assasinator

i bought a base model 2011 GT with only the performance option, i wanted. no extra weight, no nav, no sirius BS, no electric seats, no stereo amp, no rear spoiler.


minimum weight maximum performance. brembo's, 3.73, and candy apple paint...only option i wanted.


teh gt500 base is the same way.

It'llrun

Most high dollar sports cars may be tested there. Most people, however, don't own high dollar sports cars. Aside from this go-round, when have you ever heard of a Mustang or Camaro being tested on the ring? How's about ... n e v e r ...

Most cars don't really get tested on any real race track. That said, nearly anyone here, racers or not, is familiar with VIR and it is probably the most used source for bragging rights within the media, specifically thanks to the Lightning Lap. Until this year, I've never heard anyone ask about what any pony car ran on the ring. I've never known anyone to take their car to the ring, though I'm sure private people have done so in the past.

Ring times will be strictly for bragging rights, but VIR is a track nearly any America COULD go to if they want... no passport required, no shipping and handling costs necessary.

Irunelevens

VIR may be convenient, but it is just not as testing as the Nurburgring.. And no pony cars have been tested there before because honestly, they kinda stunk overall.

It'llrun

No pony car had been tested there because no pony car manufacturer ever thought it was worth the trouble to ship them over just because... The majority of Mustang owners never go to Europe, let alone live in Germany.

VIR is more convenient, which is almost assuredly one good reason so many cars are tested there. Much less money is spent going there than to Germany... from America, anyway.

I'm not taking anything away from the ring, just pointing out the obvious here. It's not convenient. Most people will never get near it. It's very expensive to get there and test. Suitable tracks are available in America.

JD_AMG

They likely didn't want to shell out the extra money for better development, hell the pre-05 muscle cars were pretty cheap... [cheap parts and cheaply built honestly, not saying thats all bad though] - many things were carry over from the 80s for god sakes...
But if the manufacturers did, they would have a HELL of a lot better cars for the time. For the 4th gen something as simple as better bumps stops, more suspension travel and better shock valving is a HUGE HUGE difference that would have made the cars much more enjoyable.

You clearly don't get it.
Being fast around the 'ring doesn't mean you are just solely fast around the 'ring, it usually means you have a ridiculously well balanced car that is fast EVERYWHERE, including the street (on less than perfect backroads).
AGAIN, you can be fast around some smooth tracks yet slow and unstable around others because your car may be too stiffly sprung, or not have enough suspension travel etc. The 'ring basically provides everything, every scenario, all on one track.

No doubt about that, but VIR only provides a fraction of what the 'ring does, or what some twisty backroads might.

gocartone

iTrader: (4)

I think it's you that doesn't get it. What good are lap times from a 12+ mile track done with different drivers in different conditions? Even the best drivers can't go around the whole Ring perfect in one run, yet you think different drivers/conditions make for a fair comparison. Sure, it might show a car is good at everything, but you can't saw one car is better than the other just based on times. Look up some of the cars that have been run by manufactures and then by magazine drivers, in some cases there is a 40+sec difference between the two.

I think a MUCH better way to compare cars is by Top Gears track, only because it's the same driver every time.

JD_AMG

Im not talking about black and white track times, im talking about developing/tuning the car using the 'ring.
As far as different day different driver, its not like manufacturers throw the car out for one lap and call it a day. After the car is tweaked there, they can spend weeks going for a time.

LS1LT1

iTrader: (16)

Not necessarily. The Stig is always masked by a helmet for good reasons...among those reasons could be that it's actually not the same driver every single time for all of these years.
But I do hear what you're saying otherwise.

firebird99

iTrader: (2)

Well I guess based upon that theory we shouldn't hold any judgement about the quarter mile times of the ZL1 or the GT500 because they were tested by different drivers on different days on different tracks with different conditions.

firebird99

iTrader: (2)

.....Sorry ^^^^^ on the cell phone

gocartone

iTrader: (4)

Are you really going to try and argue with me that a 1/4 mile drag track leaves as much room for error as a 12+ mile road course?? 0.200 seconds worth of mistakes at a 1/4 mile drag track is about equal to 10 seconds worth of mistakes on a 12.9 mile road course.

firebird99

iTrader: (2)

No it was more of an example but you did provide a good base for the argument that could be made based upon percentages. You had a good point about all things being fare in order to have a equal comparison and it should hold true to all comparisons not just ones you feel is to long to be accurate.

gocartone

iTrader: (4)

I never said two drivers at different tracks/conditions/etc are as good as gold when it comes to 1/4 mile drag racing either, but they do give you a better judgement. A car that's running ~8mph is going to walk the slower car, and a car that's running mid-high 11s on average is going to beat one that's running low-mid 12s on average. Ring times don't give you anything like averages or trap speeds to go by, just what one drivers best ever time was.

Irunelevens

We're not just talking about comparing times, the main focus is car development. The kind that can't be done nearly as well at any other track in the world.

gocartone

iTrader: (4)

I'm not saying that it isn't one of the best places in the world to engineer a car, because it is, but it is a HORRIBLE track to use for dick measuring.

Irunelevens

Agreed. But in the case of the cars in this discussion, it's pretty safe to say that if the GT500 beats the ZL1 time, it is in fact faster. Considering the driver and conditions on the ZL1 runs.

gocartone

iTrader: (4)

Agreed on that too, I was going after the people that argue the ZL1 is a better track car because it might be a little quicker around the 'Ring, but I think Ford is out to beat them there too. If the ZL1 beats the GT500 by more than 10 seconds around the 'Ring I would say it's a safe bet that its a better handling car, anything less than that and it's too close to call IMO.

Irunelevens

Agreed

firebird99

iTrader: (2)

Well after all of it seems we agree on most of it and for the record my argument on using the ring as a standard was never because I hope the ZL1 is faster because I know it can't match the mph of a GT500 even with a stiff tailwind and even if it does handle better that high speed track wouldn't work in the ZL1's favor. I just like what the track has to offer and it seemed to me that people were more concerned that they could never race their car on it do they didn't like it.

1ltcap

i understand what you guys are saying about the 'ring. but then again, both manufacturers have their own test tracks to work on odd conditions. for everything else, they have a multitude of race tracks within a couple hours of them.