2012 Camaro ZL1 vs. 2013 Shelby GT500-On Track

[eolson]

Automobile Magazine. Wow, the test on Edmunds didn't mention the GT500 handled like a pig, nor did anyone following the Road Atlanta weekend.

I am totally ready to accept the ZL1 has more stability in corners because of the Magnetic ride control technology, there is no question that it is the next step in suspension evolution, but this driver makes it seem that all the gains in the 2011 and 2012 GT500 have vanished in the 2013 GT500.

What is considered a very good time at Gingerman? What did the Boss 302 LS run at Gingerman. What did the 2012 GT500 run at Gingerman?

The car is that terrible in corners, but yet no comparable info ? What has a C6 Corvette with performance package run at Gingerman? The Z06? ZR1 ? Ford GT ?

Sounds like a bias Car and Driver article comparing the a BMW to a Mustang.

Since a performance package GT can Match and M5 BMW, beyond the terrible piggy handling comments, where are we supposed to put the 2013 GT500 into context with other recent fast cars. It pulled good G's in the corners according to the course map, and .7 seconds is not easy to put into context without other high performance car times to compare the GT500 times and corner g force to.

Why is it the missed shifts and bad gear box of the ZL1 are not talked about as being reasons for slower times in the same negative way as the longer gears of the GT500? They are both inherent features of these two current models, and might need revisions in the future. Why did the driver not mention that with shorter gears, the outcome would have been a half second faster time for the GT500??

Why is this Limey not putting both cars performance in context to other fast cars. Since it's no surprise that the ZL1 is faster in turns with the new technology, than it is more important than ever to put both cars times, no matter how the drivers driving experience is biased, into proper context.

We'll see how incredibly huge the other 4 magazines record the track time differences between the cars. I remember when the Nissan GTR came out, and everyone criticized it for being so well behaved and civil, and predictable, and confidence inspiring.

We know the GT500 has older technology and is going be more challenging to handle, but some of us like a beasty ride. Where are the comparable times to judge the difference in the times of the two cars in perspective to the differences in other fast car times and G forces as mentioned above. What crap. Erik

[Good2go]

I don't think the Automobile tester is implying that the GT500 cannot handle, it just doesn't handle as well as the ZL1. Did Edmunds do a ZL1/GT500 comparison, and were they compared at Road Atlanta?

[Bob Cosby]

Originally Posted by LOWDOWN

...Bologna? Correct. What wins at the strip is shown by the WIN light...and the quickest doesn't always light THAT bulb, do they, Bob?

Statistically, Yes. In Fact, No.

"Gentlemen, start your BENCHES!"

Quite true....I've won on a holeshot or two myself...but these tests are about the performance numbers, not the driver reaction time.

I'll stick with bologna. And I have a life too...which is why I'm replying 14 hours later!

[Fenderaddict2]

Originally Posted by 8cd03gro

How could they do that? The timeslips were in the video. . .

Only saw printed numbers not the vid. As I don't recall the original numbers or the revision I can't answer this. I do have every mag test of the Boss do time to dig 'em out I guess. I do know this though. The car comes off the line hard. Very hard, then drops in a gully then pulls out of that and keeps pulling in almost a linear BMW fashion.

I should add this is on fresh P-Zeros. They fall off quickly and by 20,000 KMs I couldn't get straight line traction in the first 3 gears, not much smoke either but some impressive black
lines. I've since switched to Potenza Pole Positions based on a tire review I read. Numbers are better but not loving the feel.

[8cd03gro]

The boss comes on pzeros? That's stupid. I wish manufactures would make tire decision based on the performance of the tire rather than relationships with the brand. Try some RE-11s next time around, you'll love them.

[eolson]

No doubt the ZL1 handles better than the GT500, it has the technology edge for sure, we already saw that when it ran back to back with the Boss LS.

The problem I'm having is that in the initial reviews of the GT500 and the Edmunds direct comparison test in particular, the driver relayed the slalom max speeds and figure eight G's, reporting that the ZL1 had the edge, and that it was a smoother more stable experience to drive. No where did he mention that the GT500 handled like a pig or had such body roll and sway that it was ungainly, as opposed to the ZL1. He simply relayed his preference for the handling and the performance edge going to the ZL1.

The driver in the Automobile report was not simply relaying that the ZL1 handled better and he enjoyed driving it more, he clearly made issue that if he would have been able to shift more correctly, that would have taken another 1/2 second off the ZL1 time. OK....

... but clearly he also relayed that the GT500's taller gears made for less than ideal shifts and desired rpm's throughout much of the course, but he failed to equate that,as he did with the ZL1's mis shifts, with a better track time.

That by definition is bias. There is no question the SVT team did not go all the way with the handling parameters with the 2013 GT500 as they might have. The fact that they did not attempt to eliminate the Monocoque effect of the live axel, by installing an X brace in the rear(or an equivalent molded carbon fiber rear seat support) as they did in the Boss LS, translates exactly into the excess "body roll" the car apparently still has.

To me the ridiculous part in general, is that GM clearly went all the way with the suspension of the ZL1 which has been proven by it's abilities being heavier than the GT500, and certainly than the Boss LS and still out handles them, but SVT and most any road racer knows that the solid axel demands having this cross over rigidity, as does the Boss LS, and they decided not to design a solution.

What are great times for Gingerman? Anyone?? Erik

[Bhobbs]

How is that bias? The taller gears are part of the GT500 by design. Getting used to the car won't change the fact that the gear box is set up that way.

[PistonsFan]

Originally Posted by eolson

Why is it the missed shifts and bad gear box of the ZL1 are not talked about as being reasons for slower times in the same negative way as the longer gears of the GT500? They are both inherent features of these two current models, and might need revisions in the future. Why did the driver not mention that with shorter gears, the outcome would have been a half second faster time for the GT500??

The tall gearing in the GT500 came about due to that fact that they could NOT use any of the added torque for the 2013 engine without spreading out the gearing. And likewise, the taller gearing and less shifting is tailored to the 1/4 mile to provide shift-less 0-60 and a 2-shift quarter mile. The tall gearing in the GT500 was selected knowing that there would be compromises in drivability.

The shift issue is not "inherent" to the ZL1. It's not a common problem seen in other ZL1's (from what I've seen). It's very possible this marketing car has been abused and the transmission is showing signs of that abuse. Or it is just one of those problematic Tremecs that surface now and then. The Tremec has had these kind of issues in many applications, although it's relatively rare. Most people report no problems with the Tremecs, some people report bad 1-2 shifts and others report 2-3 shift issues (in any application). I've driven an SS that required a little more clutch to get it in to third than other gears required. It's a Tremec thing.

[IOMZL1]

Originally Posted by eolson

Automobile Magazine. Wow, the test on Edmunds didn't mention the GT500 handled like a pig, nor did anyone following the Road Atlanta weekend.

I am totally ready to accept the ZL1 has more stability in corners because of the Magnetic ride control technology, there is no question that it is the next step in suspension evolution, but this driver makes it seem that all the gains in the 2011 and 2012 GT500 have vanished in the 2013 GT500.

What is considered a very good time at Gingerman? What did the Boss 302 LS run at Gingerman. What did the 2012 GT500 run at Gingerman?

The car is that terrible in corners, but yet no comparable info ? What has a C6 Corvette with performance package run at Gingerman? The Z06? ZR1 ? Ford GT ?

Sounds like a bias Car and Driver article comparing the a BMW to a Mustang.

Since a performance package GT can Match and M5 BMW, beyond the terrible piggy handling comments, where are we supposed to put the 2013 GT500 into context with other recent fast cars. It pulled good G's in the corners according to the course map, and .7 seconds is not easy to put into context without other high performance car times to compare the GT500 times and corner g force to.

Why is it the missed shifts and bad gear box of the ZL1 are not talked about as being reasons for slower times in the same negative way as the longer gears of the GT500? They are both inherent features of these two current models, and might need revisions in the future. Why did the driver not mention that with shorter gears, the outcome would have been a half second faster time for the GT500??

Why is this Limey not putting both cars performance in context to other fast cars. Since it's no surprise that the ZL1 is faster in turns with the new technology, than it is more important than ever to put both cars times, no matter how the drivers driving experience is biased, into proper context.

We'll see how incredibly huge the other 4 magazines record the track time differences between the cars. I remember when the Nissan GTR came out, and everyone criticized it for being so well behaved and civil, and predictable, and confidence inspiring.

We know the GT500 has older technology and is going be more challenging to handle, but some of us like a beasty ride. Where are the comparable times to judge the difference in the times of the two cars in perspective to the differences in other fast car times and G forces as mentioned above. What crap. Erik

This is a race car driver, not a politician, not an engineer. He was handed two cars and is used to detecting minor variances between two setups. This was apparently more than a minor variance so to him the difference was huge. How does he make it seem like the gains from 2012 to 2013 have vanished? It is unlikely he has even driven a 2012 GT500, he is just calling it like he sees it.

All of the stand alone GT500 tests you mention were comparing the car to how it evolved from 2012 or just to itself. These ZL1-GT500 comparisons will have a different tune because there is a different car added to the mix. None of the ZL1 individual reviews stated it was slow in the ¼ mile, but I’m sure all of the reviews where the two cars are compared will.

Limey? LMAO. You wouldn’t be calling him that if he praised the GT500. Shorter gears? Why not change the whole car. That is the price you pay for 200 mph. Why didn’t they mention how well the ZL1 would have done with 700 HP.

Would you honestly prefer a tougher to handle, ‘beasty ride’ car over the course of a race? This race car driver wouldn’t and I can’t think of one that would. Sometimes a ‘comfortable’ setup isn’t fast. Between these two at this test it appears it is.

[A-little-perspective]

Part 3 is out. Don't bother reading it, you know the answer. Daily driving is determined by bumpy back roads and changing gears in traffic.

They even said the ZL1 objectively feels like the all around victor. LOL!! Objective.....right.

[oortcloud]

Originally Posted by eolson

The problem I'm having is that in the initial reviews of the GT500 and the Edmunds direct comparison test in particular, the driver relayed the slalom max speeds and figure eight G's, reporting that the ZL1 had the edge, and that it was a smoother more stable experience to drive. No where did he mention that the GT500 handled like a pig or had such body roll and sway that it was ungainly, as opposed to the ZL1. He simply relayed his preference for the handling and the performance edge going to the ZL1.

The driver in the Automobile report was not simply relaying that the ZL1 handled better and he enjoyed driving it more, he clearly made issue that if he would have been able to shift more correctly, that would have taken another 1/2 second off the ZL1 time. OK....

... but clearly he also relayed that the GT500's taller gears made for less than ideal shifts and desired rpm's throughout much of the course, but he failed to equate that,as he did with the ZL1's mis shifts, with a better track time.

That by definition is bias. There is no question the SVT team did not go all the way with the handling parameters with the 2013 GT500 as they might have. The fact that they did not attempt to eliminate the Monocoque effect of the live axel, by installing an X brace in the rear(or an equivalent molded carbon fiber rear seat support) as they did in the Boss LS, translates exactly into the excess "body roll" the car apparently still has.

But that's why people were waiting for this type of review. They felt the Edmunds review wasn't a real world race test to push the cars to the limit. Some were saying that once they got it on a road course the handling difference would be equalized.

This review pushed the cars to their limits for much longer periods of time. Even if they did just 5 consecutive laps, that's 8+ minutes of solid full tilt driving by an experienced race car driver. This is a much different comparison so it doesn't surprise me the feedback was different. And it looks like the Edmunds review is validated. The handling difference between the 2 cars seems to become more pronounced on a race track, not less.

Although I'm fully willing to admit that on a different type of track the handling difference could be more equalized.

From what I have read MRC can have a significant impact on reducing body roll. So it didn't surprise me he pointed out that comparatively the gt500 had a lot more body roll.

The gt500 gearing was an engineering design decision by ford, whereas the shifting problem for the zl1 was not. I'm hoping the zl1 shifting issue is simply lack of familiarity with the shifter. If so, then it fixes itself for an owner who will drive it regularly. If it's a defect then that needs to be addresses by GM in my opinion. Either way it's quite different from the gt500 ford gearing issue.

[Fenderaddict2]

Part 3

http://m.automobilemag.com/reviews/d...oad/index.html

[LOWDOWN]

Just as all BOSS owners seem to assume their cars ALL run/handle the same, they DON'T. The "track hero" times for the BOSS are for the BOSS LS versions ONLY.

Now, we're going to run into (pun not intended) the GT500 crowd who, again, assume ALL GT500s run/handle the same...

If you do NOT have BOTH optional packages on your GT500, and you feel compelled to haul butt on the twisties, "your performance may differ" from those being shared by professional drivers and magazine testers.

Without the Bilsteins, I'm a-thinkin' the GT500 should be hustled on the twisties with a great deal of prudence...

[Fenderaddict2]

No surprises then. If you can only have one car get the ZL1, it's better. But if like me you have several, get the GT500. It's simply insane. And for some of us that makes it perfect.