2012 ZL1 vs. 2012 Boss 302

[thePill]

Originally Posted by SGOS252382

That's not my point. I know a stock GT is faster than a stock L99 Camaro.

Mustang guys
"Stock GTs run low 12s."
"Stock GT's with drag radials run 11s."
"Stock motor GTs lift the wheels"
etc
etc
When I'm at the track, my lightly modded L99 beats stock GTs by many cars lengths. If stock GTs run low 12s, they should run neck and neck with my car. The fact is they don't when I'm at the track. That's my point.

Those numbers are way too low, the fastest stock/stock tire run in a 5.0 was 12.58, there have been some that were 12.6.. then mag test at 12.7-13.2.

Evan Smith ran a 12.3 I think with drag radials and the record for DR's is 12.1 and that was only once.

Evo got the drivers wheel up with a 11.82@118, dyno'd at 405 RWHP and 375 RWTQ. Mods were minimal that I know of because this run was 3 days after they got the car and the tune was still being worked. You got those Mustangs running over a half second than what they really are running, where did you hear these times from?

[thePill]

Originally Posted by SGOS252382

When I'm at the track, my lightly modded L99 beats stock GTs by many cars lengths. If stock GTs run low 12s, they should run neck and neck with my car. The fact is they don't when I'm at the track. That's my point.

When your running a 12.1, your automatic is going to have the advantage. If I was seriously going into drag racing to compete, I would have got the automatic. Until you break mid 10s' or Outlaw class, then automatic's are prohibited. From low 12s until autos are prohibited, automatics rule...

Edit: Yeah, I just checked.. Outlaw class is 10.5... Not sure at what class auto's are a no-go but its somewhere around there.

[thePill]

Originally Posted by ULTRAZLS1

I know of a non shop private owner 2011 GT (no extensive weight reduction or tricks etc) that ran 11.2 with full bolt ons and slicks. Much faster than that with bolt ons and I am skeptical. For example...the evo car had a ~3100lb race weight when it went 10's with bolt ons. Thats a 600lb weight reduction....FAR from the norm.

I have heard stories similar, but weight reduction is the easiest thing to get away with in these S197's. There have been cars that dropped 300lbs that aren't noticeable. Probably weight reduction, there is alot of stuff you can pull from the car and the first 100lbs is easy, 200lbs is possible without buying any lightweight replacement parts so I have heard. Anything beyond that and you got to either pay money or forfeit your street-ability (about 3200lbs)

[SWAT 79]

I would say that the manuals have the advantage for as long as a average to above average driver (the best manual drivers could always keep up with autos regardless of how fast, again for the most part there are no definites) could handle one down a quarter. A average driver could probably drive a high 11 second car as fast or faster then an auto, assuming they have the launch down. Once you start to get down into the deep 10's, an auto is really going to be able to out class an average driver, again for the most part. Until then though the auto still has a drive train loss and it's advantage is strictly the ease of use.

SGO- You have a stout car, and can certainly drive based on your times. However, you most likely pulled 4 to 5 car lengths on a BONE STOCK 5.0, which is around 4-5 tenths faster in the quarter (putting a stock 5.0 at around 12.6-12.7). Respectfully, I doubt you can judge how many cars you were ahead of all the while driving down the strip and looking in the review, just not really plausible (which is why it's safe to say you exaggerated a bit).

I've never heard of anyone, mustang guys or otherwise, claiming a stock 5.0 can run 11's with tires (no has it been done?) however, basement 12's are absolutely possible with drag radials (as seen by such times produced). Also, 11.7 for a stock boss with just radials, is nothing surprising. I'm gonna say that car will get to 12.0, stock, no tires, when more people are able to drive them. Just as the zl1 will be able to get equal times stock, with no tires (with tires I could see the zl1 doing at least an 11.7).

[ULTRAZLS1]

Originally Posted by thePill

I have heard stories similar, but weight reduction is the easiest thing to get away with in these S197's. There have been cars that dropped 300lbs that aren't noticeable. Probably weight reduction, there is alot of stuff you can pull from the car and the first 100lbs is easy, 200lbs is possible without buying any lightweight replacement parts so I have heard. Anything beyond that and you got to either pay money or forfeit your street-ability (about 3200lbs)

I deleted the post to avoid arguments. But yes I agree.

But isnt that what makes it such an effective track car? you cant pull weight as easy on a camaro.

[thePill]

Originally Posted by ULTRAZLS1

I deleted the post to avoid arguments. But yes I agree.

But isnt that what makes it such an effective track car? you cant pull weight as easy on a camaro.

Yeah, but I think tuners should give some guys a heads up, say what was taken out at what extent.. or better yet.. charge for a professional weight reduction plan.. almost like in the Gran Turismo Game. Stage 1, Stage 2 ect ect.. safe and legal professional weight reduction.

[thePill]

Originally Posted by SWAT 79

I would say that the manuals have the advantage for as long as a average to above average driver (the best manual drivers could always keep up with autos regardless of how fast, again for the most part there are no definites) could handle one down a quarter. A average driver could probably drive a high 11 second car as fast or faster then an auto, assuming they have the launch down. Once you start to get down into the deep 10's, an auto is really going to be able to out class an average driver, again for the most part. Until then though the auto still has a drive train loss and it's advantage is strictly the ease of use.

I love a manual... it would take me some practice but I could probably beat an equal auto under 12's if I could run under 12s. But.. I still collect 3rd sometimes, even after 3000 miles on the car. I have seen some very good drivers that can handle a manual in the range your talking about..

SGO- You have a stout car, and can certainly drive based on your times. However, you most likely pulled 4 to 5 car lengths on a BONE STOCK 5.0, which is around 4-5 tenths faster in the quarter (putting a stock 5.0 at around 12.6-12.7). Respectfully, I doubt you can judge how many cars you were ahead of all the while driving down the strip and looking in the review, just not really plausible (which is why it's safe to say you exaggerated a bit).

At his trap speed (114-5mph) he would be about 28 feet ahead every 1/10th of a second of car #2 at 110mph trap (depending on 60'). His car is almost 16 foot so that is almost a car length between the two (12ft from rr bumper to fr bumper). So 7/10s or a car running a 12.8@110 would be 84 feet or 5.25 car lengths behind.

Maybe he was right.... lol..

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by ULTRAZLS1

I deleted the post to avoid arguments. But yes I agree.

But isnt that what makes it such an effective track car? you cant pull weight as easy on a camaro.

Doesn't the Grand Am racecar 5th gen weigh the same as the the Mustang competitors in that same series?

[thePill]

Originally Posted by Dragoneye

Doesn't the Grand Am racecar 5th gen weigh the same as the the Mustang competitors in that same series?

The Camaro's minimum weight is 3200lbs, the Mustang's is 3300lbs but the Camaro teams have trouble getting down to 3200. You can take a Mustang down to 2900lbs (see FIA, Formula D)..

[thePill]

I think the lightest 5th Gen Camaro I have seen is the Stevenson's Camaro, Doc said it was 3385lbs http://www.camaro5.com/forums/showth...=126331&page=2

The FIA GT3 Mustangs are limited to 1321kg which is 2906lbs and usually run really close to that. The new Marc VDS Mustang weighs 1350kg or 2970lbs. (I think I posted the video here before)

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by thePill

The Camaro's minimum weight is 3200lbs, the Mustang's is 3300lbs but the Camaro teams have trouble getting down to 3200. You can take a Mustang down to 2900lbs (see FIA, Formula D)..

I don't follow the racing as closely as maybe I should...but when you say the Camaro is 3200, but then say the builders are having trouble doing it...I'm confused.

[thePill]

Originally Posted by Dragoneye

I don't follow the racing as closely as maybe I should...but when you say the Camaro is 3200, but then say the builders are having trouble doing it...I'm confused.

They have trouble actually reducing the weight down to the minimum 3200lbs because of the natural mass the Camaro has. That link I shared got some people in trouble I think, there were pictures of the 3385lb race weight and then the driver, Jeff Bucknum got on there and raised some hell. There are alot of pictures missing and post deleted. Anyway, the Camaro fully stripped should be able to go to 3200lbs and Bucknum claims that it was lower than the 3385lbs that was shown, your not suppose to show anyone (other teams) you race weight.. Only Grand Am.
The Camaro has trouble losing additional weight so the 3200lb minimum is hard to obtain. This is because of the Camaro's natural body and chassis weight cannot be altered so it is kind of stuck at 3300+. The GT3 Mustang's race weight is 2970lbs, it was built with weight reduction in mind. That means the Mustang dry and empty is probably 2800lbs.

In all fairness, the Mustang and the M3 should have their minimum weights increased to 3400 or 3500lbs to give the rest of the field a chance.. but BMW would raise hell because they spent alot of money there to buy teams.

[thePill]

You understand what I'm saying now? Weight reduction is difficult with this car, its not as easy as removing unwanted factory nonsense like the Mustang.. Mustang's use to be below 3100lbs in Grand Am until people bitched about it.

THIS...



IS THE PROBLEM...

[Mr. Wyndham]

Thanks for the info.