MT: Shelby VS ZL1 on Laguna Seca

[FNBADAZ06]

They said the ZL-1 deviates by .2 sec and obviously they printed the fastest time. Am I doing the math correct when I say 1:39:18 + .2 is 1:39.38? Still slower than the third lap of the GT500. Even if you add a tenth each lap to the ZL-1's three laps and then add up the GT500's, the Shelby is more than half a second ahead. Even with brake fade. Does MT know how to do math?

Edit: Here is my math so correct me if I'm wrong.

Lap 1
1:38:69 - 1:39:18 = GT500 ahead by .49

Lap 2
1:39:03 - 1:39:28 = GT500 ahead by .25 (.74 cumulative)

Lap 3
1:39:30 - 1:39:38 = GT500 ahead by .08 (.82 cumulative)

I think you mis-read what he said.

" By the third lap, the Mustang was behind the Camaro, turning a 1:39.30. The ZL1, meanwhile, never deviated by more than two-tenths of a second."

In another words......from the 1st lap to the 3rd lap, the Camaro lost only .2 total .....not .2 per lap.

 

[Ry_Trapp0]

look at that, more of the some garbage form this place. on one hand we'll laugh at C5 for holding up the nurburgring lap time as the 'holy grail' and laugh about how meaningless it is. then on the other hand we'll RAGE when a magazine doesn't pick the car with the fastest lap time as the winner! hypocrisy in full effect, try taking the blinders off for a change. this place was better BEFORE the '13 GT500 was out:rollseyes

i'm still too cynical about the automotive media to put any real faith in the honesty of this review, but i would say that this is about as fair a review as you'll get. and i don't doubt one single word that randy pobst has to say, although i'm sure some that don't follow racing and don't really know who he is will. of course DBK makes a great and very relevant point about why the brakes were so beat on the GT500, but i don't think anyone would disagree that the cooling ducts that we originally saw in place of the fog lights on the track pack GT500 clearly should've made production. what's the worst that could happen, the price of each track pack equipped GT500 goes up $200? WELL worth it if you ask me.

I think this is the first review where I have seen the editors favor the turn-in and steering feel of the GT500 over the ZL1. Everything else was relatively the same as what we have seen, except for some of the on track results. I have been waiting for Randy to drive these two.

It is good to finally start seeing some more respectable times from the ZL1 as we all thought/knew it had to be capable of given what the CTS-V has done. 12.1 @ 117.4mph in this test and we just saw 12.3 @ 119mph from Car and Driver in a recent test. The GT500 on the other hand has been consistently fast from day one in the 11.5-11.8 range at 123-126mph, which is truly incredible.

A lot of people on here have been begging for people to run these cars on the track for more than one hero lap. Some people claiming that the Camaro will heat soak so bad it wouldn't make it around the track on lap two! hehe Nice to see MotorTrend do some of that:



Remember that brake cooling we all talked about that was missing from the GT500's Track Package? It also makes me questions Ford's pad choice. I didn't see any mention of bad heat soak from either car, which puts that issue to rest some.

It was interesting to hear Randy say this:



It looks like the Torsen differential in the GT500 Performance Package is really doing its job:



I still would never call a heavy supercharged car a track car, but it sounds like the ZL1 is ready for some aggressive HPDE events straight from the factory and the GT500 may benefit from some brake cooling duct or perhaps a simple pad and fluid upgrade would be enough. Similarly, the GT500's SRA is ready for some aggressive drag strip launches right from Ford and the ZL1's IRS may not live very long doing the same.

Even though I understand why, I am very surprised to see the ZL1 winning all these comparisons. Typically, comparisons go in favor of the new kid on the block and with 662hp, incredible drag strip times, and great track times, I don't understand why so many editors are choosing the ZL1. For a car driven mostly on the street, I would take a GT500 all day from the results I am seeing. I think the base suspension is even the way to go (better wheels too) if you plan on doing very little or no HPDE as it will probably ride nicer on the street. Put some better fluid and pads on for a track day and it would still be a ton of fun.

These reviews really make me want to spend a week with both and experience the difference for myself, sadly I don't have the ability to do that so I will have to take their word and the word of owners. Enjoy your cars guys!

i 100% completely agree with everything you've said, except for your comments about the multiple laps ran on track by both cars. while the issue with the brakes is certainly relevant to a stock vs stock test and absolutely shouldn't be left out or discounted, the reality is that we both know that the first thing that anyone that tracks a car does is throw in more aggressive brake pads and a higher quality brake fluid. i'm not discounting the comments made in the review nor the results, but in reality the braking issue would in fact be a non issue.
i'm waiting to see more laps though, like some comments from people who've ran these cars in a full days HPDE event. as it stands now, van reported great things about the GT500 during his time attack sessions with the car, and we have the one owner who i don't believe i've actually seen post on here or C5 that reported dissapointment in the ZL1 after an HPDE. but two data points me little, we need more info!

 

[Nicolaskl]

I think you mis-read what he said.

" By the third lap, the Mustang was behind the Camaro, turning a 1:39.30. The ZL1, meanwhile, never deviated by more than two-tenths of a second."

In another words......from the 1st lap to the 3rd lap, the Camaro lost only .2 total .....not .2 per lap.

Uh, what?

First of all, the numbers you quoted do not have the ZL1 losing .2 per lap and are entirely plausible based on what MT said. It could actually be worse for the ZL1 than what he posted.

Second of all, not deviating by more than 2 tenths means that all three laps were within 2 tenths of each other (like cap said) or it could mean .2 sequentially (like On D said). It does NOT mean .2 total. Period. If so, MT is incorrectly using the word.

Third, even if it did mean .2 total (which it doesn't), the ZL1 still lost the three lap race.

So what exactly are you trying to say here?

 

[ON D BIT]

I think you mis-read what he said.

" By the third lap, the Mustang was behind the Camaro, turning a 1:39.30. The ZL1, meanwhile, never deviated by more than two-tenths of a second."

In another words......from the 1st lap to the 3rd lap, the Camaro lost only .2 total .....not .2 per lap.

You quoted the wrong person. Cap thought it was .2 total I think its .2 per lap. Why else would they not post the time? Because they wanted to make it seem as close as possible By insinuating that the zl1 3rd lap time was faster than the gt500 3rd lap time.

Why would mt choose to talk about the gt500 lap to lap while talking(in the same sentence) about the zl1 total time loss? As I said to prove me wrong mt release the data!

Did mt talk about the lack of a nav option and the fuel economy in their story?

 

[FNBADAZ06]

Uh, what?

First of all, the numbers you quoted do not have the ZL1 losing .2 per lap and are entirely plausible based on what MT said. It could actually be worse for the ZL1 than what he posted.

Second of all, not deviating by more than 2 tenths means that all three laps were within 2 tenths of each other. It does not mean .2 total. Period.

Third, even if it did mean .2 total (which it doesn't), the ZL1 still lost the three lap race.

So what exactly are you trying to say here?

I didn't quote any numbers.......

I do speak and read the English language, and there was no ambiguity in what he wrote :

"" By the third lap, the Mustang was behind the Camaro, turning a 1:39.30. "

Argue all you want about what he ment by the " .2 second deviation" statement. And, argue all you want on who won a 3 lap race.
They didn't supply lap times for the Camaro (oddly enough). That is the only area that wasn't clearly stated by the author, but......

My statement was very clear.

 

[Shhhh]

Not trying to start a pissing match but even if you use the 3 laps the Shelby made and lets say the zl1 ran its best lap 3 times in a row the Shelby would still be ahead.

Can we atleast all be honest....im going to barely go to the drag strip(maybe a handful) and never go to the race track but I will be driving around town and on the highway. Pretty sure Im the majority as well :shrug:

They are both awesome cars. The GT500 is just a little bit more in my opinion.

 

[FNBADAZ06]

You quoted the wrong person. Cap thought it was .2 total I think its .2 per lap. Why else would they not post the time? Because they wanted to make it seem as close as possible By insinuating that the zl1 3rd lap time was faster than the gt500 3rd lap time.

Why would mt choose to talk about the gt500 lap to lap while talking(in the same sentence) about the zl1 total time loss? As I said to prove me wrong mt release the data!

Did mt talk about the lack of a nav option and the fuel economy in their story?

I thought I grabbed CaptainKirk52's post.......my bad if I didn't.
Can't answer your other questions....I didn't write the review or formulate the numbers. Maybe an e-mail to MT can get those numbers.....it's odd the didn't publish them, I do agree. Motives ?

I do place a lot of confidence in what Mr. Pobst says, however, I have no dog in this fight.

 

[ON D BIT]

"" By the third lap, the Mustang was behind the Camaro, turning a 1:39.30. "

This could mean that the 3rd lap of the mustang was slower than the best lap from the camaro.
This could mean that the 3rd lap of the mustang was than the 3rd lap of the camaro.

But which one is it? Cap(1st post of the page) showed that by adding .2 to the camaro 1st would leave it still slower than the mustangs 3rd lap.oke:

 

[islander033]

... argue all you want on who won a 3 lap race....

Here is the math if the ZL1 ran it's best lap every lap in the 3 laps (which it didn't).

GT500:
Lap 1 - 1:38:68
Lap 2 - 1:39:03
Lap 3 - 1:39:30
Total= 4:57.01

ZL1:
Lap 1 - 1:39:18
Lap 2 - 1:39:18
Lap 3 - 1:39:18
Total= 4:57.54

looks like 0.53 seconds difference. What's to argue on this 3 lap race?

 

[fangstang]

I'd be happy with either one. If I had a choice, I'd take the Shelby. But if someone threw me the keys to the ZL1, I wouldnt be upset. I cant wait to see what Ford does with a proper IRS.

 

[sknapp302]

I am curious if the catalyst protection may have caused the slightly slower lap times in the Shelby in the 2nd and 3rd laps.

 

[89TTA]

On a road course probably so. Dragstrip? GT500 wins 90% of the time stock for stock.

Not on the dragstrip and definitely not on a highway pull. Those are good old fashioned ass whippings.

Not at the drags!

I'm talking about in John Q. Publics hands. Your average owners=toss up IMO.

 

[Nicolaskl]

I didn't quote any numbers.......

You quoted a post containing numbers. Is that really that hard to understand?

I do speak and read the English language, and there was no ambiguity in what he wrote :

"" By the third lap, the Mustang was behind the Camaro, turning a 1:39.30. "

Argue all you want about what he ment by the " .2 second deviation" statement. And, argue all you want on who won a 3 lap race.

That's just it, there's nothing to argue about, only someone that's fairly seriously dim would think the ZL1 won. It very obviously lost.

You might be capable of reading the English language, but you sure as hell have a lot of trouble with anything that contains a numeral.

My statement was very clear.

Unfortunately for you it was also, like a lot of your statements, completely wrong.

 

[Detroit Iron]

Here is the math if the ZL1 ran it's best lap every lap in the 3 laps (which it didn't).

GT500:
Lap 1 - 1:38:68
Lap 2 - 1:39:03
Lap 3 - 1:39:30
Total= 4:57.01

ZL1:
Lap 1 - 1:39:18
Lap 2 - 1:39:18
Lap 3 - 1:39:18
Total= 4:57.54

looks like 0.53 seconds difference. What's to argue on this 3 lap race?

Thank you Islander, I see we have some math challenged people here. I think the writer should have said "the GT500 turned a slower third lap compared to the ZL1; however, it still won the 3 lap race." Your numbers prove it. And assuming the ZL1 turned its best time every lap is conservative. End of story, numbers don't lie!

 

[Snagged]

I'm talking about in John Q. Publics hands. Your average owners=toss up IMO.

That can be true with ANY car match ups.

 

[72MachOne99GT]

Not to push buttons, but a few days ago it was everyone getting riled up about the one lap race being awarded to the ZL1, so as a group, they began asking for 'more than one lap hero runs' stating the ZL1 will heat soak *which it very likely may still do*

Now that the brakes have been shown to fade in this review, and the ZL1 is catching up slowly, everyone is saying that the GT500 won that one lap, and was still leading after 3.

I see the same thing happening on another forum that also has an interest in these reviews...trying to remember the name of it though...

 

[Ry_Trapp0]

what 3 lap race? they didn't say anything about running only 3 laps, they simply said that, by the third lap, the GT500 was running slower than the ZL1 due to the brake fade issues. there was no race, they are not comparing cumulative numbers, they simply wen out and ran a number of laps with each car. the ONLY reason the number "3" was mentioned in the article is because that is the lap number at which the GT500 ran slower than the ZL1. nothing more, nothing less. you guys are just trying to twist this to fit your own agendas instead of reading what is actual right there in print and taking it at face value. it's sad.

 

[All-Or-Nothing]

So.........grab some race pads and proper brake fluid and problem solved.


It is strange that all the testing done with the GT500 ( I imagine thousands of brake pads were changed during testing), The Ring, Various tracks, regular streets, and lot's of months of testing and this car toasts it's brakes on 3 laps. Surely it can't come down to not making the right brake pad choice.

 

[Ry_Trapp0]

Not to push buttons, but a few days ago it was everyone getting riled up about the one lap race being awarded to the ZL1, so as a group, they began asking for 'more than one lap hero runs' stating the ZL1 will heat soak *which it very likely may still do*

Now that the brakes have been shown to fade in this review, and the ZL1 is catching up slowly, everyone is saying that the GT500 won that one lap, and was still leading after 3.

I see the same thing happening on another forum that also has an interest in these reviews...trying to remember the name of it though...

everyone here is just turning into a bunch of hypocritical fanboys. that's all there is to it. these are the same guys that admitted - before these cars were released - that the ZL1 would in all likelihood ride better and put up better handling and track numbers, especially on tighter tracks. now, when their predictions are coming true, they're back pedaling and trying to find every excuse they can to defame any given review.
the automobile and inside line reviews were a ****ing joke, that much is obvious. but the C&D review really was OK and this motortrend review is, undoubtedly, the best and most equal review we've seen yet(though still influenced by some manufacturer goodies i'm sure:rollseyes)

So.........grab some race pads and proper brake fluid and problem solved.


It is strange that all the testing done with the GT500 ( I imagine thousands of brake pads were changed during testing), The Ring, Various tracks, regular streets, and lot's of months of testing and this car toasts it's brakes on 3 laps. Surely it can't come down to not making the right brake pad choice.

yea, i think DBK may very well be right on this one and that the GT500 was beat to piss before randy pobst got a chance behind the wheel. i'm sure the magazine asshats did plenty of brake stands, back road pounding, and all the braking tests before the track test. still though, i think it shows an error on ford's part in not including the brake ducting.

edit: not to mention the top speed to zero braking that they said they performed in the nardo ring video. if there were ANY kind of break problems, they certainly would've seen them there!

 

[Detroit Iron]

what 3 lap race? they didn't say anything about running only 3 laps, they simply said that, by the third lap, the GT500 was running slower than the ZL1 due to the brake fade issues. there was no race, they are not comparing cumulative numbers, they simply wen out and ran a number of laps with each car. the ONLY reason the number "3" was mentioned in the article is because that is the lap number at which the GT500 ran slower than the ZL1. nothing more, nothing less. you guys are just trying to twist this to fit your own agendas instead of reading what is actual right there in print and taking it at face value. it's sad.

This is what people are referring to:

"" By the third lap, the Mustang was behind the Camaro, turning a 1:39.30. "

No there was no race, the magazine writers use some creative words. The GT500 turned a slower third lap compared to the Camaro. By how much we don't know...but we can guess (at most 0.12 seconds). I wouldn't consider that anything to crow about!