mannyman84

iTrader: (2)

ive been wanting to see this and i know all you guys have too..


http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...est/index.html

Irunelevens

Repost...

kain01

I only see one for the V6 and this one for the 5.0, anyway anybody notice that Motor Trend just passed a quarter mile in the GT faster than they got in the GT500 comparison with the Camaro SS? Gentleman we have a driver's race in these car's again, stock for stock.

mannyman84

iTrader: (2)

oh **** you are right. didnt notice....

LS1LT1

iTrader: (16)

It's been posted, it just happens to be located within the thread below, post# 299:
https://ls1tech.com/forums/automotiv...o-test-15.html

No big deal having it twice though.

travismcgillsdaddy

i agree its gonna be a driver race. but the 540hp gt 500 runs 11.9 bone stock off showroom floor

Darksol

I find it funny that when the G.M. guys point out that .1 seconds and .1 mph differences were negligible the Ford guys said they were crying. But so many of those Ford guys tried to compare the SS to the GT500 instead because the GT wasn't in the same league at the time.

ThisBlood147

The cars are comparable and are going to be a certifiable driver's race 99% of the time. There's absolutely no reason for gloating, whining, bragging, or excuse making. The GT and SS are right there in performance, and are available for practically the same price. All is well...

mannyman84

iTrader: (2)

until i see some street kills on youtube. 2010 camaro and 2011 GT stang ill be convinced that the stang is a faster car. and if it is, then the world if definitly ending on dec 2012......not bashing on stangs so dont get on me stang guys, ok! lol. but stangs always have been turds after they lost their 4.9

Irunelevens

Yeah, those '96 Mustang GTs sure were dogs compared to the monstrous '95s

mannyman84

iTrader: (2)

its like they stayed even with horsepower when GM just kept raising and raising theirs...if stangs would of kept their 5 liters then it would be some close races

Irunelevens

If they had done the PI heads in '96 and the 3v heads in '99 it would have been just fine.

RaggedRides

iTrader: (8)

I always wished they had carried the 351 over from the '95 Cobra R.

goof4080

If. lol

It's cool, i'm all pontiac, my dad is all chevy, and his brother is all ford. I'm very excited for ford and their mustang tho. Hopefully this will up the anti for american muscle even more. Luckily us 4th gens can still hang with ya.

assasinator

christopher ihara was there at the test session. here are his comments.


http://forums.corral.net/forums/show...5&postcount=25


Be sure to read our review.

http://www.corral.net

We got the car to 12.8 @ 109 mph. That was with two people and 40 pounds of camera gear.


Based on our times and an estimated weight of 4,139 here's what I came up with:

The Corral: Engine Dyno
Initial Readings

Code:
READING OUTPUT UNITS
WEIGHT 4139 pounds
TRAP SPEED 109 mph
E/T 12.8 seconds

Dyno Readings
READING OUTPUT UNITS
Total Horsepower 427 bhp
Horsepower Used 390 bhp
Best E/T 12.41 seconds

Fuel Readings
READING OUTPUT UNITS
Specific Fuel Consumption 213.79 pounds/hour
Fuel Pump Capacity 128.28 liters/hour
Optimal Fuel Pump Capacity 153.93 liters/hour
Injector Flow Rate 30.73 lb/hr Injectors

When adjusted to make the horsepower 412 like what is published we had to tweak the weight to 3995#:

The Corral: Engine Dyno
Initial Readings

Code:
READING OUTPUT UNITS
WEIGHT 3995 pounds
TRAP SPEED 109 mph
E/T 12.8 seconds

Dyno Readings
READING OUTPUT UNITS
Total Horsepower 412 bhp
Horsepower Used 376 bhp
Best E/T 12.41 seconds

Fuel Readings
READING OUTPUT UNITS
Specific Fuel Consumption 206.36 pounds/hour
Fuel Pump Capacity 123.81 liters/hour
Optimal Fuel Pump Capacity 148.58 liters/hour
Injector Flow Rate 29.66 lb/hr Injectors


Estimated quarter mile time is 12.41, although that is just a theoretical number.

assasinator

so the fact is, the GT has two people and camera equipment on at least some of those runs.


the car has 412bhp and not one more. but it does run better than some articles show.

kain01

No that's for the dyno, this is for the 1/4 mile time. Two different topics.

Sorry I try to stick with magazine racing because 95% of the population can barely get better than the mags with the same equipment. The guy's shaving tenths off have the CAI, the improved tires, etc........ etc........ etc........
Plus these cars ARE actually stock, nobody winking in the background and flashing a big grin saying stock. They are raced on the same track, in the same weather on the same day. It's really as unbiased and as professional as you can get. Whoever wins, wins and whoever loses, loses in these circumstances.

The GT500 with 540 hp got a 12.8 @ 115 in Motor Trend, Car and Driver was comparable with 12.9 @ 113. Wheel spin wheel spin wheel spin. Too much torque for the tires they put on these car's stock. And I'd like to see these show room GT500's hit the 11's when this guy with a tune and steeda intake could only hit a 12.4. Kind of falls more in line with what the mags say.

http://www.fordgt500.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4665

LS1LT1

iTrader: (16)

I've had one of each (both automatic convertibles) and yes, they were both slow LOL but the '95 5.0 (bought used) was still a little quicker, I ran a 14.6@94mph with it in almost stock (had a cheapie ebay cold air kit on it). Never tracked my orange '96 (bought that one new and still don't know why LOL) though.

LS1LT1

iTrader: (16)

Honestly, if they really ran a 12.8 with TWO PASSENGERS AND HEAVY CAMERA GEAR/TESTING EQUIPMENT on board, that 12.41 will not be far off at all.
Not too far my original prediction for the car, I had said months ago that I'd thought this new GT could very well beat the quickest bone stock 2003/2004 Cobras (Evan Smith ran a 12.43 if I recall...I was at the Englishtown magazine track rental when he was testing the next phase of 'free mods' on that very same Sonic Blue Cobra about a week or two after he ran the stock times).

Irunelevens

I was pulling 9.4s in the 1/8 with my '98 with just a catback, misfiring because coolant was leaking into the spark plug holes. But mine was a late-year '98 with 3.27s instead of 3.08s.