Car and Driver Short Take

[Formula51]

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...take_road_test

Looks like then went 13.2 @ 109mph in a base GT with brembos and rear gear option, although it doesn't specify if it was 3.55's or 3.73's.

The part I didn't like was this:

What’s not better is the capless fuel port Ford adopted last year. The idea of getting rid of a fussy, hard-to-turn cap is great—except that we always seem to spill fuel on the car and on our shoes. And after some hard cornering on a full tank, we noticed signs of weeping down the Mustang’s quarter panel where dust had collected in the dampness. Last year Ford told us there was a problem with early filler necks and that it had been fixed. What do they have to tell us now?

Hopefully this is a rare problem as gas eats paint.

 

[_Shooter_]

CnD never does engine braking or revving up on the clutch prior to a launch and never speed shifts on their test hence why they always have the slowest ETs of any rag out there.

 

[Dave07997S]

Car and Driver has gotten some good times out of cars, but I agree generally they are slower. They got an E46 BMW M3 to run a [email protected] when everyone else was running 13.4-13.6. Not to mention they got a 0-60 time of 4.5 sec when everyone else was hitting the 4.8 range.

As far as the Mustang though...MT ran a [email protected] in the 2011 GT

Dave

 

[Formula51]

Haha, you guys are funny.

From my experience, C&D and MotorTrend run some of the best times of the mainstream mags. MM&FF and Chevy High Performance usually run the very best times. Road and Track are the one's that admited in a response to a subscriber write-in that they leave off idle and shift like an old lady, These are the idiots that ran a 12.3 or 12.6 I think it was in a C6Z06. I cancelled that subscription long ago.

What I am more interested in is the trap speed as the engine power is curious from the few dyno's we have seen. 395rwhp as one example.

We now have two trap speeds of 109 and 110mph making that 395rwhp number MUCH more curious.

Aren't these pre-production cars the mags are testing?

 

[Dave07997S]

Haha, you guys are funny.

From my experience, C&D and MotorTrend run some of the best times of the mainstream mags. MM&FF and Chevy High Performance usually run the very best times. Road and Track are the one's that admited in a response to a subscriber write-in that they leave off idle and shift like an old lady, These are the idiots that ran a 12.3 or 12.6 I think it was in a C6Z06. I cancelled that subscription long ago.

What I am more interested in is the trap speed as the engine power is curious from the few dyno's we have seen. 395rwhp as one example.

We now have two trap speeds of 109 and 110mph making that 395rwhp number MUCH more curious.

Aren't these pre-production cars the mags are testing?

What's funny is Road and Track got the best times out of the 997S, they ran a [email protected] when everyone else was running 12.6's @ 112. They admitted to abusing the car to get those times, which I thought amusing since as you say they said they didn't abuse the cars to get good times.

 

[GTSpartan]

Don't forget, MT corrects their time (not sure on C&D). They run a time and plug it in their trusty secret converter to get the number they publish. So, they could have actually run a 13.2, or a 12.4, but it corrected to 12.8.