ZL1 vs GT500 This Friday.

[GoldenBear]

Originally Posted by shaffe

I don't want to keep arguing with you, but the way I read your posts(and I think others have as well) is that when someone states the GT500 is faster 2 out of 3 times, thus better performance results. your reply most often is how is that better, or how does that make it a better track car, how does that translate into a race, or my opinion leads me to believe that X will happen.

There is no disagreement the the GT500 ran the first two laps faster and the ZL1 ran the third lap faster. That is not in dispute.

The issue may lie in one's characterization of the general term "better results."

Results is a generic general term that can encompass many different attributes, consequences, and events. There is a difference between generically stating that a vehicle had better performance results and that a vehicle had two out of three faster lap times. The former is a more general statement which can refer to many attributes, while the latter is a specific statement referring only to the single attribute of faster lap times.

Referring to lap times is specific to simply that, lap times, while referring to results is not necessarily specific and may encompass many attributes in addition to raw lap times such as, speed through corners, time required to decelerate for turns, lateral acceleration, etc.

Originally Posted by shaffe

I don;t know if its you not reading my or other peoples posts correctly, or us not wording them correctly. But I am pretty sure no one hear said it would be a better race car, or would win a 15 lap race or would be the better track car. What me and a few others have said directed at you, was that the GT500 peformed better in 2 of the 3 laps MT ran, thus it had better performance results. You can not deny that.

Yes, the GT500 ran a faster lap time in two of the three laps, therefore, one can state that the GT500 had a better result in the category of the number of faster laps out of the three laps that were run. However, to state simply that the GT500 had better track performance attributes and results on the track is, I believe, an overstatement, as there are other performance metrics to be considered when running on the track other than three raw lap times, such as consistency, endurance, and others which have been previously mentioned.

Maybe, in order for clarity, one should state to which specific result one is referring when one discusses the performance results. With regard to the result with respect to the number of faster laps of the three laps run, the GT500 had the better result running two of the three laps faster.

Originally Posted by shaffe

yet, when we bring it up to you. you tip toe around it and bring up other stuff like how it translates into a 15 lap race. you still have not clearly admitted that anyone who has said that was correct. Or even when you do somewhat acknowledge that the GT500 was faster, you still don't say it was you go into the feel, the brake fade, the way the drivers felt about the cars so that you can still give the edge to the ZL1.

basically cliff notes is you wont flat out say that the GT500 put down better numbers on Laguna Seca. You twist into something else, but if you would just agree with what was said people wouldnt be arguing with you. Last time i checked being fast 2 out 3 times, that means those 2 times i had better results. Thats all anyone has been saying

I have stated many times and agree that the GT500 ran two faster laps and the ZL1 ran one faster lap. With regard to the number of faster laps the GT500 had the better result. I don't know how to state it any more clearly than that.

[shaffe]

Originally Posted by GoldenBear

There is no disagreement the the GT500 ran the first two laps faster and the ZL1 ran the third lap faster. That is not in dispute.

The issue may lie in one's characterization of the general term "better results."

Results is a generic general term that can encompass many different attributes, consequences, and events. There is a difference between generically stating that a vehicle had better performance results and that a vehicle had two out of three faster lap times. The former is a more general statement which can refer to many attributes, while the latter is a specific statement referring only to the single attribute of faster lap times.

Referring to lap times is specific to simply that, lap times, while referring to results is not necessarily specific and may encompass many attributes in addition to raw lap times such as, speed through corners, time required to decelerate for turns, lateral acceleration, etc.



Yes, the GT500 ran a faster lap time in two of the three laps, therefore, one can state that the GT500 had a better result in the category of the number of faster laps out of the three laps that were run. However, to state simply that the GT500 had better track performance attributes and results on the track is, I believe, an overstatement, as there are other performance metrics to be considered when running on the track other than three raw lap times, such as consistency, endurance, and others which have been previously mentioned.

Maybe, in order for clarity, one should state to which specific result one is referring when one discusses the performance results. With regard to the result with respect to the number of faster laps of the three laps run, the GT500 had the better result running two of the three laps faster.



I have stated many times and agree that the GT500 ran two faster laps and the ZL1 ran one faster lap. With regard to the number of faster laps the GT500 had the better result. I don't know how to state it any more clearly than that.

GB it seems you and I will not agree on "better results"

Just answer me this you call the road course results as 1-1-and 2 draws. The numbers DO NOT support your argument for the second draw. But yet you gladly except the numbers on the one course where it favors teh GT, and obviously the one where it favors the Z and natuarlly when they dead tied. Everyone can agree to those being 1-1-1. Yet The MT test gives more of a breakdown giving us 3 laps. Yet 2 of 3 GT500 is still faster, pushing road course results to 2-1-1 to most people. Yet you want to say this one should be a draw as well?

Please explain to me then why:

you seem to Accept the lap times from the other 3 ( ZL1 being faster on Gingerman, GT being faster on WIllow, tie on whatever 3rd course was) reviews and don't question them, I dont recall any of the reviews saying the GT was better/winner on the road course.


SO


seeing as how you accept the numbers in the other 3 tests, why are you ignoring the numbers in the MT test that favor the GT500 and saying it should be a draw

Originally Posted by GoldenBear

There appear to be some Ford fans that don't like the fact that the first four magazines that compared and reviewed the 2013 GT500 and the ZL1 all chose the ZL1 as the better vehicle.

There are those who point out that the four road course tests came out with the GT500 having a faster lap on one course, the ZL1 performing better on another, with the same lap time for both vehicles on another, and with a split result on the fourth (faster first lap for the GT500 and faster last lap by the ZL1) for a 1-1-2 record, with the ZL1 being the easier vehicle to drive on the road courses.

Ford fans are quick to point out that the GT500 is faster in a straight line. However, it's not the 1960s anymore when "muscle" cars of that era were judged mainly on straight line acceleration. Today's high performance vehicles are judged on much more than simply straight line acceleration, such as on handling, slalom and skidpad, braking, drivability, comfort, and styling.

The street road tests showed the ZL1 to be the better vehicle in that area.

Therefore, given the overall performance of each vehicle over each of the tested areas, including in real world everyday driving, all four reviews chose the ZL1 as the better overall vehicle between the two.

However, if one is mainly interested in drag racing, the 2013 GT500 may well be the better choice between the two vehicles.

Not a split result, 2/3 is majority in favor of GT500

[C5RocksC5]

GB, neither of these cars will do great as Road Course car, but great for a few laps. It gets worse for the heavier and heat soaking qualities of the ZL1. You simply can't defy physics. I didn't see that they posted a ZL1 time for its second or third lap. I maybe wrong but if I recall, they quoted its best time and said it never deviated more than 0.2 after the first lap so meaning, it was also getting slower lap after lap. But seriously, for the serious racers, the GT500 is clearly a faster car. The ZL1 handles better for sure but under a good driver, the GT500 will still be faster. I accept that and I think most already have. There is nothing wrong in admitting another car is superior to our chosen car in most performance aspects. I am convince though, that if the chart that compiled the results with the GT500 having more "performance wins" vs the ZL1 was reversed and the Z had more performance wins and the Shelby was more "comfortable", you would then be arguing who cares about comfort in performance cars.

[GoldenBear]

Originally Posted by shaffe

GB it seems you and I will not agree on "better results"

Just answer me this you call the road course results as 1-1-and 2 draws. The numbers DO NOT support your argument for the second draw. But yet you gladly except the numbers on the one course where it favors teh GT, and obviously the one where it favors the Z and natuarlly when they dead tied. Everyone can agree to those being 1-1-1. Yet The MT test gives more of a breakdown giving us 3 laps. Yet 2 of 3 GT500 is still faster, pushing road course results to 2-1-1 to most people. Yet you want to say this one should be a draw as well?

I've stated this several times, and I'll state it again. The Motor Trend comparison is a draw because the track data and results are not limited to only the number of fastest raw lap times, and assessment of all of the data provided indicates the comparison was a draw.

Originally Posted by shaffe

Please explain to me then why:

you seem to Accept the lap times from the other 3 ( ZL1 being faster on Gingerman, GT being faster on WIllow, tie on whatever 3rd course was) reviews and don't question them, I dont recall any of the reviews saying the GT was better/winner on the road course.

You are correct that all four reviews concluded that the ZL1 was the better track vehicle. Therefore, one could simply call the track performance results 4-0 for the ZL1.

However, trying to be fair, I used the information that was provided by each comparison to assess the results provided by each magazine. Some comparisons provided more information and numbers than others, and when more data was provided, I took that it into account.

The Inside Line track comparison concluded that the ZL1 was the better track vehicle, but didn't provide much detailed information other than each vehicle's fastest lap time. Thus, I used the fastest lap time to give the GT500 the nod. If Inside Line had provided all of the lap times for each vehicle or trend data with respect consecutive lap times, or more complete data, it might have been more difficult to justify giving the GT500 the nod.

The Car and Driver track comparison was similar to the Inside Line comparison in that it concluded that the times were more consistent with the ZL1, but, again, I didn't see a detailed break down of the track data, leaving only the lap time numbers. Therefore, I used the lap time information that was provided to call it draw.

The Motor Trend track comparison provided a plethora of track data and information that has been discussed many times to conclude that the comparison was a draw.

The Automobile track comparison, including the ZL1's missed shift, clearly showed the ZL1 deserved the nod.

Originally Posted by shaffe

SO


seeing as how you accept the numbers in the other 3 tests, why are you ignoring the numbers in the MT test that favor the GT500 and saying it should be a draw

I'm not ignoring the numbers the Motor Trend provided. On the contrary, I'm assessing and taking into account all of the numbers that Motor Trend provided to call the Motor Trend comparison a draw.

Originally Posted by shaffe

Not a split result, 2/3 is majority in favor of GT500

The GT500 ran two faster laps and the ZL1 ran one faster lap in the Motor Trend comparison. However, the entirety of the track data provided, and it's there if one reads the article carefully, indicates that Motor Trend track result was a draw.


I think we've probably beaten this topic to death, and no one else is likely interested. Therefore, we can agree to disagree and leave it at that.

[shaffe]

Agree to disagree I can live with that.

Touché sir, and good day hahah

[C5RocksC5]

now let's pick on the Challenger!

[Fenderaddict2]

Originally Posted by pdari

now let's pick on the Challenger!

Good idea, before the SRT 'Cuda comes out.

[9secs]

Keep reading magazines while the gt500 passes you up, at least you are going to be comfy lol. Both are great cars but i dont even see the arguement anymore. Its clear the strong and weak points of both cars.

[kbar4782]

Amen

[8cd03gro]

Now the real question is when is someone going to bring their zl1 to run me at Bandi', or better yet High Planes

[mgoodbar]

Here ya go, 100lb = 1/10 so there is 2/10 for the gt500, 100hp is basicly 0.5 to 1 sec in a 1/4 on a 3500 lb car. GT500 + 82hp = 0.5 to 0.7, 10ths.. + the gt500 had DR radials.. ..


Ok now If ya look at the second race the ZL1 was running in the staging lanes and the GT500 was not. can ya say heat soak.. The 1st race the GT500 pulled out like 1.5 cars out of the whole and the ZL1 stayed in basicly the same place the entire run. I say pully up and get some DR radials and get a rematch, + get a tune and ditch the stupid ass cats on the camaro ZL1 nothing but issues and KR inviting junk... GM placed 4 small plugs in the camaro exhaust instead of something better. read my post on my L99 camaro and you will see what I am talking about. I was getting 6kr from the driverside cat...... That is all.

[Sweet Zness]

Originally Posted by newmoon

Unless they are hot-lapping their cars numerous times I doubt heat soak is killing off their mph that much. The summer heat is an impact though and probably costing a few tenths and 1-2 mph in lost performance. If you pay attention when the ZL1s first hit the streets there were a few owners running low 12s to high 11s stock at 117+mph, as the temps rose into summer the times really increased. My guess is come Fall you will see better times. Also I suspect much of the terrible times are due to operator error, there seems to be much confusion as to which settings would be best for the TC and LC.

Not to be a dick here as I am asking completely honestly, can you please show me one non drag radial, ZL1 stock car breaking into the high 11's. I honestly haven't seen the proof of this.

[jewc75]

Originally Posted by AZ-ZL1

Maybe all...BS

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=FBVohx6uzTM

[9secs]

The guy also mentioned in the top youtube post that it was his 5.0, and the camaro ran a 12.9 later on while he could run a best of 13.2 . Thats racing... 5.0 cut a way better light, cant win them all. Run that race 10 more times and it would probably favor the zl1 8/10 times.