2013 Ford Mustang Shelby GT 500 650 HP! How will it stack up against the ZL1?

[Scarrzz]

Originally Posted by rez333

Current GT500 is 3820lbs. Carbon Fiber driveshaft is a loss of 40lbs already, that brings it down to 3780lbs - then add 70lbs of other stuff, then subtract some for other stuff etc and you end up at 3850lbs.

You don't lose that much with a CF driveshaft. Maybe 10 pounds, but at least it is reciprocating weight, which means less drivetrain loss.

[IOMZL1]

Originally Posted by Scarrzz

You don't lose that much with a CF driveshaft. Maybe 10 pounds, but at least it is reciprocating weight, which means less drivetrain loss.

This isn't a dump truck.

[rez333]

Originally Posted by IOMZL1

The electronically adjustable Blisten dampers are inferior to MR suspension. The Blisten’s are adjustable from the ****pit from ‘street’ to ‘track’. This effectively softens the dampening for the street and stiffens it at the track. While a nice feature, the MR actually adjusts dampening as you drive and is a far superior system.

The Bilstein dampers are superior in my opinion - ON A SPORTS CAR. Sure - for your average family car, the MR is better but on a sports car - the LESS nanny controls the better. Heck - even better than the Bilstein are mechanically adjustable dampers.

You may need the microsecond adjustments on the street, but you won't need it on the track. On the track you want to know exactly how the car is going to react and then have the driver DRIVE to compensate. MR will take away the driving. Plus on a road course, the surface isn't going to be variable enough for it to make a lick of difference in the first place.

My "premium performance sedan" has soft enough dampers that it's comfortable already. Why do I want or need MR? I don't. However it would be nice to have a firmer setting for more spirited driving - having the ability to switch between the two is what I desire, not necessarily have MR completely remove the nuances of the road.

[rez333]

Originally Posted by Scarrzz

You don't lose that much with a CF driveshaft. Maybe 10 pounds, but at least it is reciprocating weight, which means less drivetrain loss.

The stock two-piece driveshaft is 45-50lbs. The CF driveshaft is around 11-14lbs. Do your research before confusing speculation with fact.

Originally Posted by toilets

40lbs for the shaft no way. really?.. Fords could be different but look at "Doc's" build here and he went to a single carbon shaft from the stock 2 piece ss one, and it was only a difference of 3 pounds

Yes - the Ford's driveshaft is very heavy. Do a google search on "CF driveshaft" and there are many threads saying how much the original two piece weighs.

[IOMZL1]

Originally Posted by rez333

The Bilstein dampers are superior in my opinion - ON A SPORTS CAR. Sure - for your average family car, the MR is better but on a sports car - the LESS nanny controls the better. Heck - even better than the Bilstein are mechanically adjustable dampers.

You may need the microsecond adjustments on the street, but you won't need it on the track. On the track you want to know exactly how the car is going to react and then have the driver DRIVE to compensate. MR will take away the driving. Plus on a road course, the surface isn't going to be variable enough for it to make a lick of difference in the first place.

My "premium performance sedan" has soft enough dampers that it's comfortable already. Why do I want or need MR? I don't. However it would be nice to have a firmer setting for more spirited driving - having the ability to switch between the two is what I desire, not necessarily have MR completely remove the nuances of the road.

I disagree on all counts. Any professional motorsport engineer would love to have continuously adjustable dampers. Reasons? You want different damper curves under braking, acceleration, cornering, under bumps, to prevent body roll, heave, pitch, etc.

People that think MR is a comfort feature only for touring cars just don’t understand it. Sure, it helps on the streets. The MR can do what the Blisten shocks can do x1000.

[GoldenBear]

Originally Posted by toilets

But is the GS vert and the GS competely different in power? In my eyes, you are quoting an entirely different car (Zo6, ZR1) yes I know its still a Corvette.

Dont want to start a fight as I respect very much the input you provide on this forum... I just dont think that its possible or should I say, I dont think GM will do it due to cost.

I'm not saying that the 2013 ZL1 will have more horsepower than the 2012 does. I'm just saying that it could.

Also, as IOM has pointed out, from one model year to the next there are things other than horsepower increases that can be done that will increase performance as well. For example, the 1967 Camaro had a rear suspension that used single leaf rear springs and the shock absorbers were mounted just inboard of the rear axle. That rear suspension gave the 1967 model a less than smooth ride, and it tended to bottom out when the car hits dips in the road, and significant wheel hop would occur when accelerating quickly from an standing start. For 1968 Chevrolet solved the problems by equipping the rear suspension with multi-leaf rear springs and adopting a staggered rear shock setup (one in front of the rear axle and one behind) to counteract wheel hop under hard acceleration. As a result the 1968 Camaro ended being a much better performing vehicle than the 1967 model.

[Sawyer]

Originally Posted by coolman

Now I'm sort of glad that I couldn't get allocation for a ZL1. It looks like they fixed the back end also which was the only thing I didn't like about the old one.

No the back end end still looks hideous, escpecially the lights.

[2cnd chance]

Originally Posted by rez333

dude - you sound like those Ford fan bois who made lots of excuses when the ZL1 did 7:41s at the ring.

Why on earth would you suppose Ford would lie about the 3850lb weight?

Simple, when you "add" to the now 3,850 weight it = more
Unless they will have a really stripped down model. I'd be afraid of 650HP and 20OMPH with no chassis improvements.

[Uneducated Guess]

Originally Posted by 2cnd chance

I'd be afraid of 650HP and 20OMPH with no chassis improvements.

I'm just gonna put this out there...200mph is just a number that they're throwing out there to oust chevrolet. is it capable? probably. how many will actually achieve this? little to none. just like I don't expect many to hit the top speed in the ZL1 either. the top speed, imo, is insignificant.

[adamgl]

You can keep your mustangs, front looks like a mini.

And getting 650 HP from the ZL1 would be pretty easy. Pulley and tune.

[Uneducated Guess]

[IOMZL1]

Originally Posted by rez333

The stock two-piece driveshaft is 45-50lbs. The CF driveshaft is around 11-14lbs. Do your research before confusing speculation with fact.



Yes - the Ford's driveshaft is very heavy. Do a google search on "CF driveshaft" and there are many threads saying how much the original two piece weighs.

Fair enough, it is heavy but weight savings would only be ~28-32 lbs which is still significant.

http://www.svtperformance.com/forums/shelby-gt500-150/712074-2011-driveshaft.html

“the stock steel on the 07-09 was 43lbs”

http://www.vmptuning.com/store/index.php?p=product&id=392&parent=88

“The stock DS weighs over 40lbs:”

“The new carbon fiber PST shaft weighs under 15lbs:”

[HEMI DAVE]

Originally Posted by Scarrzz

.

I'm betting the quarter mile time released by Ford will not begin with the number 12.

I don't think ZL1's quarter mile time should begin with a 12.

That is all.

I agree......they would of been better off with a sick 1/4 mile time than ring time..........

1/4 mile is what it's all about with these car's.......

[preppykid]

Hopefully the ZL1 price is reduced. (optimism). I read that the GT500 will be priced around $60k:

http://www.topspeed.com/cars/ford/20...-ar106552.html