Road & Track test of GT500

[BLWN DSG]

0-60 4.7sec

0-100ft 2.9sec
0-500ft 7.3sec
0-900ft 10.4sec

0-1320 (1/4 mile) 13.1 @112

test weight 4130lbs

Saw this on the NHTOC site....not very impressed if this is true!

 

[98_Snake]

link?

 

[type911]

Wondering if this car is going to become an embarasment?

 

[Wintermute]

Maybe Ford is trying to support the aftermarket. Imagine all these pre-orders scrambling around trying to make the thing as fast as a stock terminator lol.

Or maybe someone forgot to take the factory limiter off.

:thumbsup:

 

[Alex_96Cobra]

with that trap I would say traction was a big issue.

 

[Alex_96Cobra]

4130 lbs?? jeeeeez. someone needs a diet.

 

[VNMOUS1]

0-60 4.7sec

0-100ft 2.9sec
0-500ft 7.3sec
0-900ft 10.4sec

0-1320 (1/4 mile) 13.1 @112

test weight 4130lbs

Saw this on the NHTOC site....not very impressed if this is true!

These yahoos couldn't launch a friggin' Big Wheel. They, along with C & D, left the traction control on. C & D called it "launch control". Because the throttle is drive-by-wire, you basically pop it up to 3,400 and step off the clutch and floor it.

Motor Trend got it at 4.5 and 12.7/116.0 in the 1/4. 0-100 was 9.6 sec. 45-65 passing was accomplished in 1.9 sec. 0-40 took 2.7 seconds, but it only took an additional 1.8 to see 60mph. Yeah....I'd say hooking up is a real problem.

MT has it .5 sec slower 0-60 than their test Z06. Understandable given it's 850 pounds heavier. It is .7 seconds slower than the Z06 in the 1/4 mile.

So, poor weight distribution due to the heavy engine and it's necessary cooling systems/fluids/etc have taken it's toll on the launch. In the real world, we're all going to be driving around at low to mid speeds and punching it. THAT'S where the GT500 kicks butt.


bj

 

[BLWN DSG]

These yahoos couldn't launch a friggin' Big Wheel. They, along with C & D, left the traction control on. C & D called it "launch control". Because the throttle is drive-by-wire, you basically pop it up to 3,400 and step off the clutch and floor it.

Motor Trend got it at 4.5 and 12.7/116.0 in the 1/4. 0-100 was 9.6 sec. 45-65 passing was accomplished in 1.9 sec. 0-40 took 2.7 seconds, but it only took an additional 1.8 to see 60mph. Yeah....I'd say hooking up is a real problem.

MT has it .5 sec slower 0-60 than their test Z06. Understandable given it's 850 pounds heavier. It is .7 seconds slower than the Z06 in the 1/4 mile.

So, poor weight distribution due to the heavy engine and it's necessary cooling systems/fluids/etc have taken it's toll on the launch. In the real world, we're all going to be driving around at low to mid speeds and punching it. THAT'S where the GT500 kicks butt.


bj

good info on the numbers...I am not trying to start trash talking, if I could afford one I would buy one in a second!!! :rockon: I just thought with the power they are advertising it would have been pretty deep into the 12's if not a little faster.

 

[Wintermute]

I just want the snake off the front, hehe.

 

[ON D BIT]

good info on the numbers...I am not trying to start trash talking, if I could afford one I would buy one in a second!!! :rockon: I just thought with the power they are advertising it would have been pretty deep into the 12's if not a little faster.

at ford press event the car did 12.25 @117. i think the great drivers will do a little better than that, with the car seeing 11's with just tires. no the gt500 will not be as fast in the 1/4 as the 405 horsepower z06.

 

[BLUE OVAL NUT]

QOUTE :By Peter Valdes-Dapena, CNNMoney.com staff writer
June 6, 2006: 3:18 PM EDT

If you aren't lucky enough to be an owner, console yourself with this: Owners will get the most enjoyment out of it on a track. The 300-horsepower Mustang GT is at least as much fun, maybe more, where you and I drive every day, on the public roads. It's plenty powerful, light, cooler-sounding at idle and quieter and smoother at speed.

If you want the Shelby, wait a while. You'll pay less for it and it will still be great. But, for my money, I'll take the Mustang GT. On a dollar-per-smile basis, it remains unbeaten.
Guess he doesn't want one either oke:

 

[Formula51]

These yahoos couldn't launch a friggin' Big Wheel. They, along with C & D, left the traction control on. C & D called it "launch control". Because the throttle is drive-by-wire, you basically pop it up to 3,400 and step off the clutch and floor it.

Motor Trend got it at 4.5 and 12.7/116.0 in the 1/4. 0-100 was 9.6 sec. 45-65 passing was accomplished in 1.9 sec. 0-40 took 2.7 seconds, but it only took an additional 1.8 to see 60mph. Yeah....I'd say hooking up is a real problem.

MT has it .5 sec slower 0-60 than their test Z06. Understandable given it's 850 pounds heavier. It is .7 seconds slower than the Z06 in the 1/4 mile.

So, poor weight distribution due to the heavy engine and it's necessary cooling systems/fluids/etc have taken it's toll on the launch. In the real world, we're all going to be driving around at low to mid speeds and punching it. THAT'S where the GT500 kicks butt.


bj

To be fair, MotorTrend also went 11.5 at 127 mph in a C6 Z06 and 11.6 or 11.7 I believe in another test. The 12.0 for the Z06 (0.7 sec faster than the GT500) is the slowest test of the Z other than Road and Tracks and we know how terrible they are. That 12.0 was also run in the test pitting the Z against aftermarket tuner cars such as a Lingenfelter C6 (1000hp), Henessey Viper (1000hp), and pullied Ford GT(750hp). Had they run 11.5 in that test they would have really shamed those cars as the fastest was the modified Ford GT at 11.4. The Z beat or tied all of those cars in every category except the 1/4 mile and standing mile. These cars had highly modified suspensions as well, except the Ford GT.

However, the GT500 will run faster than 12.7 with 116mph traps. It is certainly capable of low 12's and I have no doubt Evan Smith and some other great drivers will get it there.

 

[03LGCOBRA]

That same issue they got a BMW 550i to do 0-60 in low 5s and the quarter in qbout 13.5. I think that this is right, I don't have the issue in front of me. But come one how can a car that weighs the same, but has 140 less horsepower to run just .4 secs slower???? They can't drive the car.

BMW 550i -360HP V8 -if they can get that to perform like that I would think they would be able to get a 500 HP S/C V8 to do better than a 13.1???

Learn to drive

 

[Jpjr]

To be fair, MotorTrend also went 11.5 at 127 mph in a C6 Z06 and 11.6 or 11.7 I believe in another test. The 12.0 for the Z06 (0.7 sec faster than the GT500) is the slowest test of the Z other than Road and Tracks and we know how terrible they are. That 12.0 was also run in the test pitting the Z against aftermarket tuner cars such as a Lingenfelter C6 (1000hp), Henessey Viper (1000hp), and pullied Ford GT(750hp). Had they run 11.5 in that test they would have really shamed those cars as the fastest was the modified Ford GT at 11.4. The Z beat or tied all of those cars in every category except the 1/4 mile and standing mile. These cars had highly modified suspensions as well, except the Ford GT.

However, the GT500 will run faster than 12.7 with 116mph traps. It is certainly capable of low 12's and I have no doubt Evan Smith and some other great drivers will get it there.

Point being its all relative. If the GT 500's times could be faster, than so could the Corvettes with the same driver.

 

[E. Green Cobra]

To be fair, MotorTrend also went 11.5 at 127 mph in a C6 Z06 and 11.6 or 11.7 I believe in another test. The 12.0 for the Z06 (0.7 sec faster than the GT500) is the slowest test of the Z other than Road and Tracks and we know how terrible they are. That 12.0 was also run in the test pitting the Z against aftermarket tuner cars such as a Lingenfelter C6 (1000hp), Henessey Viper (1000hp), and pullied Ford GT(750hp). Had they run 11.5 in that test they would have really shamed those cars as the fastest was the modified Ford GT at 11.4. The Z beat or tied all of those cars in every category except the 1/4 mile and standing mile. These cars had highly modified suspensions as well, except the Ford GT.

The Z ran 12.0 bottom line, all the cars were tested same day and track,which IMO means far more than when actually comparing the cars. Obviously the Z has run faster, I'm sure 1000rwhp Vipers have too, but on that day the cars ran what they did...I can't really see how it "shamed" any of the cars there- as running with a minimum of 500rwhp @ 3400lbs on Mich PS2's is no easy feat...besides when have you ever seen any of the rags get the claimed numbers out of any tuner car period? Unless it was on slicks that is...

 

[Formula51]

The Z ran 12.0 bottom line, all the cars were tested same day and track,which IMO means far more than when actually comparing the cars. Obviously the Z has run faster, I'm sure 1000rwhp Vipers have too, but on that day the cars ran what they did...I can't really see how it "shamed" any of the cars there- as running with a minimum of 500rwhp @ 3400lbs on Mich PS2's is no easy feat...besides when have you ever seen any of the rags get the claimed numbers out of any tuner car period? Unless it was on slicks that is...

Two of the cars did run on slicks, I believe the Viper and Lingenfelter Vette, both were in the 10's and have gone faster before.

"shamed" was just me playing around. The Z06 did beat the cars in every handling/braking test done and tied the Viper in braking, or something like that. You should read this test. It was very cool and the cars were HIGHLY modified, that is why I made the "shamed" comment. Had a roughly 800hp 06' Mustang GT and a similar GTO that both did very well, when running.

Of course the Mustang broke! FORD doesn't stand for Found On Road Side Dead for no reason! Just playing :beer:

 

[chuckstang]

Actually the C6 broke its rear end during that test
So HAAAAAAAAAAAAA

 

[begone]

QOUTE :By Peter Valdes-Dapena, CNNMoney.com staff writer
June 6, 2006: 3:18 PM EDT

If you aren't lucky enough to be an owner, console yourself with this: Owners will get the most enjoyment out of it on a track. The 300-horsepower Mustang GT is at least as much fun, maybe more, where you and I drive every day, on the public roads. It's plenty powerful, light, cooler-sounding at idle and quieter and smoother at speed.

If you want the Shelby, wait a while. You'll pay less for it and it will still be great. But, for my money, I'll take the Mustang GT. On a dollar-per-smile basis, it remains unbeaten.
Guess he doesn't want one either oke:

This guys gotta be joking right? "Console your self...." What a joke. There's gotta be a big difference in buyer types from those who desire to buy and can afford the 500 hp GT500 or any other High Horse Power vehicle for that matter. How can he not realize this. He probably drives a Toyota prius for his DD.

 

[GTSpartan]

Just a reminder to all that MT uses CORRECTED times for 1/4 mile runs, meaning the cars may not have actually run the posted time, but would in theory run those time. Sometimes their correction formula is close and other times it's a bit too optimistic, usually in the trap speed. C/D and R/T don't use corrected times.

That's the main reason why they normally have the better posted times.

 

[E. Green Cobra]

Two of the cars did run on slicks, I believe the Viper and Lingenfelter Vette, both were in the 10's and have gone faster before.

"shamed" was just me playing around. The Z06 did beat the cars in every handling/braking test done and tied the Viper in braking, or something like that. You should read this test. It was very cool and the cars were HIGHLY modified, that is why I made the "shamed" comment. Had a roughly 800hp 06' Mustang GT and a similar GTO that both did very well, when running.

Of course the Mustang broke! FORD doesn't stand for Found On Road Side Dead for no reason! Just playing :beer:

I read it/have it. The Z's impressive no doubt, I would have liked to see the Z and Gt on slicks but I guess they didn't want to break anything, can't wait for their next top speed test