MT: Shelby VS ZL1 on Laguna Seca

[tbi0904]

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

One could say that about a Z06 and a 5.0.

As a few others have mentioned, it's a little funny to see some of the same people two days ago swear up and down they don't care about road course times suddenly caring very much about them now that the GT500 has run a faster time in the last couple tests. Some of you guys need to be a little more consistent, this isn't camaro5 is it?

 

[72MachOne99GT]

Someone else mentioned on the evil site that adding brake ducts could have created issues with the aerodynamics required to achieve 200 mph.

I'll accept that as I don't plan on taking the car to a road course, and if I ever DO....I sure as shit won't be driving the car hard enough to wear out the brakes after a handful of laps, let alone after 1.

 

[Ry_Trapp0]

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!

exactly what i'm saying, but you highlighted islander's post up above in which he proclaimed victory for the mustang by adding together cumulative 3 lap times, and then said in your very post...

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."​

...why should the author have said "it still won the 3 lap race" when there was no 3 lap race and they only mentioned "3" because that's the number of laps it took for the GT500 to turn a slower number than the ZL1? what if the author had said "by the third lap, the mustang was behind, and it kept slowing as we continued to lap?"

 

[Detroit Iron]

Extrapolating performance numbers around a road course doesn't mean much. We do know that the Mustang posted a better time after three consecutive laps (6.5 miles of hard driving). The time difference was getting less each lap. But then again, you can't extrapolate that out to 20 laps. Sooner or later, the ZL1 brakes get soft too. Bench racing at its best!

 

[Ry_Trapp0]

Extrapolating performance numbers around a road course doesn't mean much. We do know that the Mustang posted a better time after three consecutive laps (6.5 miles of hard driving). The time difference was getting less each lap. But then again, you can't extrapolate that out to 20 laps. Sooner or later, the ZL1 brakes get soft too. Bench racing at its best!

concur!!! which car is faster on any track is completely irrelevant to how the owner will drive a car. you don't go do any HPDE event to run a faster lap than a ZL1, you do it because it's fun as shit!!!

Someone else mentioned on the evil site that adding brake ducts could have created issues with the aerodynamics required to achieve 200 mph.

I'll accept that as I don't plan on taking the car to a road course, and if I ever DO....I sure as shit won't be driving the car hard enough to wear out the brakes after a handful of laps, let alone after 1.

LOL, ans as usual, whoever that was on the "evil site" is full of shit. brake ducts are so small that adding them in place of the fog lights would be 100% insignificant. i don't remember if it was still equipped with them in the nardo ring video(i'll have to go look later), but most of the testing there was at least one GT500 equipped with the brake ducts(and dive planes on the front bumper and 2 piece rotors).

 

[Kewlv8]

Pobst summarized. " The Mustang's more fun to drive because it's better balanced,"

Hmmm, wonder which one I would pick? For some reason I like my 'fun' car to actually be fun.....

 

[Ry_Trapp0]

Pobst summarized. " The Mustang's more fun to drive because it's better balanced,"

Hmmm, wonder which one I would pick? For some reason I like my 'fun' car to actually be fun.....

to be fair, that was randy pobst's comment after running them on the race track, but the editors said differently during the back road driving portion;-)

 

[89TTA]

That can be true with ANY car match ups.

You have to be realistic. Similar cars performance wise can go either direction in similar hands. Unless all owners of each are highly trained with a lot of seat time. The rest is just bragging rights.

 

[ON D BIT]

exactly what i'm saying, but you highlighted islander's post up above in which he proclaimed victory for the mustang by adding together cumulative 3 lap times, and then said in your very post...

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."​

"

Warning speculative post:

It looks to me that MT is hiding information. If the mustang never lost when comparing lap times, a clever way to cover it up is to say just that.

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

When in reality the mustang was slower only on the 3rd lap than the camaro was on its first and nothing more.

If MT was not trying to hide the above statement I believe they would have posted the all 3 lap times for the camaro as well.:bash:

 

[Snagged]

You have to be realistic. Similar cars performance wise can go either direction in similar hands. Unless all owners of each are highly trained with a lot of seat time. The rest is just bragging rights.

And again, that can be said about any car match up, just depends on how big the driver screws up. RWD cars are easy to mess up, especially ones with 662hp. To say it's a drivers race between the ZL1 and GT500 on the drag strip is just not true. If you believe in that then you must believe every race between any car match up is a driver's race (within reason).

Now the race between the ZL1 and GT500 on a road course is very much a driver's race because they are so close to one another, which is impressive the ZL1 does so well given its drawbacks.

 

[Nicolaskl]

And again, that can be said about any car match up, just depends on how big the driver screws up. RWD cars are easy to mess up, especially ones with 662hp. To say it's a drivers race between the ZL1 and GT500 on the drag strip is just not true. If you believe in that then you must believe every race between any car match up is a driver's race (within reason).

Now the race between the ZL1 and GT500 on a road course is very much a driver's race because they are so close to one another, which is impressive the ZL1 does so well given its drawbacks.

I agree. What's not so impressive (for the ZL1) is Al Os simulator and hordes of screaming Camaro fans saying for months that the ZL1 was going to destroy the Ford on the road course, and then the ZL1 loses 2 out of 3 times.

Autoblog talked to the Camaro ZL1’s chief engineer Al Oppenheiser, who says that according to simulations he has run, the ZL1 will beat the GT500 around the track [and] the ZL1 will go from 0-60 MPH faster

Oops.

 

[PowerWheels]

"The Mustang's more fun to drive because it's better balanced, and on the street it might be the Mustang because you don't brake that hard and the issue might not come up."

This and the better interior sells it for me.

As for track racing is this not correct? Once the Shelby gets ahead, which it will the Camaro will never be able to pass it. Hence an almost certain win every time.

If my dealer sells me the Shelby for the price I want I'll buy it, else I'll just wait a bit longer and see what the 2015 rumors are. But I'd rather have the beast than a downsized IRS that handles a bit better.

Even when I look at super cars, the one that has brutal power and acceleration makes me smile the most. That's just me.

 

[89TTA]

And again, that can be said about any car match up, just depends on how big the driver screws up. RWD cars are easy to mess up, especially ones with 662hp. To say it's a drivers race between the ZL1 and GT500 on the drag strip is just not true. If you believe in that then you must believe every race between any car match up is a driver's race (within reason).

Now the race between the ZL1 and GT500 on a road course is very much a driver's race because they are so close to one another, which is impressive the ZL1 does so well given its drawbacks.

Again, I am talking about your TYPICAL owner who might go to the strip. Nothing more, nothing less.

 

[capnkirk52]

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?

Nice. And all I was trying to do with my times is add .1 to the ZL1 each lap for the .2 deviation that MT quoted. I surmise that the 1:39:18 was the best lap for the ZL1 (since I doubt MT would post the worst lap #) and 1:39:38 is the worst lap.

 

[ToMany01L's]

I've noticed now over the mag reviews how not one of them mention mpg or how that the stock bottom end in these motors isn't even close to the same level capability wise, but they'll sit there and talk driving comfort into the dirt lol. They prioritize subjective things over facts. Magazine reviews are the biggest fuqing jokes i've ever seen.

 

[rwboring]

Indeed, while the ZL1 has a Corvette-sourced computer program that allows you to floor the gas halfway through a corner and let the computer dole out the torque for maximum traction, the GT500 gets by with good old-fashioned chassis tuning. Roll quickly into the throttle during corner exit, and the Mustang digs in and flings you down the straight. It doesn't seem possible, but it really does get all 631 lb-ft of torque to the ground.

when is it not driving?

also I thought it was interesting how the GT500 actually had a quicker "set up" for 2 out of the 3 last turns... that doesn't make much sense, can someone clear that up for me? From my memory those aren't tight turns so maybe "handling" isn't needed?

 

[Formula51]

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!

 

[Snagged]

I've noticed now over the mag reviews how not one of them mention mpg or how that the stock bottom end in these motors isn't even close to the same level capability wise, but they'll sit there and talk driving comfort into the dirt lol. They prioritize subjective things over facts. Magazine reviews are the biggest fuqing jokes i've ever seen.

That is a good point to make, if in fact the mags did look past MPG with them being so involved with daily driving (can't remember).

 

[islander033]

what 3 lap race?...

"Race" or no "race" the GT500 was still ahead after 3 laps. I think that is the point being made.

 

[SVTeveN]

"1 Trick Pony"

"And that's Important b/c we don't drive everywhere a quarter mile at a time"

lol at the gt500 smoking towards the end.

Randy was a little sympathetic towards the shelby. We know why.

R.I.P Carrol Shelby you guys built a great mustang.


But overall the ZL1 is the more sophisticated car. Basically everything was said that I already knew in this review.


That is why the ZL1 Keeps "WINNING" :beer: