Ford Performance and lack of Performance Numbers

[hognutz]

... so far the only thing ive seen is that the GT350 got 1 mph higher trap and slightly slower 1/4 time then the ZL1 but it is also priced UNDER 50, not 55... so it is on par with the performance (a drivers race) for 5k less... I'd say that's a win...

keep in mind while performance matters the biggest thing is sales. Through august this year the Mustang was up over 50% in sales and the Camaro was down about 13%... just like in anything money is what drives it and ford is going to have all the GT350's sold where GM is dropping waaaaay below MSRP to sell their "performance" Camaro

all the car tested have the track pack or tech pack though that is 55k+. I would not buy a base car myself. Can't find any data on how that performs at all. I would want the mag ride.


I am not arguing sales in any way. I never have given two shit about sales figures. I buy these cars for what they do not which one sells more. I prefer to buy the one that sells worse actually they are not as many of them around when you go to unload the car.

 

[hognutz]

A lot of the buyers interested int he GT350 arent really interested in the C7, ZL1, or even the Boss 302. Its has a much different appeal

that's neat but I was talking about me not other people ha ha. if I did not have two daughters and had 55k or so to drop I would be buying a c7 at supplier price vs a GT350 at MSRP. Me having kids is why I am looking at this car so I wanted it to have C7 numbers because it is C7 money.

 

[bpmurr]

So it's faster than the c7.

Right now all we have is the Motor Trend video review where it did 0-60 in 4.1 and 1/4 mile in 12.4. So as of right now the regular GT350 is not as fast in a straight line as a Z51 Vette.

 

[DSG2003SVT]

Does anyone have a clue how much the CA 91 octane affected the dyno numbers and MPH? Ford's 526 rating is technically for 93 octane. So, I wonder how much difference there would be in the tests with 93. Maybe 15hp? 1-2 MPH? Does anyone know?

 

[bpmurr]

Where did chevy post those numbers? They have a 3.7 0-60 on the page, I dont see any other numbers

either way, the numbers are right inline with the GT350 TP, yet the GT350 TP is 10k less than a similarly equipped C7 (1LT, Z51, MR, Comp Seats). Not bad if you ask me

http://articles.latimes.com/2013/ju...utos-chevrolet-corvette-stingray-060-20130620

 

[hognutz]

So it's faster than the c7.

how is 12.4 117 faster than 12.1 or 12.2 at 117 or 118??? am I missing something thats a pretty sound beating in a real drag race thats not a fender. now that being said I hate magazine racing I would much rather see a heads up race. hopefully they are door to door. they are defiantly in the same realm for sure. the car just came in expensive with GG so I was hoping for some 11's.

 

[01LightningGal]

I guess I am trying to understand this, so maybe you guys can help me out...............

Some folks are angry at Ford for not publishing performance figures that many on the internet would call lies. Then when Joe "I am not a good driver" can't live up to those numbers, he is all over the internet talking about how Ford is lying about the performance, or there is something seriously wrong with his car.

Then, some are not going to buy, or consider buying a GT350 because of drag strip numbers that were achieved on road racing tires on an unprepped track with an octane of fuel that does not meet factory recommendations (91 octane is all that is available in CA, vs the 93 octane recommended by Ford). They are comparing times / numbers from different drivers on different days with different conditions, and are allowing themselves to be disappointed............. knowing fully that this can make a HUGE difference in numbers.

Frankly, I am trying to figure out why people are looking at or for 1/4 mile times for a GT350. This is a road race car, not a drag car. If you want great drag times, wait for the GT500. Case in point, the Camaro Z/28 isn't a great drag car either. Gee, what a surprise.

 

[bpmurr]

I guess I am trying to understand this, so maybe you guys can help me out...............

Some folks are angry at Ford for not publishing performance figures that many on the internet would call lies. Then when Joe "I am not a good driver" can't live up to those numbers, he is all over the internet talking about how Ford is lying about the performance, or there is something seriously wrong with his car.

Then, some are not going to buy, or consider buying a GT350 because of drag strip numbers that were achieved on road racing tires on an unprepped track with an octane of fuel that does not meet factory recommendations (91 octane is all that is available in CA, vs the 93 octane recommended by Ford). They are comparing times / numbers from different drivers on different days with different conditions, and are allowing themselves to be disappointed............. knowing fully that this can make a HUGE difference in numbers.

Frankly, I am trying to figure out why people are looking at or for 1/4 mile times for a GT350. This is a road race car, not a drag car. If you want great drag times, wait for the GT500. Case in point, the Camaro Z/28 isn't a great drag car either. Gee, what a surprise.

Why did Ford put a drag mode in it then?

 

[rwboring]

all the car tested have the track pack or tech pack though that is 55k+. I would not buy a base car myself. Can't find any data on how that performs at all. I would want the mag ride.


I am not arguing sales in any way. I never have given two shit about sales figures. I buy these cars for what they do not which one sells more. I prefer to buy the one that sells worse actually they are not as many of them around when you go to unload the car.

you are building a car more then the base price, because that is how you want it... which just adding the recaro seats to a ZL1 is 1995, navigation 500, etc... not to mention the $2600 GG tax. If you are going to compare prices you should make sure its apples to apples first.


You should care about sales because if they don't sell the base model they can't make the performance models, that is pretty simple logic. For instance GM saying they had to build 100k a year in order to bring the Camaro back and the last 3 years they have been below that. So GM better do something before they have to kill it off again. (weight loss and more power was a good start).

 

[DSG2003SVT]

Why did Ford put a drag mode it in then?

For Motor Trend to not try, apparently.

 

[bpmurr]

For Motor Trend to not try, apparently.

Agreed!

 

[DSG2003SVT]

It's the rumor that they didn't try it in drag mode. So, let's just say, "allegedly." Haha!

 

[Lemers]

Everyone needs to take the sales numbers of the Mustang and Camaro with a grain of salt.

The Mustang just released a redesign while the Camaro's redesign is soon to be released.

Didn't mustang sale numbers drop just before the redesign?
I fully expect the Camaro to out sale the Mustang at least at first this year.

 

[DSG2003SVT]

Everyone needs to take the sales numbers of the Mustang and Camaro with a grain of salt.

The Mustang just released a redesign while the Camaro's redesign is soon to be released.

Didn't mustang sale numbers drop just before the redesign?
I fully expect the Camaro to out sale the Mustang at least at first this year.

Remember that, before the 2003-2009 hiatus, the Mustang outsold the Camaro 4 to 1. It was the same then: lower performance, but better comfort, better livability, and lower base price.

Now, the Mustang has a completely new chassis and body style, the Camaro hasn't been on hiatus, and the Camaro only has an evolutionary body style. Camaro may have a new chassis, but the body is far from new looking. I think the Mustang may keep outselling the Camaro, even if the Camaro gets an initial surge right after release.

 

[rwboring]

Everyone needs to take the sales numbers of the Mustang and Camaro with a grain of salt.

The Mustang just released a redesign while the Camaro's redesign is soon to be released.

Didn't mustang sale numbers drop just before the redesign?
I fully expect the Camaro to out sale the Mustang at least at first this year.

http://blog.caranddriver.com/warnin...aro-vs-mustang-sales-numbers-in-living-color/

not really... 2012 and 2013 were pretty even, 2014 was no where close (2015 were late 2014 so that will be off)...

 

[krt22]

For Motor Trend to not try, apparently.

:lol:

 

[Mark Aubele]

Vorshlag also stated that the stock S550 GTPP has been significantly faster than the stock Boss.

Which isn't true. Haven't really seen any other data to back that up.

 

[DSG2003SVT]

Which isn't true. Haven't really seen any other data to back that up.

In their experience, yes, it is. They've posted results and discussed it at length. Others may feel differently, but that's what Vorshlag has stated.

http://www.vorshlag.com/blog/?p=854

 

[hognutz]

you are building a car more then the base price, because that is how you want it... which just adding the recaro seats to a ZL1 is 1995, navigation 500, etc... not to mention the $2600 GG tax. If you are going to compare prices you should make sure its apples to apples first.


You should care about sales because if they don't sell the base model they can't make the performance models, that is pretty simple logic. For instance GM saying they had to build 100k a year in order to bring the Camaro back and the last 3 years they have been below that. So GM better do something before they have to kill it off again. (weight loss and more power was a good start).

I don't care if chevy kills the camaro again. I did just fine in my 2007 Z06 last time it was dead ha ha. when I said I don't give a shit about sales number I was not making that up I don't care at all. never have and never will. that is for weirdo's like the pil to argue about.


This is how I buy cars. I use money.... I look at the cars I wan't with the option I want.... then I look at the deal I can get and compare that price. MSRP vs MSRP means nothing if you dont' have to Pay MSRP.

If I could order a GT350 at xplan right now I would already have done it. just because they are selling at MSRP or over now does not mean in 3 years that will mean jack. they could be 10k under that.

then again I am poor and have to minimize money lost on car deals. this MSRP and ADM game is not for me. even the $1300 GG tax feels like a bad touch in some ways.

 

[ON D BIT]

Right now all we have is the Motor Trend video review where it did 0-60 in 4.1 and 1/4 mile in 12.4. So as of right now the regular GT350 is not as fast in a straight line as a Z51 Vette.

I was going by the knowledge that the R is running at 11.7 at 121. But mt to mt your looking 117.8 for the c7 and 117.8 for the base gt350. The R is two mph faster.

how is 12.4 117 faster than 12.1 or 12.2 at 117 or 118??? am I missing something thats a pretty sound beating in a real drag race thats not a fender. now that being said I hate magazine racing I would much rather see a heads up race. hopefully they are door to door. they are defiantly in the same realm for sure. the car just came in expensive with GG so I was hoping for some 11's.

It looks like they are the same to me with the R being fast at near 120 mt numbers.