Z/28 OR SS VS 2011GT500

[syr74]

Originally Posted by 2SSARMY

I eat cobras

Not this one.

[kbui]

What happen to the GT500 numbered 31 on that list? Who tested the #12 and #13 on that list?

[assasinator]

Originally Posted by BackinBlackSS/RS

That is refreshing to hear. I get so tired of people dumping what they have just because the new model has more power or whatever. My SS is badass and is the car I have always wanted. I don't care if a faster, better one comes out next year. This is my baby and I'm keeping her.

fantastic for you man. thats what its all about.

[a_Username]

Originally Posted by THE EVIL TW1N

Lol. I guess that picture means I'm right.

[Sleestack]

Originally Posted by kbui

What happen to the GT500 numbered 31 on that list? Who tested the #12 and #13 on that list?

12 was tested in controlled environment by a SVT Team member (Ford).

http://jalopnik.com/5541716/2011-she...w-track-record

13 seems to be an entry by an individual, so may be taken with a grain of salt.

31 is from lighting lap in 2010....(car and driver)
http://www.caranddriver.com/features...p_2009-feature

[motorhead]

I have no faith in that forum of testing at all after seeing the list. There is no way a 2010 gt500 convertible is that much faster then a 2010 gt500 coupe. The convertible has a softer suspension and weighs more. Plus I have a very hard time believing that the 2011 even with it's upgrades over 2010 which are minimal at best can run with a Z06. Say what ever you like ,but I'm not buying it.

[a_Username]

Originally Posted by motorhead

I have no faith in that forum of testing at all after seeing the list. There is no way a 2010 gt500 convertible is that much faster then a 2010 gt500 coupe. The convertible has a softer suspension and weighs more. Plus I have a very hard time believing that the 2011 even with it's upgrades over 2010 which are minimal at best can run with a Z06. Say what ever you like ,but I'm not buying it.

I'd have to agree with this. I'd say this particular GT500 had one of the better drivers, better weather conditions, and basically better conditions than other cars being compiled onto this list.

[8cd03gro]

Like I said, any testing like this should be taken with a grain of salt. However, I would hardly say the changes are minimal.

[snakekiller]

Originally Posted by motorhead

I have no faith in that forum of testing at all after seeing the list. There is no way a 2010 gt500 convertible is that much faster then a 2010 gt500 coupe. The convertible has a softer suspension and weighs more. Plus I have a very hard time believing that the 2011 even with it's upgrades over 2010 which are minimal at best can run with a Z06. Say what ever you like ,but I'm not buying it.

if you question one run, we should question every run.

the 2011 mustang lost 120lbs and gain 10hp, that alone should make it faster
ad to that the lighter optional rims, and super-car pzero tires.
we also have to remember ford din't claim 9 seconds faster, it claimed 3 seconds faster than the 2010. i do agree the z06 should be faster, but its also relatively unchanged since 06.

[Sleestack]

Originally Posted by snakekiller

if you question one run, we should question every run.

That about sums it up.... every car had a chance of having good or bad conditions, drivers, etc.... and when you put it all together in a consolidated list, the GT500 is a Bad MoFo....... Maybe all things equal it would move up or down a few spots, but that precision is not the purpose of this list... just a relative degree of 'Badness'......

[kbui]

Not knocking the GT500. People whose opinions I trusted have these things. However in looking at test data, you always have "outliers" which you will have to recheck. Just looking at the numbers for Ford's, the 2 data points which would be questionable are the non-C/D tested. It's hard to believe the GT500 can out run the GT given the power to weight ratios and GT was a "track" car. Either all the C/D tested data are bad or the 2 non C/D tested are questionable. I will be interested in seeing the next set of tests from C/D. It's not I believe C/D more than others, it's just that they will tend to test these vehicles at around the same time; removing at least one more variable. Interesting numbers nevertheless. I think Ford should take these new GT500's and GT's to the "ring"....

12. Shelby Mustang Cobra GT500 2:58:48 ´11 558 / 1720 Ford SVT
13. Ford Mustang Shelby GT500 Conv. 2:58:5 ´10 547 / 1758
15. Ford GT 3:00.7 ´04 550 / 1538 Car and Driver
28. Shelby GT500 3:05.9 ´06 507 / 1807 Car and Driver
31. Shelby GT500 3:07.4 ´10 547 / 1767 C/D

[Sleestack]

Originally Posted by kbui

Not knocking the GT500. People whose opinions I trusted have these things. However in looking at test data, you always have "outliers" which you will have to recheck. Just looking at the numbers for Ford's, the 2 data points which would be questionable are the non-C/D tested. It's hard to believe the GT500 can out run the GT given the power to weight ratios and GT was a "track" car. Either all the C/D tested data are bad or the 2 non C/D tested are questionable. I will be interested in seeing the next set of tests from C/D. It's not I believe C/D more than others, it's just that they will tend to test these vehicles at around the same time; removing at least one more variable. Interesting numbers nevertheless. I think Ford should take these new GT500's and GT's to the "ring"....

12. Shelby Mustang Cobra GT500 2:58:48 ´11 558 / 1720 Ford SVT
13. Ford Mustang Shelby GT500 Conv. 2:58:5 ´10 547 / 1758
15. Ford GT 3:00.7 ´04 550 / 1538 Car and Driver
28. Shelby GT500 3:05.9 ´06 507 / 1807 Car and Driver
31. Shelby GT500 3:07.4 ´10 547 / 1767 C/D

I may question the tune on the car, driver, etc.... but the time is pretty self evident by the little ticking numbers on the top right of the video......

[garagelogic]

Originally Posted by motorhead

Plus I have a very hard time believing that the 2011 even with it's upgrades over 2010 which are minimal at best can run with a Z06. Say what ever you like ,but I'm not buying it.

I agree that on the same day on the same track, it is doubtful the 2011 GT500 is going to go neck-and-neck with a Z06 but, if people are willing to buy the fact that only a tenth of a second separates a 2010 GT500 from a 2010 Camaro SS in a quarter mile (you know what test I'm talking about) then they should also be willing to accept the results of this particular run.

[motorhead]

Originally Posted by garagelogic

I agree that on the same day on the same track, it is doubtful the 2011 GT500 is going to go neck-and-neck with a Z06 but, if people are willing to buy the fact that only a tenth of a second separates a 2010 GT500 from a 2010 Camaro SS in a quarter mile (you know what test I'm talking about) then they should also be willing to accept the results of this particular run.

I should make myself clear. The biggest problem I see with the test is the 2010 convertible being right behind the 2011 coupe when every test one reads states that the 2010 convertible is far less of a handler the the 2010 coupe. I guess it just goes to show that any car can win on any given day.

I know for a fact from drag racing that the 2010 gt500 takes some practice launching ,but when it's done right that thing is way faster than a camaro. I've seen it first hand. Their's one at the track I go to that couldn't run faster than a 12.85 it's first night out. After the guy hooked up with someone that knows how to drive, now it runs very low 12's completely stock and in the mid 11's with just dot slicks. It makes me want to trade my camaro everytime I see it. Well, not really. But it's impressive. So to make a short post long, I don't buy that test either, or if it's correct for that day then that guy didn't know what he was doing with the GT500. I hate to say it but that is a great car that chevy will have their work cut out for to beat with the Z/28.