New lightning lap

[Norm Peterson]

Originally Posted by gajagfan

If the GT has the "track pack" or "PP" I think they call it, then this is big. If not, then not so much.

Bigger than Ford should have let it be, but not exactly unexpected. The hints have been there from at least as far back as Randy Pobst's review, and the GT/PP is intentionally a little less hardcore than the 1LE's 2-percenter level.

The difference probably is almost entirely in the tires, wheels, and dampers.

The SCCA Solo Nationals F Street results went up a little earlier today (http://sololive.scca.com/FS.html), and (unofficially at this point) two 2015 (S550) Mustangs finished above last year's FS winner David Corsaro, placing as high as 3rd. For a car to pull that off in its first year is huge, because development has only begun. 42 out of 47 (including the top 41) in the class were running on Bridgestones, almost certainly meaning RE71R's, which minimizes the tire variable . . . I'd consider myself put on notice by this if I were you, as it sure takes some of the comfort out of that LL lap time margin.

In David's defense, it does look like Day #1 hurt him relative to those placing above him, and I feel kind of bad for him.

I haven't read C/D's commentary on the S550's LL run yet, so I have no idea what their take was.


Norm

[Chris1SS1LE]

Solo SCCA data is not very good data. Its all individuals, most those guys run shaved dot tires, The suspensions are tuned and they skirt the rules by grandfathering stuff in.

[PapaKlutch]

Originally Posted by Norm Peterson

Bigger than Ford should have let it be, but not exactly unexpected. The hints have been there from at least as far back as Randy Pobst's review, and the GT/PP is intentionally a little less hardcore than the 1LE's 2-percenter level.

The difference probably is almost entirely in the tires, wheels, and dampers.

The SCCA Solo Nationals F Street results went up a little earlier today (http://sololive.scca.com/FS.html), and (unofficially at this point) two 2015 (S550) Mustangs finished above last year's FS winner David Corsaro, placing as high as 3rd. For a car to pull that off in its first year is huge, because development has only begun. 42 out of 47 (including the top 41) in the class were running on Bridgestones, almost certainly meaning RE71R's, which minimizes the tire variable . . . I'd consider myself put on notice by this if I were you, as it sure takes some of the comfort out of that LL lap time margin.

In David's defense, it does look like Day #1 hurt him relative to those placing above him, and I feel kind of bad for him.

I haven't read C/D's commentary on the S550's LL run yet, so I have no idea what their take was.


Norm

What Bridgestone's would a 1LE run in FS? I assume stock class means keeping the 20 inch wheel? Or, no? The RE71 is not made in a 20", is it?

[Mgizzle]

Keep in mind mustang ran on new track which changed last year. Some corners got wider for more passing and new pavement in many sections. Sounds like 1-2 sec quicker times in last years discussions of LL.

Tires alone used to help a lot, but with these modern cars and compounds not much more. Mamy are slower on tires they think are better. The stang is too soft after driving one and not as sharp, as some.magazines stated a better DD than track car. However, most interesting was the LL comments on engine and trans issues during their laptime.....not sure what that meant since no detail was provided. The ecoboost also lost power during run they stated.

[MEDISIN]

Originally Posted by Norm Peterson

Bigger than Ford should have let it be, but not exactly unexpected. The hints have been there from at least as far back as Randy Pobst's review, and the GT/PP is intentionally a little less hardcore than the 1LE's 2-percenter level.

The difference probably is almost entirely in the tires, wheels, and dampers.

I always appreciate your perspective and input Norm. Sure the tires will contribute to a better lap time. But do you really think that accounts for a 4 second difference around VIR? Don't forget the 1LE (and ZL1) run was PRIOR to the repave and widening. My lap times alone are 2+ seconds faster after the widening. So in reality we're talking about a 6 second difference. Dampers...okay. Sure the 1LE is stiffer, more track oriented but didn't Ford claim the 2015 GT PP was faster than a Boss 302? The Boss ran 3:02.8 PRIOR to resurfacing.

The ZR1 ran 1.1 sec faster with Pilot Sport Cup's vs PS2's. Some difference yes, but not the magnitude of the 1LE vs GT PP.

Ultimately the "tires" argument is nullified by the fact that FoMoCo, and every other manufacturer, has access to the same tire manufacturers GM does. If all that was needed were tires and dampers to beat the 1LE, then FoMoCo willingly chose NOT to do this...why? Too rough a ride, didn't fit the price point, didn't want to step on GT350 toes - all valid reasons. With better power to weight than the 1LE, I really expected it to be closer in performance. The Eco-boost surprised me too - slower than a GTI?

Originally Posted by Norm Peterson

The SCCA Solo Nationals F Street results went up a little earlier today (http://sololive.scca.com/FS.html), and (unofficially at this point) two 2015 (S550) Mustangs finished above last year's FS winner David Corsaro, placing as high as 3rd. For a car to pull that off in its first year is huge, because development has only begun. 42 out of 47 (including the top 41) in the class were running on Bridgestones, almost certainly meaning RE71R's, which minimizes the tire variable . . . I'd consider myself put on notice by this if I were you, as it sure takes some of the comfort out of that LL lap time margin.

Not really. The Lightning Lap isn't the only place a GT PP has fallen to the 1LE in head-to-head comparisons.
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/..._gt/specs.html

The SCCA events are not factory stock cars, and drivers have varying skill, so comparing one to another is meaningless from the perspective of the cars performance. Mustangs are, shall we say inexpensive to purchase, race and maintain which is why there are so many Mustang entries relative to every other car. Of course you're going to see more on the leader-board, look at the sheer number of entrants.

Originally Posted by Norm Peterson

I haven't read C/D's commentary on the S550's LL run yet, so I have no idea what their take was.

Norm

For your reading pleasure...

FORD MUSTANG GT
3:05.2
BASE PRICE: $35,695 • AS-TESTED PRICE: $42,975
435 HP • 3822 LB • 8.8 LB/HP
—
From the numbers, and if you don’t count the new independent rear suspension, the reborn Mustang GT doesn’t appear to be much different than its predecessor. Twenty-three horsepower separates the two, and while both ride on 19-inch Pirelli P Zero tires, the new Stang has a 255/275 stagger to the old car’s square 255 fitment. Despite the new car’s 196-pound weight gain, the two Mustangs are separated by just 1.1 mph on the front straight. So, where did the new car lop off 3.4 seconds?
The short answer is everywhere. Pick a corner, any corner. Fractions of time came from every sector. It’s all due to the Mustang’s stable chassis and the confidence it imparts. And that’s true whether you choose the V-8 or the turbocharged four. With a big V-8 riding over the front wheels, the handling of this Performance package GT reminds us of the Mercedes- Benz E63 AMG S-model we lapped last year. Like the AMG, the Ford’s large body leans ever so slightly in corners. The grip is good (0.93 g in Horse Shoe), the nose-heavy mass distribution slows turn-in speeds, and the brakes take all manner of abuse without any fade. Get the front turned in and the car won’t set a P Zero wrong. The tail will swing wide only if you provoke the Mustang with lots of throttle and at absolutely the wrong time. Through the Climbing Esses the GT was quicker and posted a better time than the 2012 Mustang Boss 302 Laguna Seca. The average speed there even bested the Mercedes-AMG C63 S and both Cadillac ATS-Vs we have this year. Despite normal readings from the oil and coolant gauges, we did experience a slight fade in power during our hot laps. The shifter also drew ire. Close gates make it easy to find fifth when you’re looking for third. But mostly, the GT’s polished performance makes us eager to try out the more powerful and track-focused GT350R.

[Norm Peterson]

Originally Posted by Chris1SS1LE

Solo SCCA data is not very good data. Its all individuals, most those guys run shaved dot tires, The suspensions are tuned and they skirt the rules by grandfathering stuff in.

The Street category - these cars both run in F Street - probably represents better data concerning each car's inherent capability than you can get otherwise. The modifications allowed are very few, and everybody gets the same ones. DOT R-compound tires were phased out of what used to be called 'Stock' category and update/backdate was never allowed in Stock or Street.

Mgizzle - Street category allows you to change wheel diameter up or down by 1" as long as the width remains the same as stock and the offset differs from stock by no more than 7.00 mm (0.275").


At the pointy end of the Solo sport you can consider the top drivers to be at least comparably skilled.


Norm

[Norm Peterson]

Originally Posted by MEDISIN

I always appreciate your perspective and input Norm. Sure the tires will contribute to a better lap time. But do you really think that accounts for a 4 second difference around VIR? Don't forget the 1LE (and ZL1) run was PRIOR to the repave and widening. My lap times alone are 2+ seconds faster after the widening. So in reality we're talking about a 6 second difference. Dampers...okay. Sure the 1LE is stiffer, more track oriented but didn't Ford claim the 2015 GT PP was faster than a Boss 302? The Boss ran 3:02.8 PRIOR to resurfacing.

The ZR1 ran 1.1 sec faster with Pilot Sport Cup's vs PS2's. Some difference yes, but not the magnitude of the 1LE vs GT PP.

I'd guess that the "tire" differences - all of them together meaning tire sizes (255/275 vs 285/285) and wheel widths (9/9.5 vs 10/11) as well as make/model are probably responsible for up to a second in every minute (0.93g isn't quite 1LE territory). Which is really just another way of saying that the GT/PP is tuned a bit "softer" from the factory than the 1LE. What you should expect a S550 to wear at a track day would be closer to what the 1LE gets as its standard fitment, and lap time differences will shrink accordingly. This applies to the MT comparison as well. They're still testing production stock vs production stock with no attempt to put the cars on a more even footing.

No enthusiast is likely to leave that kind of low-hanging fruit alone, any more than an SS owner with the same sort of track day interest would stick to his SS wheels/tires/etc. and ignore the easy 1LE upgrades that basically bolt right on.


About the Boss 302 and its 3:02 time . . . that was a Laguna Seca Boss, which runs on P Zero Corsas, which is a 60-treadwear R-compound tire in the same category as the Z/28's Trofeos. (And that makes the 1LE's accomplishment huge).

Ultimately the "tires" argument is nullified by the fact that FoMoCo, and every other manufacturer, has access to the same tire manufacturers GM does. If all that was needed were tires and dampers to beat the 1LE, then FoMoCo willingly chose NOT to do this...why? Too rough a ride, didn't fit the price point, didn't want to step on GT350 toes - all valid reasons. With better power to weight than the 1LE, I really expected it to be closer in performance. The Eco-boost surprised me too - slower than a GTI?

My guess is that the 'plain' GT350 is what Ford is aiming at the 1LE, and the GT350R at the Z/28. The GT/PP is simply intended to top the SS without downsides in ride quality - kind of like what the S197 GT 'Track Pack' cars were intended to do (and generally did until the 1LE came about).

I have no ideas about the EB and what else might have hurt its LL performance, but then again that trim in either Ford's or Chevy's ponycar isn't on my radar.


I'm really surprised that there haven't been more 1LEs autocrossed. I'm not counting the local/regional level, where chasing the results isn't worth my time any more and where there will be way more scatter in driver ability anyway.

Be a little careful about making excuses for the "SCCA events". If anything, the playing field is closer to level there, at least in the 'Street' category. IOW, FS is what the factories could have done with very little further effort and without rendering their cars too extreme for street and even daily use.


Like I said yesterday, I'd consider it notice. Not notice that the 1LE is obsolete, but notice that on a level playing field the competition is starting to crowd it a bit.


Norm

[BruHop]

Wasn't rain and wet track an issue at the Solo Nationals? If so, it's hard to draw conclusions that one "car" is better.

[Mikamaro]

Originally Posted by gajagfan

I imagine there is a lot of truth to what you have said. I would love to see a test of a 1LE with the stock Goodyears vs. the stock SS set-up.

8 seconds slower.

In 2009, the SS ran a lighting lap of 3:09.5 on the old surface as well. The oak tree was still standing then.

read all about it here:
http://www.caranddriver.com/features...s-3095-page-10

[Norm Peterson]

Originally Posted by BruHop

Wasn't rain and wet track an issue at the Solo Nationals? If so, it's hard to draw conclusions that one "car" is better.

When everybody being compared runs in the same heat, the weather effect is minimized. The only "gotcha" being if there are any drivers who didn't bring tires that are better in the rain as well as their 'dry' tires. But by this time, the possibility of rain should be well-established and the Solo Nationals is a big enough event that people should come prepared. Tire and other contingencies are at stake, not a small consideration.


Norm

[Pushrod Pete]

Originally Posted by Mikamaro

8 seconds slower.

In 2009, the SS ran a lighting lap of 3:09.5 on the old surface as well. The oak tree was still standing then.

read all about it here:
http://www.caranddriver.com/features...s-3095-page-10

that's not comparable because the SS itself received a suspension upgrade in 2012.

[White_SS/RS]

Originally Posted by gajagfan

I imagine there is a lot of truth to what you have said. I would love to see a test of a 1LE with the stock Goodyears vs. the stock SS set-up.

Originally Posted by Mikamaro

8 seconds slower.

In 2009, the SS ran a lighting lap of 3:09.5 on the old surface as well. The oak tree was still standing then.

read all about it here:
http://www.caranddriver.com/features...s-3095-page-10

I think Gajagfan fan is saying a 1le with the 285 g2 tires compared to a 1le with 255/275 Pirelli tires.

[BruHop]

Originally Posted by Norm Peterson

When everybody being compared runs in the same heat, the weather effect is minimized. The only "gotcha" being if there are any drivers who didn't bring tires that are better in the rain as well as their 'dry' tires. But by this time, the possibility of rain should be well-established and the Solo Nationals is a big enough event that people should come prepared. Tire and other contingencies are at stake, not a small consideration.


Norm

And, that being said, The 1LE Camaro was 3rd fastest in the dry on the 2nd day.

[X25]

1LE has excellent suspension tuning that supplements the tires. You can't just slam a higher traction car to a car and expect it to use its potential. If, for instance, the suspension is very soft, with better tires, it will only lean, squat, and roll more, not to mention overcook brakes.

You need a complete package for better handling. Just take a look at Z/28, and see how much more performance it can extract with better tires; just amazing. GT350 is copying most of the secret sauce directly from Z/28 and then some; I have high hopes for it. Regular GT? Not really.