Car and Driver Zl1 vs '13 GT500

[Fenderaddict2]

Originally Posted by Blue Menace

Are you certain of that?

http://m.jalopnik.com/5704575/ford-b...vernment-money

It was an easy google search to find. Betcha I could find gobs more with a little effort.

I am sure as I belong to a group that funded it. The government money was equalization to level the playing field after the government decided to bail out GM and Chrysler. A move which Ford was against and one the spoke out about until the hush money.

[Fenderaddict2]

Originally Posted by GoldenBear

Let's get some facts into the discussion, shall we?

Ford was able to obtain $23.6 billion in loans from American banks due to the timing of the loans Ford received. Ford borrowed in the money in late 2006 before the American financial system was on the verge of collapse in the Fall of 2008.

GM and Chrysler borrowed money from the Federal Government in 2009 in the aftermath of the financial crisis when banks weren't lending and there was no other available option.

Also, it's not as though Ford didn't take any U.S. Government loans. Ford did receive $5.9 billion in low-cost government loans in 2009 to overhaul its factories. And, Ford Credit received $15.9 billion in bailout money from the U.S. Government.

True. See my statement above.

[Betiwin]

Originally Posted by Fenderaddict2

True. See my statement above.

I own GM's but it is what it is. They screwed up and need a Goverment bailout and ford did not. Ford had the better and smarter management team. We will see what the future holds for both. Hopefully good things!

[devildog1679]

The below stats says it all why can't you guys just admit it or at least give it credit? It may not be the better looking car, it may not be the best handling car but it does hold its own and in the hands of a real driver it will post faster Laptimes. It may be harder to control but in the end it's who crosses that line first that counts. For those argue "Well just add another 80HP and it will smoke the GT500". I would counter add IRS and magnets to the 500 and it will smoke it. Just admit it guys, whether it be 0-60, 1/4, some tracks, the GT500 is the faster car plain and simple. Just look at stats below.

GM and Camaro Crowd said
ZL1 would be faster to 60- NOPE
GT500 wouldnt be able to put power down in 1/4 mile- 11.6 at 125 seems like its hooking to me.
GT500 won't be able to hang with the magnetized ZL1 on a road course. it set faster laps on 2 different tracks, tied it on another and was slightly slower on the last one.

Everything some said the GT500 couldnt do, it does and does it better then they thought.

Case closed now enjoy your car. I own a mere 412HP 5.0 but I would gladly take a ZL1 or GT500.

[Stew]

ANyone else who has the magazine and read the article..... One of the pros for the GT500 was it's fade free brakes. Any chance MT may have just had a bad example?

[Good2go]

No matter what GM said, I don't think there was much doubt about the GT500 owning in the accelleration department. It's the got weight and power all over the ZL1, so the straight-line performance advantage is no surprize at all.

[newmoon]

Originally Posted by Long Carbine

The ZL1 is down well over 100HP............at the rear wheel.

Conservatively.

It also weighs almost 400 more pounds.

It will take 150 more HP to stay even with a 2013 GT500 on a 1/4 mile track stock for stock.

Both on slicks, the GT500 will beat the ZL1 by over a second and a half. About a Greyhound bus length.

With the extra hp, tq, and weight advantage the 500 has over the ZL1 it is only 3-4 tenths quicker given equal drivers. The ZL1 doesn't need 150 more hp to make up that differance, while it would need a big number to match the 500's mph, it doesn't need it to match the E/T.

[GoldenBear]

Originally Posted by Fenderaddict2

The government money was equalization to level the playing field after the government decided to bail out GM and Chrysler. A move which Ford was against and one the spoke out about until the hush money.

The government loan that Ford Credit received had nothing to do with leveling the playing field.

Originally Posted by Betiwin

I own GM's but it is what it is. They screwed up and need a Goverment bailout and ford did not. Ford had the better and smarter management team. We will see what the future holds for both. Hopefully good things!

As I mentioned before the material difference between Ford's loans, and GM's and Chrysler's loans is the timing of when those loans were needed.

Ford needed the loans first, in 2006, before the American financial system was on the verge of collapse in the Fall of 2008 and was, therefore, able to obtain loans from American banks which were willing to lend at that time. GM and Chrysler, however, need money later, in 2009, in the aftermath of the financial crisis when banks weren't willing to lend and the only viable option was to obtain money from the U.S. Government.

It's spreading misinformation to state the GM and Chrysler "screwed up" and Ford did not. The entire U.S. automobile industry "screwed up." The main difference was not in the management teams of the companies. The main difference was in the timing of when loan money was required.

[Betiwin]

Originally Posted by GoldenBear

The government loan that Ford Credit received had nothing to do with leveling the playing field.


As I mentioned before the material difference between Ford's loans, and GM's and Chrysler's loans is the timing of when those loans were needed.

Ford needed the loans first, in 2006, before the American financial system was on the verge of collapse in the Fall of 2008 and was, therefore, able to obtain loans from American banks which were willing to lend at that time. GM and Chrysler, however, need money later, in 2009, in the aftermath of the financial crisis when banks weren't willing to lend and the only viable option was to obtain money from the U.S. Government.

It's spreading misinformation to state the GM and Chrysler "screwed up" more than Ford did. The entire U.S. automobile industry "screwed up." The difference was not in the management teams of the companies. The difference was in the timing of when loan money was required.

Ok so let's put it this way. Ford refinanced there home, GM and Chrysler stoped paying their mortgage, had to go to their parents to not only loan them money but buy all there stuff and put it in there name to avoid bankruptcy, then ask the bank for loan forgiveness and then asking their kids to help pay the mortgage after all the help.

So you tell me who looks better. A person who refinances there home or the people who went bankrupt?

Any bank, shareholder, taxpayer is gonna say ford. If u love to lose your money and investment then GM was ur spot.

Don't get me wrong is sucks and I hope they are successful now and forever but it is what it is.

[shaffe]

Thats interesting that C/D said teh GT500 brakes were fade free, but MT said they faded horribly.

Maybe MT car had just been pushed so hard in magazine reviews that they were wearing or C/D got the "freak"

[Stew]

Originally Posted by shaffe

Thats interesting that C/D said teh GT500 brakes were fade free, but MT said they faded horribly.

Maybe MT car had just been pushed so hard in magazine reviews that they were wearing or C/D got the "freak"

It does make me think, did any of the other reviews complain of brake fade?

[GoldenBear]

Originally Posted by devildog1679

... in the hands of a real driver it will post faster Laptimes. It may be harder to control but in the end it's who crosses that line first that counts. For those argue "Well just add another 80HP and it will smoke the GT500". I would counter add IRS and magnets to the 500 and it will smoke it.

I think that it's considerably easier and much less expensive to add 80 horsepower to the ZL1 than it is to add an IRS and "magnets" to the GT500.

Originally Posted by devildog1679

Just admit it guys, whether it be 0-60, 1/4, some tracks, the GT500 is the faster car plain and simple. Just look at stats below.

GM and Camaro Crowd said
ZL1 would be faster to 60- NOPE
GT500 wouldnt be able to put power down in 1/4 mile- 11.6 at 125 seems like its hooking to me.
GT500 won't be able to hang with the magnetized ZL1 on a road course. it set faster laps on 2 different tracks, tied it on another and was slightly slower on the last one.

Please don't over generalize and misstate what people on Camaro5 have stated.

From my recollection very few people here on Camaro5, if any, stated that the ZL1 would be faster in a straight line than the GT500. The ZL1 may be easier to launch consistently, but obviously, 82 less horsepower and 250 more pounds are difficult handicaps to overcome in a straight line.

Also, I don't believe than many, if any, stated that the ZL1 would be faster on a single lap or two on every road course that exists. On the contrary, many stated that on road courses with long straights where more horsepower is an advantage, the GT500 would likely be able to run at least a single lap faster than the ZL1.

Also, road races generally aren't only 2 or 3 laps. The ZL1 appears to be more consistent and easier to drive on a road course over the long haul. Being faster on a one shot run, whether it's in a straight line or on a road course does not necessarily make for a better car. That's one reason why all four reviews so far have concluded that the ZL1 is a better overall car than the GT500 is.

That's not to say the GT500 would not be a better car for some, just not for the reviewers and many who post here on Camaro5.

[Bob Cosby]

Originally Posted by GoldenBear

...Also, I don't believe than many, if any, stated that the ZL1 would be faster on a single lap or two on every road course that exists.....

Prior to the latest round of comparison tests, I don't recall ANYBODY putting a qualifier like "single lap" or 'two laps" into the discussion. Most of it was "the GT500 will have better 1/4 mile times and the ZL1 will have better road course times".

Hmmmm.....will stop there. Detente'

[GoldenBear]

Originally Posted by Bob Cosby

Prior to the latest round of comparison tests, I don't recall ANYBODY putting a qualifier like "single lap" or 'two laps" into the discussion. Most of it was "the GT500 will have better 1/4 mile times and the ZL1 will have better road course times".

Hmmmm.....will stop there. Detente'

Unlike the quarter mile, which is a one shot run, a road course race is generally not a single lap or two.

Although, many stated that the GT500 would likely be able put up a faster time (i.e., one lap) on a road course that is suited to vehicles with more horsepower (i.e., having long straights).

However, it appears that even on a road course that is suited to vehicles with more horsepower, the ZL1 will ultimately output perform the GT500 over the course of many laps due to the braking issues that the GT500 appears to have.

[GoldenBear]

Originally Posted by Betiwin

Ok so let's put it this way. Ford refinanced there home, GM and Chrysler stoped paying their mortgage, had to go to their parents to not only loan them money but buy all there stuff and put it in there name to avoid bankruptcy, then ask the bank for loan forgiveness and then asking their kids to help pay the mortgage after all the help.

So you tell me who looks better. A person who refinances there home or the people who went bankrupt?

Any bank, shareholder, taxpayer is gonna say ford. If u love to lose your money and investment then GM was ur spot.

Don't get me wrong is sucks and I hope they are successful now and forever but it is what it is.

You appear to be missing the critical point that the crucial difference between the Ford loan and the GM and Chrysler loans is the timing of when the loans occurred.


The lending atmosphere and global financial situations were completely different between 2006 and 2009. Ford could not have gotten a loan from American banks in 2009, and GM and Chrysler could have obtained loans from American banks in 2006.

It's not an apples to apples comparison when assessing financial transactions in 2006 and in 2009. Therefore, it's not useful to assess the loans without regard to the realities of the global financial situation of the times. The reality of the global situation was the determining factor in the type of loans that were obtained.

[IOMZL1]

Originally Posted by Bob Cosby

Prior to the latest round of comparison tests, I don't recall ANYBODY putting a qualifier like "single lap" or 'two laps" into the discussion. Most of it was "the GT500 will have better 1/4 mile times and the ZL1 will have better road course times".

Hmmmm.....will stop there. Detente'

Unless you ask the SVT crowd about the Boss vs. ZL1 comparison where clearly the Boss would catch up to the ZL1 after two laps because of heat soak.

[Betiwin]

Sorry in the end it is still: there those that had to be bailed out an ones that did not and went into bankruptcy. So because the better managed company's did things right before hand vs those that did not. Being an effective company and manger is knowing when to make moves. GM was bleeding since 2002, the financial crisis just sped up the rigormortis. In some ways the crisis prolly was a life a saver as congress was pressured to help.

So let's look at it from this angle both the GT500 and Zl1 brakes will eventually fail. But one company seen this and add ducts so they could live longer. Smart move right? Just as Ford seen the heat coming they refinanced there debt instead of GM/CHYSLR let there debt over heat, fade and crash the company.

[Betiwin]

Originally Posted by IOMZL1

Unless you ask the SVT crowd about the Boss vs. ZL1 comparison where clearly the Boss would catch up to the ZL1 after two laps because of heat soak.

I'd love to see a 4 car review of the ZL1, ILE, Boss and 500. I bet all four would. Be pretty close than alot would like to think around a 5-10 lap track event.

[101fng]

why is it this is only the first review to mention brake fade? you'd think it would be noticed by more than one reviewer if it was a common problem among the 500's. maybe this was just the first review where the driver actually pushed it, maybe it was a lemon, or maybe the other gt500's were factory freaks. more reviews and times will help to determine what the real issue is. obviously the gt500 isn't a brick on a road coarse like many initially thought

[shaffe]

Originally Posted by GoldenBear

I think that it's considerably easier and much less expensive to add 80 horsepower to the ZL1 than it is to add an IRS and "magnets" to the GT500.


Please don't over generalize and misstate what people on Camaro5 have stated.

From my recollection very few people here on Camaro5, if any, stated that the ZL1 would be faster in a straight line than the GT500. The ZL1 may be easier to launch consistently, but obviously, 82 less horsepower and 250 more pounds are difficult handicaps to overcome in a straight line.

Also, I don't believe than many, if any, stated that the ZL1 would be faster on a single lap or two on every road course that exists. On the contrary, many stated that on road courses with long straights where more horsepower is an advantage, the GT500 would likely be able to run at least a single lap faster than the ZL1.

Also, road races generally aren't only 2 or 3 laps. The ZL1 appears to be more consistent and easier to drive on a road course over the long haul. Being faster on a one shot run, whether it's in a straight line or on a road course does not necessarily make for a better car. That's one reason why all four reviews so far have concluded that the ZL1 is a better overall car than the GT500 is.

That's not to say the GT500 would not be a better car for some, just not for the reviewers and many who post here on Camaro5.

GM itself stated that ZL1 would be faster to 60 did they not?

As far as the other things, reading threads here when both cars were launched as soon as the GT500 won the 1/4 contest as many if not all expected the majority said the GT500 would not be able to beat a ZL1 on a road course. No mention of X amount of laps. it was simply put by many that the ZL1 would beat the GT500 around a road course. The GT500 has posted faster lap times at 2 tracks, one with long straights and Laguna Seca(this surprised me alot actually, LS doesnt have many long straights)

Now I agree the ZL1 is the easier vehicle to drive harder and will post better track times due to the suspension. 1 magazine noticed brake fade, C/D did not, they actually complemented the GT500s fade free brakes. So I think that is simply a variable, maybe MT car was beat on harder before they got it, maybe they pushed it that much harder we don't know but untill more than 1 review or more than one complaint comes up on the brakes I think it may have just been bad luck for teh GT500, just like the shifting issues for each car in earlier reviews.

Both cars are fantastic, but it just seems like the GT500 is not getting any credit for being able to go toe to toe with the ZL1 on a road course.

[Bob Cosby]

Originally Posted by GoldenBear

Unlike the quarter mile, which is a one shot run, a road course race is generally not a single lap or two.

Not really. In any sort of sanctioned "racing" on a drag strip, one needs to be very consistent round after round. Though not comparable to a road race, it still more than a "one shot run" as you put it.

Unless we're looking for those "hero runs"....and then we have the same "hero runs" for the road course, and we are back to square one.

Although, many stated that the GT500 would likely be able put up a faster time (i.e., one lap) on a road course that is suited to vehicles with more horsepower (i.e., having long straights).

Eh, many did say that the high HP tracks would indeed favor the GT500, I still don't remember anyone saying - or implying - that the GT500 could only beat the ZL1 for one lap. In fact, until the first reference to this came only after the brake fading experienced by M/T. It should be noted that no other mag seemed to have this problem.

However, it appears that even on a road course that is suited to vehicles with more horsepower, the ZL1 will ultimately output perform the GT500 over the course of many laps due to the braking issues that the GT500 appears to have.

Perhaps....but again, only M/T seem to have this problem, and otehr mags praised the GT500 brakes quite a bit.

Originally Posted by IOMZL1

Unless you ask the SVT crowd about the Boss vs. ZL1 comparison where clearly the Boss would catch up to the ZL1 after two laps because of heat soak.

Yup, do remember that for sure (not necessarily two laps...but at some point). Not really relevant to the two vehicles we are discussing, but I have seen that brought up both here and elsewhere.

Fun discussion...

[Angrybird 12]

Find it funny that the ford fans keep bringing up the bailout. Do they even think for one minute that if GM had gone under they would even have the GT500 as it sits today? Ford needs GM as much as GM needs Ford to keep pushing the boundaries of performance.

[101fng]

Originally Posted by Angrybird 12

Find it funny that the ford fans keep bringing up the bailout. Do they even think for one minute that if GM had gone under they would even have the GT500 as it sits today? Ford needs GM as much as GM needs Ford to keep pushing the boundaries of performance.

yes, thank you. as much as i disagree with GM taking the bailout, it served us all well by bringing us these two beautiful cars

[papawattz]

Originally Posted by evolve

How many laps is the ring?

The ring is about 6 times as big, so about a 1/3rd into the race around the ring the camaro would be ahead and would probably stay there

[GoldenBear]

Originally Posted by Betiwin

Sorry in the end it is still: there those that had to be bailed out an ones that did not and went into bankruptcy. So because the better managed company's did things right before hand vs those that did not. Being an effective company and manger is knowing when to make moves. GM was bleeding since 2002, the financial crisis just sped up the rigormortis. In some ways the crisis prolly was a life a saver as congress was pressured to help.

So let's look at it from this angle both the GT500 and Zl1 brakes will eventually fail. But one company seen this and add ducts so they could live longer. Smart move right? Just as Ford seen the heat coming they refinanced there debt instead of GM/CHYSLR let there debt over heat, fade and crash the company.

It appears that you and I don't agree on the facts, or at best have a different interpretation of the facts, so I think it's best not to continue to pursue this particular discussion.