Camaro ZL1 (vs GT-R) Review by Road & Track

[MauriSSio]

Originally Posted by toilets

Sorry but I'd be shocked if the zl1 beat the 13 500 in any catagory besides price. Why? Because now they have a target... And so far, although we fire first with the best the first year, ford has always fired back with something better each and every year. So why would 2013 be any different?

Ford didnt have a chevy to target even when they made the 2013 gt500. The 2013 gt500 was a response to the boss mustang actually.ford won't be able to respond to the zl1 till at least next year but maybe even longer. Gm had the luxury of having a gt500 to bench mark since 07`

[toilets]

Originally Posted by MauriSSio

Ford didnt have a chevy to target even when they made the 2013 gt500. The 2013 gt500 was a response to the boss mustang actually.ford won't be able to respond to the zl1 till at least next year but maybe even longer. Gm had the luxury of having a gt500 to bench mark since 07`

Incorrect and I'm also including mustangs in general in this. Look,I'm a Chevy fan and I'm still buying my z for a lot of reasons ford can't match. All I'm saying is that I can see people's point in now being hesitant buying , what is supposedly the greatest camaro ever built, only to be trumped by something before even Being released. And don't feed me the line the gt won't hook up because we are already stating that we have a tough match against the 12 500 let alone the 13 500.

I understand it's not about numbers but for once I'd like to say I have the fastest pony car longer than a few months

[Mr. Wyndham]

Just by that short video alone....gtr doesn't look nearly as much fun (or good) as the Camaro.


Not upset it "lost" on the track, either...I think you'd have to be a fool to expect otherwise...

I am impressed at the levels of performance the ZL1 delivers without the every-day-driving compromises that are clearly evident in the nissan.

Interesting read. It really doesn't appear that they were truly comparing the two, seriously...if they were -- somehow I ended up liking the ZL1 more than I did, before.

[a_Username]

That review was a total win for the ZL1.

All told, says Managing Editor Andy Bornhop, “the GT-R is an impressive piece of technical hardware that makes average drivers much faster than they probably should be…it’s a car for Gran Turismo gamers, for sure. And even though it’s about $40,000 more than the ZL1, it’s still a bargain supercar.” And while we both agreed that the quintessentially American ZL1 was the preferred ride back to our California office, the GT-R would be our choice for trying to set a fast lap on an unfamiliar racetrack. After all, this Godzilla likes to smash lap records, not towns…

Originally Posted by n2oSS

so a car with less hp but awd beats the zl1 and flag on the play but zl1 vs a car with 140ish hp less is game on ................ i think i get it now.

Or, ignoring the ridiculous "you must compare specs," one is only ~$7K more expensive than the other compared to ~$40K.

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by n2oSS

so a car with less hp but awd beats the zl1 and flag on the play but zl1 vs a car with 140ish hp less is game on ................ i think i get it now.

Originally Posted by a_Username

Or, ignoring the ridiculous "you must compare specs," one is only ~$7K more expensive than the other compared to ~$40K.

I'd like to make a point here, if I may....if you (generally) keep trying to knock a comparison for not being "fair"...eventually you're going to end up with two cars that may as well be built by the same manufacturer on the same assembly line on the same day....cars that are SOOO close it becomes a drivers race in which each time the comparison laps are done - the magazine will get a different result.

What is the point in that.

These reviews should come with a label: "For Entertainment purposes only". Some need to stop getting so wound up over one journalists' opinion. It. is. not. gospel....

/ Carry on....

[FINALLYSATISFIED]

ZL1 is in supercar territory thats why they compared it to the GT-R. Obviously the GT-R was going to come out on top that was a no brainer.

All in all, the ZL1 is a great buyer for that consumer looking for alittle of both worlds. 2.8 seconds is alot mind you but Chevy would have to change their set up to AWD in order to compete with the GT-R. Is it possible in the future? Who knows...

[a_Username]

Originally Posted by Dragoneye

I'd like to make a point here, if I may....if you (generally) keep trying to knock a comparison for not being "fair"...eventually you're going to end up with two cars that may as well be built by the same manufacturer on the same assembly line on the same day....cars that are SOOO close it becomes a drivers race in which each time the comparison laps are done - the magazine will get a different result.

What is the point in that.

These reviews should come with a label: "For Entertainment purposes only". Some need to stop getting so wound up over one journalists' opinion. It. is. not. gospel....

/ Carry on....

Stop stealing my arguments brobeans!

However, the only flaw in the "muscle" argument you made is that you want to compare specs. To have a completely fair comparison by this argument would to have everything the same HP, Weight, Whether they are Super, Turbo, or N/A, etc. Which is impossible since the only things with the exact same comparable specs would be two of the same car. But with price, you can compare different vehicles at the same price. Like comparing a GT against an SS at around $30,000 a piece, unless you are one of those that say there is a 100 horsepower difference which gives the SS the win. But, you have to know that different companies take different directions to get their results; Ford would have taken the balanced method of combining a lighter weight car with a smaller motor that puts out less HP, to GM applying the, what I like to call, "Brute Force" method where they have a heavy car with a lot of horsepower. Both cost basically the same, so price is the only reliable comparison.

[Drake Heminger]

Originally Posted by MY1STCAMAR0

ZL1 is in supercar territory thats why they compared it to the GT-R. Obviously the GT-R was going to come out on top that was a no brainer.

All in all, the ZL1 is a great buyer for that consumer looking for alittle of both worlds. 2.8 seconds is alot mind you but Chevy would have to change their set up to AWD in order to compete with the GT-R. Is it possible in the future? Who knows...

+1

[Sawyer]

Were talking godzilla here. Very impressed with ZL1 in this comparison.

[ParisTNDude]

I happened to pick up an older Road and Track the other day where they tested a 2011 GT500 Super Snake with 750HP. On a perfect weather day with tons of traction compound (their comment) on a drag strip, the Super Snake turned only 11.7 seconds at something over 120. The 2011 has all of the weight saving technology and the better suspension parts which are current. Wiith the 2013 having 100 less HP than the super snake, how much slower will it be than the Super Snake? The super snake had the same tires projected for the 2013 GT500. I can't see the 2013 GT500 beating a 750HP super snake. With so many different cars compared to the ZL1 thus far, I wonder why none have been a GT500?

[GT5Junkie]

Originally Posted by 72MachOne99GT

Am I the only one who hopes they do a comparison like this on both a longer, straigter higher horsepower friendly track, AND a shorter, more technical track as well?

I'm tired of hearing it on BOTH sides about how this race isnt fair because it favors one car, or this race isnt fair because it favors this car.
*

What nut is saying that an extremely high speed, high horsepower track favors the 444 HP Boss? Seriously...

I really don't see how anyone could think anything other than this track choice looks a little bit weak on GMs part. If they want to show off their MRC why'd the pick a track with a 2200' straightaway, and then remove as many turns as they could?

Something to think about, the GTR beat the GT500 by 3.2 seconds at Streets of Willow. The GTR beat the ZL1 by 2.84 seconds at Inde. Sounds like the 12 500 vs the 12 ZL1 would be a good matchup, and I don't think bodes well for people that think the 12 ZL1 is going to smoke the 13 500 on a roadcourse.

[GT5Junkie]

Originally Posted by ParisTNDude

I happened to pick up an older Road and Track the other day where they tested a 2011 GT500 Super Snake with 750HP. On a perfect weather day with tons of traction compound (their comment) on a drag strip, the Super Snake turned only 11.7 seconds at something over 120. The 2011 has all of the weight saving technology and the better suspension parts which are current. Wiith the 2013 having 100 less HP than the super snake, how much slower will it be than the Super Snake? The super snake had the same tires projected for the 2013 GT500. I can't see the 2013 GT500 beating a 750HP super snake. With so many different cars compared to the ZL1 thus far, I wonder why none have been a GT500 thus far?

With launch control and gearing that produces easier launches, the 2013 probably won't be slower at all.

I guarantee one of the major auto rags will run an 11.9 or better, and MM&FF will run an 11.7 or better.

[tt335ci03cobra]

2013 gt500's will pull 11.7 and better on great days they claim 3.7 and better for 0-60.

Car and driver: "...in no more than 3.7 seconds..."

Time will tell.

The supersnake isn't that super or robust. I think it's way over priced.

[GT5Junkie]

Originally Posted by tt335ci03cobra

The supersnake isn't that super or robust. I think it's way over priced.

Agreed. 6 grand for the FRPP 750 horse kit and 2400 to BMR for suspension and you're probably as good or better in the performance department.