2013 GT500 going to the Ring in April

[actireman]

I'm told it's gonna happen. They plan on going in April. They feel they can put down a number close to the ZL1. The ZL1 is wider and has more tire, The GT500 is lighter and more HP. I will get a call when it happens. I love it, theres nothing like a good pony war.
The other interesting thing is, they don't think it will be much faster in the Quarter mile on stock tires due to size, and balance of the car. Very interesting.

[motorhead]

I'll be sure to hold off on buying my ZL1 until the numbers on the GT500 come out.
































































































































































































































































NOT!!!!

[YourBlindingBias]

I think the whole "ring" thing is over-rated.
I won't be taking any car to germany to run the ring ever, I can also bet neither will most people on this forum.
I would be more interested in seeing stateside track times because I CAN ACTUALLY GO THERE.

[IOMZL1]

Originally Posted by YourBlindingBias

I think the whole "ring" thing is over-rated.
I won't be taking any car to germany to run the ring ever, I can also bet neither will most people on this forum.
I would be more interested in seeing stateside track times because I CAN ACTUALLY GO THERE.

+1

Yeah, they haven't tested on my route to work so how do I know the car will be any good WHERE I ACTUALLY DRIVE?

[toilets]

Dun dun dun.... I really hope our time holds up

[Frankzl1]

Originally Posted by motorhead

I'll be sure to hold off on buying my ZL1 until the numbers on





NOT!!!!

I was wondering what's up with all the blank space hahahahaha!!! Good one

[PeeBee]

Originally Posted by YourBlindingBias

I think the whole "ring" thing is over-rated.
I won't be taking any car to germany to run the ring ever, I can also bet neither will most people on this forum.
I would be more interested in seeing stateside track times because I CAN ACTUALLY GO THERE.

i.e. Laguna Seca times don't really tell me much either... But it doesn't keep me from getting a good idea whether a car is fast or not, even though I probably won't drive one of my cars there in a lifetime...

[ParisTNDude]

They test all GM cars on the GM test track to determine it's capabilities, faults and defects if any, and none of us will ever get a chance to drive that track. Why is it so difficult to understand that running good times at Nurburgring offer clear endorsement of the car's capabilities. We selll GM cars in Europe and most European motorsports fans will be highly impressed with a car that runs better times than a Porsche 911 on the "ring", as an example. It's a lot like posting 0-60 and 1/4 mile ETs, I suspect 90% of all Camaro owners may never see a 1/4 track, but it's certainly the accepted standard measure of a cars acceleration capabilities. I've run 20 laps or so at Nurburgring in various cars during my prior 13 years living and working in Europe and I know how difficult the track is to drive fast...therefore, I will be deeply impressed by any car that beats the ZL1 and likewise any that fail to match it's time at Nurburgring. I expect the Mustang to run slower times than the Camaro. I'm just curious where the OP got the "inside information" on the GT500s plans to run the ring?

[YourBlindingBias]

Originally Posted by PeeBee

i.e. Laguna Seca times don't really tell me much either... But it doesn't keep me from getting a good idea whether a car is fast or not, even though I probably won't drive one of my cars there in a lifetime...

Well of course I am speaking of stateside being where I am.
I'm just wondering why people are so obsessed over ring times if they don't track their car or won't fly to germany to run on the track it was tested on.

[Shurenuff]

Originally Posted by PeeBee

i.e. Laguna Seca times don't really tell me much either... But it doesn't keep me from getting a good idea whether a car is fast or not, even though I probably won't drive one of my cars there in a lifetime...

I enjoy the ring times, even though I'll likely never get a chance to drive it. That track has become the standard of the performance car world, so why not?

[YourBlindingBias]

Not why not, that's cool they test at the ring.
But people hold it to such high regard that they would ignore stateside track times in favor of ring times. If the ZL1 ran awesome at laguna sec would there be such a celebration and quoting all the time?

[OldScoolCamaro]

Originally Posted by actireman

I'm told it's gonna happen. They plan on going in April. They feel they can put down a number close to the ZL1. The ZL1 is wider and has more tire, The GT500 is lighter and more HP. I will get a call when it happens. I love it, theres nothing like a good pony war.
The other interesting thing is, they don't think it will be much faster in the Quarter mile on stock tires due to size, and balance of the car. Very interesting.

Well, as Pedders Pete related....there is a diminshing return in the increase of horsepower, this will hold true especially for the Mustang. If it does not hook up well in the 550 range, it will be even more hard pressed doing so without taking alot of the motor out of it electronically at 650. Floating rear axle on a 4 link...massive amount of rear suspension work with slicks...aftermarket of course will get the job done for the dragstrip. But they won't be able to make this happen on their factory production vehicle....with street tires. So, all the big three makers...in order to fully use the full BHP on tap, need extensive rear suspension and traction mods to launch the cars at the strip, without using the electronic Nannies to reduce HP and wheel spin...that will void a warranty. So.....we have reached the level of unusable factory produced horsepower? Or, are we no different than back in the glory days of megaton HP big blocks....

[motorhead]

Originally Posted by OldScoolCamaro

So.....we have reached the level of unusable factory produced horsepower? Or, are we no different than back in the glory days of megaton HP big blocks....

I think we sure did for the price point that these cars are aiming at.

[YourBlindingBias]

Originally Posted by OldScoolCamaro

Well, as Pedders Pete related....there is a diminshing return in the increase of horsepower, this will hold true especially for the Mustang. If it does not hook up well in the 550 range, it will be even more hard pressed doing so without taking alot of the motor out of it electronically at 650. Floating rear axle on a 4 link...massive amount of rear suspension work with slicks...aftermarket of course will get the job done for the dragstrip. But they won't be able to make this happen on their factory production vehicle....with street tires. So, all the big three makers...in order to fully use the full BHP on tap, need extensive rear suspension and traction mods to launch the cars at the strip, without using the electronic Nannies to reduce HP and wheel spin...that will void a warranty. So.....we have reached the level of unusable factory produced horsepower? Or, are we no different than back in the glory days of megaton HP big blocks....

ford made improvements on the 2013 suspension, it's not the same as previous models, and you're right at this point it's all IF'S, so I wouldn't say anything for sure because it's all just assumptions or what they call "bench racing".

[PeeBee]

Originally Posted by YourBlindingBias

Well of course I am speaking of stateside being where I am.
I'm just wondering why people are so obsessed over ring times if they don't track their car or won't fly to germany to run on the track it was tested on.

Not "obsessed" with it, but it's a good measure of how a car performs overall.
From a manufacturer's point of view I can understand perfectly well. If a car performs well there, it'll perform well almost everywhere. With the Ring, they have a "playground" with all the features to test car handling at one location...

[Shurenuff]

Originally Posted by YourBlindingBias

Not why not, that's cool they test at the ring.
But people hold it to such high regard that they would ignore stateside track times in favor of ring times. If the ZL1 ran awesome at laguna sec would there be such a celebration and quoting all the time?

I understand your point, but it a lot of it really boils down to marketing. Ring times are now the world standard and are what most people in the US, and especially around the globe, are familiar with.

You're right that releasing an awesome Leguna Seca time would have less impact than an awesome ring time, that's just the way it is.

And I don't believe using the ring is pure marketing and hype. That track, unlike pretty much any track in the world truly tests all of a vehicles performance capabilities. There's a reason why it is the standard.

[IOMZL1]

Originally Posted by YourBlindingBias

Well of course I am speaking of stateside being where I am.
I'm just wondering why people are so obsessed over ring times if they don't track their car or won't fly to germany to run on the track it was tested on.

It is a catch-all, very demanding track. It has aspects of most every other track you can find on earth. It does not necessarily favor high horsepower, quick acceleration, good braking, top speed, traction, or good low speed or high speed handling individually - you have to have the entire package to do well. The track is not necessarily smooth so it is challenging in that regard for both car and driver.

Chances are if you do well at the ring, you will do well most anywhere. This does not mean the order of lap times will hold true for any track in the world because some tracks ARE biased to top speed, good acceleration, handling, etc. But a good ring time means you got things right and the car is balanced. Just because a ZR1 beats a GT-R at the ring doesn’t mean it will happen everywhere.

The other thing is that the ring times can’t be taken down to the tenth of a second, even though many cars are very close in their times. We all know that driver, weather, etc. can change lap times. So if the ZL1 beats the GT500 by 2 seconds, for example, I’d call it a wash. The best you could do is have the same driver on the same day run both cars back to back a few times and perhaps average the laps but this will never happen. For this reason, the order can’t really be taken as a rule but more of a guideline. Maybe look at it as ‘tiers’ – Cars under 7:30 = Tier 1, Cars under 7:50 = Tier 2 for example. It is an exercise in marketing if one car beats another by 1 second to say it is faster, but that is the nature of racing in general.

So although many US drivers will never take their car to the ring, having a good time there can give confidence to any track they might go to. It is like the ¼ mile statistic in a sense except that road course ‘performance’ is much harder to quantify and the best we can do is go to the (one of if not the) most demanding track on earth as a ‘standard’ of sorts. The ring is simply the most widely accepted standard for measuring road course performance in the world.

[Shurenuff]

Originally Posted by IOMZL1

It is a catch-all, very demanding track. It has aspects of most every other track you can find on earth. It does not necessarily favor high horsepower, quick acceleration, good braking, top speed, traction, or good low speed or high speed handling individually - you have to have the entire package to do well. The track is not necessarily smooth so it is challenging in that regard for both car and driver.

Chances are if you do well at the ring, you will do well most anywhere. This does not mean the order of lap times will hold true for any track in the world because some tracks ARE biased to top speed, good acceleration, handling, etc. But a good ring time means you got things right and the car is balanced. Just because a ZR1 beats a GT-R at the ring doesn’t mean it will happen everywhere.

The other thing is that the ring times can’t be taken down to the tenth of a second, even though many cars are very close in their times. We all know that driver, weather, etc. can change lap times. So if the ZL1 beats the GT500 by 2 seconds, for example, I’d call it a wash. The best you could do is have the same driver on the same day run both cars back to back a few times and perhaps average the laps but this will never happen. For this reason, the order can’t really be taken as a rule but more of a guideline. Maybe look at it as ‘tiers’ – Cars under 7:30 = Tier 1, Cars under 7:50 = Tier 2 for example.

So although many US drivers will never take their car to the ring, having a good time there can give confidence to any track they might go to. It is like the ¼ mile statistic in a sense except that road course ‘performance’ is much harder to quantify and the best we can do is go to the (one of if not the) most demanding track on earth as a ‘standard’ of sorts. The ring is simply the most widely accepted standard for measuring road course performance in the world.

What he said

[OldJedi]

I agree, very well said.

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by IOMZL1

It is a catch-all, very demanding track. It has aspects of most every other track you can find on earth. It does not necessarily favor high horsepower, quick acceleration, good braking, top speed, traction, or good low speed or high speed handling individually - you have to have the entire package to do well. The track is not necessarily smooth so it is challenging in that regard for both car and driver.

Chances are if you do well at the ring, you will do well most anywhere. This does not mean the order of lap times will hold true for any track in the world because some tracks ARE biased to top speed, good acceleration, handling, etc. But a good ring time means you got things right and the car is balanced. Just because a ZR1 beats a GT-R at the ring doesn’t mean it will happen everywhere.

The other thing is that the ring times can’t be taken down to the tenth of a second, even though many cars are very close in their times. We all know that driver, weather, etc. can change lap times. So if the ZL1 beats the GT500 by 2 seconds, for example, I’d call it a wash. The best you could do is have the same driver on the same day run both cars back to back a few times and perhaps average the laps but this will never happen. For this reason, the order can’t really be taken as a rule but more of a guideline. Maybe look at it as ‘tiers’ – Cars under 7:30 = Tier 1, Cars under 7:50 = Tier 2 for example. It is an exercise in marketing if one car beats another by 1 second to say it is faster, but that is the nature of racing in general.

So although many US drivers will never take their car to the ring, having a good time there can give confidence to any track they might go to. It is like the ¼ mile statistic in a sense except that road course ‘performance’ is much harder to quantify and the best we can do is go to the (one of if not the) most demanding track on earth as a ‘standard’ of sorts. The ring is simply the most widely accepted standard for measuring road course performance in the world.

Post of the day.

[radz28]

@ motorhead

LOL!!! Nice

The 'Ring, IMO, has become the benchmark of overall car performance. I won't pretend to suggest I'll ever go there, let alone get close to consistantly pushing ZL1 to it's limits, however, it's another point to benchrace, which is a lot of what this particular hobby/obsession is about. I think it's great that it's going there, and it would seem to me this is where they're going to establish it's fast times. We know it's been there before, so it seems to me they're probably pretty comfortable with their powertrain and chassis systems and are ready to put their money where their mouth is.

I've been thinking, despite the mass of CAMARO, that it's on a superior chassis to the Mustang. With ZL1 being considerably down on power and having more weight, I'm wondering what all it's technology will do to keep it competitive. If there was a measure of the quality of the car, and justification for it's weight, I think we've come to the point to where we're either going to see a payoff or maybe find a little disappointment in some cases.

Personally - I think it's going to be pretty tough. My decision won't be swayed by the results though

[GoldenBear]

IOM, don't you know that you are totally wrong with your analysis?

Isn't it obvious from most of our Mustang "friends" that until the 2013 GT500 posts a faster lap time at the Nurburgring than the ZL1 did, that Nurburgring lap times don't mean anything. Then, if the 2013 GT500 posts a faster time, a Nurburgring lap time will be the most important benchmark by which any car can possibly be measured.

[YourBlindingBias]

I think if the ZL1 posted a bad time at the "ring" nobody would be talking about it so much lol and there would be more "who cares about the ring" posts than how important the ring is.

[SSSylentZL1]

ZL1>GT500

[IOMZL1]

Originally Posted by GoldenBear

IOM, don't you know that you are totally wrong with your analysis?

Isn't it obvious from most of our Mustang "friends" that until the 2013 GT500 posts a faster lap time at the Nurburgring than the ZL1 did, that Nurburgring lap times don't mean anything. Then, if the 2013 GT500 posts a faster time, a Nurburgring lap time will be the most important benchmark by which any car can possibly be measured.

That's true, GoldenBear. But ZL1 fans will then have the GT500 fans right where they want them because they will have finally admitted it is a valid test of a car. ZL1 fans can say that the GT500 had to go there twice just to beat ZL1 it so it doesn't count until the ZL1 goes a second time. You have to compare apples to apples, after all. Er, I mean compare apples to moon rocks if it supports your argument.