The 2011+ Mustang Thread

[a_Username]

Originally Posted by syr74

13.1 is far from the worst time ever recorded for the Camaro by one of these rags, for example Automobile knocked down a 13.3 seconcd 1/4.

As for this being the best Mustang 1/4 mile time, don't assume it will stay that way. I said it before and I'll say it again here, one of the major auto rags is going to knock down a 12.6 in this car and Evan Smith is going to go much, much faster than that.



Or they couldn't get the Camaro to hook up. There was a lot of banter on this board about the Mustang potentially 'having problems hooking up', but the reality seems to be the exact opposite.



That isn't going to change the status quo at this point. No magazine of any ilk has ever gotten a 12.7 from the Camaro SS, and as far as I know only two private owners have ever met or beaten that time.

Unless Chevy does something with the 2011 Camaro SS it's pretty obvious the Mustang is going to be a couple of tenths faster at least.

The Camaro's problem of hooking up can be solved by a little mod called the driver. ET shows the driver's ability to launch, while MPH shows the car's potential. ET obviously told who won the race, but with selected, relatively unexperienced drivers (who are the biggest part of rather a car beats another) any of these three cars can beat one another. Put someone like nhra stocker in there... and I'm very sure you'd see a matched time.

Before the random mustang fans get defensive, I'll conciete in saying this new 2011 GT is in fact faster than the 2010 SS, but let's wait until an actual 2011 MY Magazine comparison at least before throwing up the "I WIN!" flag. However, I'm a lot more interested in what the GT will manage to do in the hands of a good driver, just to see how much potential these mainstream autowriters managed to tap out.

[garagelogic]

Originally Posted by a_Username

The Camaro's problem of hooking up can be solved by a little mod called the driver.

True. I could say the same exact thing for the GT500. How else can you explain me driving a bone stock 2007 GT500 to a 12.51 @ 113.81 (2.042 60ft) at Beech Bend Raceway back in 2008 when all the magazines can muster from a 2010 version sporting more power than that car is a 12.8 (or 12.4, depending on what is being referenced)? As anyone who has seen me drive at the track can tell you, I am no Evan Smith, either.

Originally Posted by a_Username

ET shows the driver's ability to launch, while MPH shows the car's potential.

ET is also a reflection of vehicle weight, rolling resistance, etc. not just how well someone can get it to 60ft.


I, too, would have liked to see MotorTrend wait until they had 2011 versions of all three cars before making performance comparisons. Of course, we’ve not heard a peep out of GM regarding any changes to the Camaro for the 2011 model year and so far we only have rumors on what Fiat is going to bring to the table with their Challenger. Even if it gets the 6.4L, it will need to be putting out 475-500HP just to be competitive with the GM and Ford offerings.

The silence from GM speaks volumes to me on their plans for the 2011 Camaro, but I’m hoping that they are simply waiting for the right time to spring any upgrades on us.

As for the testing, remember, the quarter mile tests were not done on a prepped track, so only getting a 13.1 from the Camaro should not be a surprise. Neither should it be a surprise that the significantly lighter and better geared Mustang beat it on the same day on the same surface by four tenths. I have no doubt that you will see mid-to-low 12’s from a 2011 Mustang GT on stock tires once they hit a real racetrack, much like you’ve seen stock 2010 Camaro’s getting mid-12’s under similar conditions.

[syr74]

Originally Posted by a_Username

The Camaro's problem of hooking up can be solved by a little mod called the driver. ET shows the driver's ability to launch, while MPH shows the car's potential.

Yes and no, there are cars that just do not have the ability to put it all down on the pavement. I'm not saying where or how that all shakes out in this comparo, but the notion that a good driver can correct every ill just doesn't hold water.

Originally Posted by a_Username

ET obviously told who won the race, but with selected, relatively unexperienced drivers (who are the biggest part of rather a car beats another) any of these three cars can beat one another. Put someone like nhra stocker in there... and I'm very sure you'd see a matched time.

Potentially, I'm curious to get to see him run if were ever at Beech bend at the same time. I'm also curious to see if I can get some seat time at the strip in a 2011 GT, assuming I don't just buy one myself which is becoming increasingly likely.

Originally Posted by a_Username

Before the random mustang fans get defensive, I'll conciete in saying this new 2011 GT is in fact faster than the 2010 SS, but let's wait until an actual 2011 MY Magazine comparison at least before throwing up the "I WIN!" flag. However, I'm a lot more interested in what the GT will manage to do in the hands of a good driver, just to see how much potential these mainstream autowriters managed to tap out.

I'm curious to see how much faster the GT is in the hands of a good driver as well.

[Whiskey Tango Foxtrot]

Um a stock a6 camaro should have no problem hooking up on any sort of dry pavement. Mine felt as if it couldnt out 60' a kid on a big wheel.

[ULTRAZLS1]

I have never denied that the GT would be a couple tenths faster than the camaro. Just look at the power to weight.

I was talking about motor trend tests. They have run a 13.0 and a 12.9 with the camaro...all with the same trap speeds as this 13.1 run. This 13.1 is the worst time they have got with the camaro and the best they have got with the GT. It is just kind of funny. If the conditions were worse for perofrmance the trap would have suffered....traction was the issue and or the driver was not as skilled in the camaro....obviously

They were not able to hook up with the camaro on this day at this track.

Their is not going to be a .4 second difference between two cars that have trapped bascically the same in 4 different tests now and trapped nearly the same in this test. Thats all I am saying.

[Whiskey Tango Foxtrot]

^^^ wut he said too.

[a_Username]

Originally Posted by garagelogic

True. I could say the same exact thing for the GT500. How else can you explain me driving a bone stock 2007 GT500 to a at Beech Bend Raceway back in 2008 when all the magazines can muster from a 2010 version sporting more power than that car is a 12.8 (or 12.4, depending on what is being referenced)? As anyone who has seen me drive at the track can tell you, I am no Evan Smith, either.

ET is also a reflection of vehicle weight, rolling resistance, etc. not just how well someone can get it to 60ft.


I, too, would have liked to see MotorTrend wait until they had 2011 versions of all three cars before making performance comparisons. Of course, we’ve not heard a peep out of GM regarding any changes to the Camaro for the 2011 model year and so far we only have rumors on what Fiat is going to bring to the table with their Challenger. Even if it gets the 6.4L, it will need to be putting out 475-500HP just to be competitive with the GM and Ford offerings.
The silence from GM speaks volumes to me on their plans for the 2011 Camaro, but I’m hoping that they are simply waiting for the right time to spring any upgrades on us.
As for the testing, remember, the quarter mile tests were not done on a prepped track, so only getting a 13.1 from the Camaro should not be a surprise. Neither should it be a surprise that the significantly lighter and better geared Mustang beat it on the same day on the same surface by four tenths. I have no doubt that you will see mid-to-low 12’s from a 2011 Mustang GT on stock tires once they hit a real racetrack, much like you’ve seen stock 2010 Camaro’s getting mid-12’s under similar conditions.

About the GT500, I completely agree. IMO, it's just as stupid to blindly accept magazine comparisons as facts as it is to accept comparable record numbers, under certain circumstances.

I was talking about what mostly affects each measurement of speed, such as launching mostly affects your ET. One of my biggest fusses about magazine comparisons is what you brought up, relatively few of them actually do performance based testing on actual performance locations, such as tracks, drag strips, etc. They do it out on a closed street somewhere lol. No it didn't really come to a surprise that the GT is beating the SS in these comparisons, however it seems that EVERY mainstream magazine author is jumping on the bandwagon and releasing premature comparisons. As I recall, you didn't see 2010 Camaro SS vs. 2009 Mustang GT comparisons.

As I've said before, considering GM's recent agressive direction, I doubt GM is going to lay down and take a hit without doing a little something to try to turn the tables.

On the bright side, the 2011 GT just shows what American car companies are capable of creating. Not only are they exceeding our performance expectations, but our quality and everyday drivability expectations as well.

[a_Username]

Originally Posted by syr74

Yes and no, there are cars that just do not have the ability to put it all down on the pavement. I'm not saying where or how that all shakes out in this comparo, but the notion that a good driver can correct every ill just doesn't hold water.



Potentially, I'm curious to get to see him run if were ever at Beech bend at the same time. I'm also curious to see if I can get some seat time at the strip in a 2011 GT, assuming I don't just buy one myself which is becoming increasingly likely.



I'm curious to see how much faster the GT is in the hands of a good driver as well.

The argument wouldn't hold water if we were talking about cars that had a major traction disadvantage. Both of these cars seem to have enough rubber, as well as the suspension to back it up, in order to catch traction very well.

[GTAHVIT]

Originally Posted by garagelogic

True. I could say the same exact thing for the GT500. How else can you explain me driving a bone stock 2007 GT500 to a 12.51 @ 113.81 (2.042 60ft) at Beech Bend Raceway back in 2008 when all the magazines can muster from a 2010 version sporting more power than that car is a 12.8 (or 12.4, depending on what is being referenced)? As anyone who has seen me drive at the track can tell you, I am no Evan Smith, either.

ET is also a reflection of vehicle weight, rolling resistance, etc. not just how well someone can get it to 60ft.


I, too, would have liked to see MotorTrend wait until they had 2011 versions of all three cars before making performance comparisons. Of course, we’ve not heard a peep out of GM regarding any changes to the Camaro for the 2011 model year and so far we only have rumors on what Fiat is going to bring to the table with their Challenger. Even if it gets the 6.4L, it will need to be putting out 475-500HP just to be competitive with the GM and Ford offerings.

The silence from GM speaks volumes to me on their plans for the 2011 Camaro, but I’m hoping that they are simply waiting for the right time to spring any upgrades on us.

As for the testing, remember, the quarter mile tests were not done on a prepped track, so only getting a 13.1 from the Camaro should not be a surprise. Neither should it be a surprise that the significantly lighter and better geared Mustang beat it on the same day on the same surface by four tenths. I have no doubt that you will see mid-to-low 12’s from a 2011 Mustang GT on stock tires once they hit a real racetrack, much like you’ve seen stock 2010 Camaro’s getting mid-12’s under similar conditions.

My guess is Mustang will be able to ride this win for a year or so.

I don't see GM making significant changes to the power train just yet... Honestly... I'd rather see GM offer a track pack ish option instead of just running the HP race.

[a_Username]

Originally Posted by GTAHVIT

My guess is Mustang will be able to ride this win for a year or so.

I don't see GM making significant changes to the power train just yet... Honestly... I'd rather see GM offer a track pack ish option instead of just running the HP race.

A track pack like option would be much more likely than the other option for the Camaro to handle better, which would be losing weight lol.

[ULTRAZLS1]

Originally Posted by syr74

As for this being the best Mustang 1/4 mile time, don't assume it will stay that way. I said it before and I'll say it again here, one of the major auto rags is going to knock down a 12.6 in this car and Evan Smith is going to go much, much faster than that.

Just how fast do you think a car can go (stock) with 109-111 trap speeds? (and I think we can say this now since it has been same tack same day with the camaro, not to mention the 3 other tests showing nearly identical traps as the camaro)

[Sax1031]

Originally Posted by ULTRAZLS1

Just how fast do you think a car can go (stock) with 109-111 trap speeds? (and I think we can say this now since it has been same tack same day with the camaro, not to mention the 3 other tests showing nearly identical traps as the camaro)

I think you will see a 12.5 or a 12.6 on a well prepped track.

I am waiting for Evan Smith to run the 2011. He is the only mag driver I really respect.

[a_Username]

Originally Posted by Sax1031

I think you will see a 12.5 or a 12.6 on a well prepped track.

I am waiting for Evan Smith to run the 2011. He is the only mag driver I really respect.

I say 12.4 or so.

[Sax1031]

Originally Posted by a_Username

I say 12.4 or so.

I think a 12.4 would be the best case scenario.

If anyone can do it though it is Evan Smith.