT500s due to high demand. I've seen other performance cars with published Ring times being offered with incentives and cash on the hood (again - who could have imagined!). So I sleep pretty well at night. And spend my days (and nights) working on the next slayer vs. worrying about Ring times.

Hopefully this gives you some perspective on where our minds are at wrt Ring times.
See you at SEMA!

Jamal

[72MachOne99GT]

Ford hasn't engaged in the Pissing Contest.

Clearly means they suck.

It's clear to see why Ford has no need to release times.

They let the vehicles speak for themselves. (yes, even the wood axle over powered piece of shit that can't make a turn to save it's own life)

[hockeylover86]

Originally Posted by LOWDOWN

Car - Curb Weight -- HP -- P2W --- 'Ring

ZR1.....3,300............638....5.2.......7:19

GT500..3,850...........662....5.81.....7:39

Z06/7...3,200..........505....6.33.....7:22

Z/28.....3,827..........505....7.58.....7:37

ZL1......4,120..........580....7.10.....7:41

Chassis dynamics, including weight distribution, tire sizes and compounds, all come into play. IRS vs. SRA. Even the Laws of Physics cannot defy such a staggering P2W advantage the GT500 has over ALL except the ZR1.

The fact the 'Ring numbers are in the same neighborhood as the GMs listed is strictly due to one outrageous engine, wrapped in an outdated chassis. By moving to IRS with the next-Gen Mustang is a clear admission of this significant shortcoming by its parents...

Remember, this outdated chassis has been around since 05.

What was the Camaro running in 05? Oh right..

Kudos to them for keeping it selling well for so long against a platform 4 years newer...

[2010-1SS-IBM]

Originally Posted by sizl1

The benefit of IRS has nothing to do with the track. The benefit of IRS is for regular roads that have potholes and other imperfections where an IRS would benefit - all of which is irrelevant on a track.

But not irrelevant on a street car.

[shaffe]

Originally Posted by ZL1-V

Who stated in this thread that IRS was a better handling system?

Might not have been in this thread, but almost every thread on this forum where Mustang and handling are brought up, people bring up the Solid axle vs IRS in terms of handling

[Rock36]

Originally Posted by Truck Norris

Ya, really..... Here is a letter from SVT Cheif Engineer Jamal Hameedi regarding this very topic

Question-

Greetings Jamal, How are you? As I'm sure you're aware we've been busy the GT500
Nürburgring lap video that the media group included among the other track
runs. I was wondering if you could shed some light on why Ford chose to
not release an official 'Ring time for the 2013/14 GT500? Y
Thanks, Travis




Reply-

Ring times! Oh man don't even get me started on this topic. Our (my) view is that there is no such thing as an official manufacturer Ring time. The times being posted by many manufacturers are in my humble opinion akin to qualifying times being set at a race with no pre/post inspection (ie it would never happen). In the racing world - inspection/verification is a key part of the sport. In order for us to set an "official" time corner weights would have to be taken, calibration checksums need to be verified, engine power verified via chassis rolls, a hoist inspection, and probably a fuel sample taken by an independent 3rd party like a governing/sanctioning body. I would love to see this since everyone seems to be infatuated with Ring times. Having said that, I think it's really important that performance cars be judged against one another on the track - but the comparisons really need to be on the same day by a professional driver (just track condition from day to day puts another huge variable in comparisons). We have seen lap time spreads of over 3 sec with same car same driver different day at VIR. Now extrapolate that to a track with a 7 min lap time. Motor Trend collects cars on the same day and puts a professional driver behind the wheel - not journalists whose driving ability puts yet another huge variable in lap times - and compares vehicles same driver same day. I think they do it correctly. So does Auto Motor und Sport in Germany.

The reason we test at the Ring is because it is a fantastic venue for doing vehicle dynamics work. You get so much different content in terms of turns, elevation, etc that you would need to visit 5 different tracks to duplicate it. It's also a chance for our North American vehicle dynamics guys to cross pollinate with our Team RS guys since we are all one group now. Team RS gets a chance to offer feedback on the RWD cars and the SVT guys offer perspective on the FWD cars. That's really powerful and worth spending the money to send cars and engineers over there. Renting the Ring exclusively ($$$$$!) to make a video - not so much. I'd rather put that money into the car.

I know this isn't what the internet bench racers want to hear. As soon as there is a standard for measuring lap times - our performance vehicles will be the first in line to get tested. Until then - it's just marketing and a total free for all. They are very cool to watch though. Lol. The 2013/2014 GT500 sold just fine without a published Ring time (who could have imagined!). Actually we spent a lot of time trying to figure out how to make more GT500s due to high demand. I've seen other performance cars with published Ring times being offered with incentives and cash on the hood (again - who could have imagined!). So I sleep pretty well at night. And spend my days (and nights) working on the next slayer vs. worrying about Ring times.

Hopefully this gives you some perspective on where our minds are at wrt Ring times.
See you at SEMA!

Jamal

I agree 1000% with everything Jamal said, and anyone who has put more than a few laps on a road course would likely agree, especially with the parts in bold.

Hopefully all the GT500 fans that were quick to flaunt the 'Ring video of the GT500 (ahem svtperformance) see where Jamal Hameedi is coming from too.

[LOWDOWN]

Originally Posted by sizl1

No, you guys are all wrong. With a Watts link and Torque Arm, racing teams like Griggs Racing have created Mustangs that can outcorner Porsches. The problem with the stock Mustang is NOT the live rear axle. In fact properly set up, a live rear axle will outhandle IRS (as Griggs, for example, has proven) on the track because it mimics F1 "suspension" (which is really no suspension at all) on the track - that is wheels on both sides having the same angles at all times.

The PROBLEM with stock Mustangs is the use of a panhard bar, which means during s-turns, the car feels unsettled because turning left feels different from turning right. Most reviews state exactly this: that the GT500 felt unsettled during s-turns. A Watts link solves this problem.

The benefit of IRS has nothing to do with the track. The benefit of IRS is for regular roads that have potholes and other imperfections where an IRS would benefit - all of which is irrelevant on a track.

Google the reactions of people who have installed suspension like that from Griggs Racing on a Mustang. They are simply astounded about the difference. I repeat: the problem is not the live rear axle - it's the panhard bar.

FORD designed, engineered and marketed a compromised car...PERIOD. As is every vehicle marketed. Thank God for GRIGGS which, BTW, is an aftermarket (non-OEM) supplier.

Solid axle is better for handling? REALLY?!

Name ONE manufacturer that continues to use this archaic system on a vehicle of such capabilities? Ferrari? Porsche? Lambo? Audi? BMW?

Even the FORD GT was IRS...because it rode better... RIGHT!

NASCAR, that paragon of leading-edge technology, insists on solid-axle architecture. And they'd be the ONLY non-production-based major motorsports body who does...

Even Jamal is forced to move into the late-20th Century, this time around.

[LOWDOWN]

Proof?

Why not put an SAE-certified 662 hp engine in either a Z/28 or ZL1 and see how badly it beats a 7:39 time? That might make you say "Si!" to a ZL1...instead of pretending.

BTW, with Danny Popp running LPE's L28 at the OUSCI Finals and finishing FIRST on the road course, don't you Ford folks find it suspicious that NO CURRENT MUSTANG was even remotely represented? GRIGGS or otherwise... And, of course, the Camaro's IRS had Danny's butt feeling most thankful.

Things that make you go "hmmmmm"...

[Fenderaddict2]

Originally Posted by shaffe

Might not have been in this thread, but almost every thread on this forum where Mustang and handling are brought up, people bring up the Solid axle vs IRS in terms of handling

That advantage prior to the magic magnetic shocks and now, Multimatic F1 derived suspensions was the ability of the SRA to put the power down coming out of a corner. If the track surface was smooth, and you weren't scared riding the curbing, you can run pretty fast times on a track with an IRS Mustang, stock or as many track rats do, modified. Plus the rear end is indestructible. My BMW's would never have taken the number of track outings my Boss takes without serious issues. Were they easier to drive fast? Most definitely. Were they as fast? Not once I acclimatized to the Mustang. Were they as cheap or as fun? Not even close. So for a track car, I love the Boss 302. If I need faster I'm looking at much more money, or a car with zee practicality. As always, these arguments are pointless. On any given day, at any given track you or I could win or lose against a better or lesser car.

Bench racing is a muggs game. Get your cars out on the track, make some friends and enjoy some friendly competition. If you can't beat the other cars there, you can always try and beat your last lap.

[Fenderaddict2]

Originally Posted by 72MachOne99GT

Ford hasn't engaged in the Pissing Contest.

Clearly means they suck.

It's clear to see why Ford has no need to release times.

They let the vehicles speak for themselves. (yes, even the wood axle over powered piece of shit that can't make a turn to save it's own life)

Not sure folks here will get your sarcasm.

[SEVEN-OH JOE]

Originally Posted by LOWDOWN

Proof?

Why not put an SAE-certified 662 hp engine in either a Z/28 or ZL1 and see how badly it beats a 7:39 time? That might make you say "Si!" to a ZL1...instead of pretending.

BTW, with Danny Popp running LPE's L28 at the OUSCI Finals and finishing FIRST on the road course, don't you Ford folks find it suspicious that NO CURRENT MUSTANG was even remotely represented? GRIGGS or otherwise... And, of course, the Camaro's IRS had Danny's butt feeling most thankful.

Things that make you go "hmmmmm"...

Good points, LD. Where are these all-conquering late-model Mustangs at the Optima Challenge? None to be found, not even Van. Come to think of it, no Challengers or Chargers either. A Cobra or two, with IRS.

Oh wait. No 1/4 mile drags. But there's the Start-Stop Challenge.

You're right, LD. Hmmmm.

[trademaster]

Originally Posted by SEVEN-OH JOE

Good points, LD. Where are these all-conquering late-model Mustangs at the Optima Challenge? None to be found, not even Van. Come to think of it, no Challengers or Chargers either. A Cobra or two, with IRS.

Oh wait. No 1/4 mile drags. But there's the Start-Stop Challenge.

You're right, LD. Hmmmm.

By, "Optima Challenge" do you mean the Optima Ultimate Street Car Invitational?

A 1965 Corvette won this year. What a horrible example to compare technologies. No professional drivers and an enormous variance in modifications and power as well as tire choice.

[LOWDOWN]

Originally Posted by LOWDOWN

Proof?

BTW, with Danny Popp running LPE's L28 at the OUSCI Finals and finishing FIRST on the road course, don't you Ford folks find it suspicious that NO CURRENT MUSTANG was even remotely represented? GRIGGS or otherwise... And, of course, the Camaro's IRS had Danny's butt feeling most thankful.

Things that make you go "hmmmmm"...

Originally Posted by SEVEN-OH JOE

Good points, LD. Where are these all-conquering late-model Mustangs at the Optima Challenge? None to be found, not even Van. Come to think of it, no Challengers or Chargers either. A Cobra or two, with IRS.

Oh wait. No 1/4 mile drags. But there's the Start-Stop Challenge.

You're right, LD. Hmmmm.

Originally Posted by trademaster

By, "Optima Challenge" do you mean the Optima Ultimate Street Car Invitational?

A 1965 Corvette won this year. What a horrible example to compare technologies. No professional drivers and an enormous variance in modifications and power as well as tire choice.

trademaster, you like to conveniently skirt the issue raised and confirmed: WHO WON THE HOT LAP CHALLENGE, regardless of modifications?

Yes, that's right. Danny Popp in the LPE L28...FACT!! To quote Ford FanBoyz, "ol' FAT ASS"! Over your previously mentioned hot rodded '65 Vette, and a Cobra, and Mark Stielow, and...EVERYBODY ELSE. Weighing 3900 lbs! More than a GRIGGS-equipped ultra-boosted GT500 from the assembly line...which NO ONE has the guts to create. Why? Why waste their time?!

http://www.optimabatteries.com/us/en...ficial-result/

Now, iirc, GRIGGS is an all-conquering aftermarket modification that would be totally acceptable at the Optima Challenge (individual qualifying events), or the new USCA and its National Series starting next year. How about some GT500s showing up, GRIGGS or no griggs, run by Van or any other nobody/somebody/ANYBODY? Van. Billy J. Jack Jr. ANYBODY!!!!!

Apparently, other than 1/4 mile racing, all GT500s must be custom-ordered in YELLOW!

Maybe Jamal will have some promotion budget left to see that a next-Gen IRS Mustang has a sporting chance against some real world streetable competition...or NOT!