Im trollin bro.
0-60 and 1/4 mile time for GT350, R, and Camaro SS
- Thread starter az20115.0
- Start date
Im trollin bro.
I'll agree that Porsche makes some awesome cars but they are some of the most overpriced ones made. A 911 Carrera is around 100k and when you look at its numbers it's not much faster than a mustang gt. Is it worth almost three times more??
If you want to pay $80 to $90k for a gt350R that's your right I just wouldn't do it. Like I said before I wouldn't pay over msrp for any car no matter what. It's bad business.
I'm not arguing just having a discussion about cars. :beer:
So many people are decidedly lost in space.
The gt350(r) is a great car. I won't take time to explain how foolish some people are being. I'll just say wow, some people need help, bad...
The camaro weighs...what a mustang weighs. It's faster this year because it has 20 extra hp, and better weight balance, not weighs less. 20hp in a 3750lbs car nets 1-2mph on trap speeds.
2015 mustangs were running 110-114 in rags. Ss's are testing from 112-116.
Morons have almost no comprehension skills.
Also 100* temps pull timing, correcting a time to 70* times (that was yielding with pulled timing) will not be accurate. It'd be like testing mpg by driving up hill and into the desert. It will be shitty, and not representative of the realistic average performance.
The gt350(r) is a great car. I won't take time to explain how foolish some people are being. I'll just say wow, some people need help, bad...
The camaro weighs...what a mustang weighs. It's faster this year because it has 20 extra hp, and better weight balance, not weighs less. 20hp in a 3750lbs car nets 1-2mph on trap speeds.
2015 mustangs were running 110-114 in rags. Ss's are testing from 112-116.
Morons have almost no comprehension skills.
Also 100* temps pull timing, correcting a time to 70* times (that was yielding with pulled timing) will not be accurate. It'd be like testing mpg by driving up hill and into the desert. It will be shitty, and not representative of the realistic average performance.
I'm going based on times and driving experience from good track drivers. People pay for that experience and performance. :beer:
hey krt22... do you know what an "estimate" is? if it is measured, by definition it is therefore not estimated... its a 1/4 mile run at full throttle from a dig, therefore it is a 1/4 mile pull.. car pulls, vbox measures. not sure why this is so confusing to you
Last edited:
I agree with that, but...
You may or not be able to compare those times with actual track numbers. It's like comparing dyno numbers from a DynoJet and a Mustang Dyno. The numbers could be noticeably off, or they can mesh together just fine. Who really knows.
I think it's just best to see real track numbers. And even then, I've been to the track where cars run .5 / 4mph+ off as a whole to what they normally run, so you do need a decent sampling size.
It doesn't.
M/T uses a VBOX for all of their testing measurements. That includes around a road course. So does that mean their road course times are "estimates," too?
Not that I keep track of them, but I've never heard of a bone stock one doing better than a 12.8.
Mine went 12.7 110, 1 week old, actually 90 degrees out. Had I not pullied (not pulled, damn autocorrect)it, I'm sure a 12.5 or better would have happened in "regular" weather.
Last edited:
Because there is a spot size error with any and every GPS location device (in this case Vbox says its 3M). They are very close, but it is still not an absolute measurement. If you ran the same car with standard timing lights, there is always some margin of error
Technically yes, for the same reason as above, but on a full lap the total time elapsed and the total distance covered is much larger, so the spot size error for the most part becomes statistically insignificant.
Not in the ballpark with a GT500 though......And that is what will help it's 1/4 ET. And I only bring that up since we're talking it's 1/4 time. And I await the 1st person to bolt slicks and dump the clutch at 8K. We'll see how strong the lightened transmission is.
i don't know how to do the math, but if you take the torque of both cars and factor in the gearing, i bet its a lot closer than most people are giving it credit for. GT500 has tons of torque but long ass gears, GT350 has less torque (still a decent bit) and uses gearing to make up what it "lacks." I've made the comment 100 times that the bmw m3 puts down similar times to the 5.0 with 100 less torque, you can do a lot with gearing. Ask any 2v owner lol...
Certainly less than the big blown 5.8L, but torque isn't everything. It really depends on how you use a car. If your primary concern is drag racing, skip the GT350.
Go wail a GT350R around a mountain road and you won't be thinking about lack of torque, I guarantee you that. Never been in a base car but the R is flat out ridiculous around a road course.
One additional guarantee I can make is that when some of the upcoming magazine stuff comes out, people will go from "ZOMG GT350 IS HOMO" to "OMG GT350 IS GREATEST FORD EVER BUILT!"
Last edited:
You just explained the horsepower calculation...
I'm eager to see how the TR3160 handles abuse as well, especially in comparison to the TR6060.
DBK is there a media embargo right now?
When do you get yours?
When do you get yours?
No media embargo, just some upcoming reviews.
Who knows at this point. I'm hoping soon, just so it doesn't end up coming off a truck in snow.
Who knows at this point. I'm hoping soon, just so it doesn't end up coming off a truck in snow.
Who in their right mind would launch a [street] car at 8,000 RPM?!?
(Unless you're talking about an old RSX. okeI bet this car would be absolutely nasty in a straight line with a 4.10 in it! Heck, with an 8250 red line, it could get away with a 4.30. Fifth and 6th are probably both overdrive gears with 6th being tall as hell.
you make great points. Why is everyone so concerned with its 1/4 time? If they want a drag car, a 5.0 A6 would be a much better choice.
Users who are viewing this thread
