With far superior hardware, the GT350 easily surpasses the S197's best effort. The Boss was a good car and a necessary stepping stone but that's where it ends in the context of any comparison with the GT350.
Ford Performance and lack of Performance Numbers
- Thread starter bpmurr
- Start date
With far superior hardware, the GT350 easily surpasses the S197's best effort. The Boss was a good car and a necessary stepping stone but that's where it ends in the context of any comparison with the GT350.
Different days different amateur drivers are huge. Once again the stock s550 ran a 52 at Sears point while other amateur drivers are running 58 and 00 in their c7z and 991 gt3 respectively. That 52 is faster than the driver ever ran in a stock boss.
I bought a new Gt500 2014 $500 over invoice.
Is that 6k or 15k off? 500 over invoice is not a manufacturer rebate it's a discount from the dealer which is very different than what blown is complaining of.
Read much? Look at my post again, clearly state that it was an LS.
Yeah, I saw the performance package S550 was 2 (not 3 from what I remember reading anyway) sec faster than a Brembo, non track package (as far as I know considering it was an '11 as you stated) S197 GT IN VORSHLAG'S HANDS. Who obviously after reading their post had some sort of vested interest in showing the S550 to be faster than a Boss 302. So I guess we are to believe a standard S197 GT is faster than a Boss on a track because Vorshlag said so, right?
Just because that car ran a better lap on that day doesn't mean much. It just means it was faster. That day. I would bet a bunch that in most cases a Boss factory delivered would beat an S550 GT around a road course.
I don't recall complaining about anything surrounding discounts. You're twisting my words.......again. All I said was the GT350 has had a bad rollout compared to recent cars. This can't be disputed in my opinion, even though you think otherwise. Facts are facts. My pockets like discounts. GM builds 170 Vettes a day. Of course there will be discounts. I have no problem with that. It makes the car accessible to more people. I know you probably just care about exclusivity, but give me a good deal any day over being the only one in my town with a certain vehicle. That's not the topic anyway. You have a habit of getting side tracked.
As tedious and sometimes painful as this type of thread(magazine racing?) typically is for an old gear head like me to read, from beginning to end, I struggled though and I must admit even enjoyed it a bit. 
First, it is important to remember that third part testing always trumps factory testing in the mind of the consumer. The factory will therefore try to facilitate and encourage third part testing and try to encourage that the testing be done in a venue favorable to the vehicle they have built. This means that this testing is not under the manufacturer's complete control or scheduling.
Second, has anyone considered that perhaps they don't want a bunch of ballast slapped on this car before it even has a chance to win a few races?
Do you remember all the weight that got slapped on to the Boss 302S and Boss 302R when they first came out?
(Grand Am Continental Challenge, SCCA, NASA, Etc.) Some of these governing bodies added even more weight mid season.
They know these cars will sell well, so why tip your cards this early before you rack up some victories, when many of those protesting about performance numbers may not actually be potential buyers anyway?
Just a few thoughts I had.
First, it is important to remember that third part testing always trumps factory testing in the mind of the consumer. The factory will therefore try to facilitate and encourage third part testing and try to encourage that the testing be done in a venue favorable to the vehicle they have built. This means that this testing is not under the manufacturer's complete control or scheduling.
Second, has anyone considered that perhaps they don't want a bunch of ballast slapped on this car before it even has a chance to win a few races?
Do you remember all the weight that got slapped on to the Boss 302S and Boss 302R when they first came out?
(Grand Am Continental Challenge, SCCA, NASA, Etc.) Some of these governing bodies added even more weight mid season.
They know these cars will sell well, so why tip your cards this early before you rack up some victories, when many of those protesting about performance numbers may not actually be potential buyers anyway?
Just a few thoughts I had.
No I'm not. You said Ford did not know how to roll out or market new vehicles like gm or dodge. I simply provided proof that neither gm or dodge do a very good job at either. Your purchase was indeed proof that gm failed at this despite what you say!
Yes I read your post, now finish reading mine. It's not a trivial difference with the tire compound difference between the two cars, that difference alone can amount to a few seconds.
The s550 is a superior chassis, period. Ford did a great job making the most of the s197 and its solid rear axle, but it was an inherent limitation. And even though the cars are close in the hands of prodessionals, in the hands of amateurs the s550 will be easier to drive fast. Most amateurs don't have the cahones to drive a live axle car at its limits. ( I certainly don't)
So guys that can't drive can drive the S550 faster. Gotcha. I wasn't gauging the capability of the two based on whether an amateur could be fast in one or the other.
And on tires not being trivial, note that the only data you have backing up the S550 faster than the Boss argument has the Boss on "worn out NT05s".
And on tires not being trivial, note that the only data you have backing up the S550 faster than the Boss argument has the Boss on "worn out NT05s".
Who are you?
Ford engineers testing against their past mustangs is not good enough for you?
"can't drive" is a huge misnomer, but there is a big difference between a professional and an amateur. Does it really matter if a professional can pilot car A faster than car B, if you yourself cannot pilot car A faster than car B?
We are talking real world performance here, not bench racing via magazine lap times. Anyone who has spent more than a few days at the track knows where to draw this line.
As for NT05s, they are still street tires, they dont fall off like race tires do, so being "worn out" doesnt mean they completely lack grip.
We are talking real world performance here, not bench racing via magazine lap times. Anyone who has spent more than a few days at the track knows where to draw this line.
As for NT05s, they are still street tires, they dont fall off like race tires do, so being "worn out" doesnt mean they completely lack grip.
Last edited:
Boss ls runs 3 seconds faster on a slower track on a different day and different driver.
Stock 15 Mustang GT running 6 seconds faster at Sears points(1:52 to 1:58) against a new c7 z06 on a different day and different driver.
If the ls is faster than the new GT based on the above. Does this mean the new GT is faster than the new Z06?
Your post delineates why this thread exists.
No real data, just magazine racing bullshit.
Last edited:
52s in a bone stock car at sears is really quite fast, but you are wasting your breath with these keyboard racers. They wont be able to look up equivalent times via motor trend or car and driver since they dont test at Sears, and thus these times will glaze right over them.
Wait. They don't want manufacturer tests or magazine tests.
And Ford does not release times so they will lose these sales and have to sell them for half price!
After reading this thread the concept being argued here is pretty funny.
Because Ford Performance doesn't list hard numbers, they are potentially losing sales even though there is no hard numbers to prove this. The proof is that in the past decade Ford hs sold a lot of performance vehicles. On the other hand, Chevy provides hard numbers for every possible metric measurable, and while they sell plenty of cars they have had to mark down vehicles due to lack of sales.
Could it be that Ford is just focused on cars that will sell? Maybe they know that there's a cross-town rival that will do everything in their power to exploit numbers so why play that game? You look like the better man if you just stick to your guns and your product and let the real world numbers speak for you, or in other words, dont partake in childish games. You dont see all the premium brands bragging about every individual metric against each other. They may highlight something particularly outstanding, but you dont see BMW, Porsche, or Ferrari bragging about every little number. Welcome to the big leagues.
Because Ford Performance doesn't list hard numbers, they are potentially losing sales even though there is no hard numbers to prove this. The proof is that in the past decade Ford hs sold a lot of performance vehicles. On the other hand, Chevy provides hard numbers for every possible metric measurable, and while they sell plenty of cars they have had to mark down vehicles due to lack of sales.
Could it be that Ford is just focused on cars that will sell? Maybe they know that there's a cross-town rival that will do everything in their power to exploit numbers so why play that game? You look like the better man if you just stick to your guns and your product and let the real world numbers speak for you, or in other words, dont partake in childish games. You dont see all the premium brands bragging about every individual metric against each other. They may highlight something particularly outstanding, but you dont see BMW, Porsche, or Ferrari bragging about every little number. Welcome to the big leagues.
Last edited:
What Ford engineers? Vorshlag? I have no clue what you are talking about.
I'm really not sure what the **** you two are talking about anymore. One cites Vorshlag, the other implies a stock S550 is faster than GT3s and Z06s.
The only reason I posted in the first place was to attempt to point out that it was a bit disingenuous to proclaim the S550 to be "faster than a Boss". I really have no data as I never ran my '14 against a stock S550 the same day on the same track, so I posted some magazine data with the cars being discussed on the same track. Better IMO than someone obviously trying to sell parts (nothing against Terry he has done a ton for the community) or what some mythical ford engineer ran who also wants to sell a new model.
Keyboard warrior? No keyboard warrior here. Been "racing" for years.
I'm really not sure what the **** you two are talking about anymore. One cites Vorshlag, the other implies a stock S550 is faster than GT3s and Z06s.
The only reason I posted in the first place was to attempt to point out that it was a bit disingenuous to proclaim the S550 to be "faster than a Boss". I really have no data as I never ran my '14 against a stock S550 the same day on the same track, so I posted some magazine data with the cars being discussed on the same track. Better IMO than someone obviously trying to sell parts (nothing against Terry he has done a ton for the community) or what some mythical ford engineer ran who also wants to sell a new model.
Keyboard warrior? No keyboard warrior here. Been "racing" for years.
Last edited:
You stated that the boss ran faster at the same track on different days with different drivers than the new mustang. Because of this you stated the boss was faster.
I was merely pointing out how you can not compare those two numbers. Different days different drivers can be similar or worlds apart. And we don't know which. So as a driver you should know not to compare the two.
There has been no direct competition between the two via the media. Ford engineers benchmarked the boss ls against the new mustang and from the professional driving times I've seen hit their mark. As I've said 52 is a hell of a time at Sears where many amateurs with better cars can't match that time!
I was merely pointing out how you can not compare those two numbers. Different days different drivers can be similar or worlds apart. And we don't know which. So as a driver you should know not to compare the two.
There has been no direct competition between the two via the media. Ford engineers benchmarked the boss ls against the new mustang and from the professional driving times I've seen hit their mark. As I've said 52 is a hell of a time at Sears where many amateurs with better cars can't match that time!
Again, OP, and just about everyone else, wants to see some same day, same track, preferably 3rd party comparative testing. You keep quoting hearsay BS.
Users who are viewing this thread
