Quote:
Originally Posted by ULTRAZLS1
Camaro is out of gear at 110 as well. THe mustang is out of gear at 111.5 I believe...sounds like exactly where it needs to be to maximize its trap speed as well as ET. If the mustang loses some trap the camaro loses just as much or more...you have no choice but to shift if you want to break 110 in the camaro...yet it still does it frequently.
Also Motor trend (or any mag) will get certain times to prove a point. Not all out cheating...but slight bias.
For example...
They ran a 12.9 with the camaro when racing it against the GT500 at a 12.8. The camaro was the new best thing then and they wanted to prove that they were right in saying this.
Now in a heads up comparison they run a 13.1 (with the same trap..so conditions are same for performance...only difference this time is launch and or driver) in the camaro and an even better time in the mustang at 12.7. this further backs the new claim they are making as the mustang being the new best thing. It wouldnt have made a very big statement and or backed their claim about the mustang if they would have pulled another 12.9 or better with the camaro.
|
EXACTLY. And this is the point I'm trying to make. A car should be reviewed for what it is and what it does performance wise for the consumer, not based on "what's in". The problem with Motor Trend is, they murder the Camaro's external appearance that they loved 6 months ago and score it 3rd place while making the Mustang's review appear like the holy grail to consumers when literally the only thing about the car that's changed is it's performance. Nothing about the car's appearance was changed even slightly dramatic to where it would actually look different from anything else they've produced. Put the 2010 Mustang and the 2011 Mustang next to each other and nearly all people wouldn't be able to tell the different...until they look at the "5.0" badge.
You see this is my problem,....when a reviewer of a particular product possess a bias from the beginning of the review, it make it impossible to be "fair and balance". Motor Trend is now equivalent to "Fox News"; they report everything but news, they only give you the news about the world in the way THEY want you to see it. And that's what Motor Trend does, keep the bias aside, don't build one car up to appear better than it really is to tip the favor of consumer opinion toward "your favorite".
Quote:
|
Dont even think about making a jab at the Challenger either, I know it isnt as fast, but I'm happy with my car.
|
At least you know it isn't fast......I'm not going to argue against that fact. Nor will I argue against the fact that you love your car, ...it's nice, it's a classic car with good looks, but in just about every past comparison of the big three by other reviewers, the Challenger RT/SRT8 both scored last place
in all comparisons. I just don't agree with MT putting the the Challenger in 2nd place over the Camaro just because one editor prefers it's looks and performance when months ago it sucked.
Quote:
why should they be better? i don't see that logic. 104 ft compared to 108 ft. is BASICALLY the same. So to argue about how it got 105 ft. before doesn't matter. But the magazine had to pick a better of the two, and it did. It's not that serious.
And i believe the mustang would have trapped higher with more correct gearing. The mustang is out of gear at 110-111 mph and has to be shifted into 5th. I don't think it's costing it too much in the time (another ~.1) but the mph would suffer (~2 mph).
|
108ft compared to 104 feet is not the same, performance wise, there is clearly a difference. 6 months ago the Camaro SS' braking was 105ft, BUT NOW some how the Brembos have seemed to have changed or worn to the point where the car's braking is now 108ft. That's hella significant in a damn comparison. I feel Motor Trend is seriously fixing these time for the Mustang's favor to make it appear better than it is.
They're going nuts because ....gasp...shock and awe, the new Mustang gets Brembo brakes too, "and the brakes work so much better on the Mustang than the Camaro", when in reality, that's far from true. If we look at the braking the Camaro first achieved compared to what they're claiming the Camaro has now achieved, you'll see, the braking on both cars the Mustang and Camaro are nearly dead even, one not significantly doing better than the other given the 200 pound weight difference.
Mustang 60-0 braking =
104ft
Camaro SS 60-0 braking =
105ft.
But as far as the drag times in this new comparison, I asked a honest question because I didn't understand something.
I wanted to know how the Mustang can trap the same speed as the Camaro "111.3 mph" and achieve a whopping "12.7", but when the Camaro SS in they're first comparison ran "111.0 MPH flat" it achieve a significantly lower drag time at 13 seconds. So basically, Motor Trend is telling us, .3mph can take a car from 13.0 flat at 111.0mph to 12.7 at 111.3 mph. That doesn't make sense. Something doesn't add up to me.
I can get through the quarter and score a 13.0 @111.0mph....but if I had .3 more mph "111.3" I could some how JUMP to
12.7 or for that matter 12.8 in my Camaro like the Mustang just did. That's my problem. The 2011 is the same kid on the block it's just that today he's driving a newer bike with better tires and brakes, but we're going to stack the chips in his favor because he's always been our favorite.