It seems the 2011 Mustang Gt's performance was "Inflated" vs 2010 Camaro
#401
Can you show us a new SS that ran 10's within even a month of production release? I'm positive it could happen... Did it? I'm not concerned about the 1st couple days... It's safe to say that didn't happen, regardless of possibilities.
I can't... It may have been a compound sentence, but it wasn't a difficult sentence.
I can't... It may have been a compound sentence, but it wasn't a difficult sentence.
#402
#403
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (4)
There is absolutely nothing cost effective about boring and stroking, especially in a N/A combination where you want all parts to "match" to get the most out of them.
After bolt ons, everyhting else goes out the window anyways. It turns into "who can spend more on modding thier car".
Stock manuals are running into the mid 12s at ~112 and I have seen a stock auto that ran 12.73 at 115.x. The car is lighter and putting 370-380 to the tire bone stock. It is certianly worthy of some "hype".
After bolt ons, everyhting else goes out the window anyways. It turns into "who can spend more on modding thier car".
Stock manuals are running into the mid 12s at ~112 and I have seen a stock auto that ran 12.73 at 115.x. The car is lighter and putting 370-380 to the tire bone stock. It is certianly worthy of some "hype".
a stock auto trapping 115? are you sure?
#404
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (6)
But who really cares about when it was ran. Does it magically make it faster? If you guys are just too naive to see these cars are very close stock or modded then I don't know what to tell you. Are you too hard headed to see the facts?
Edit: It was august.
https://ls1tech.com/forums/2010-cama...-2010-10s.html
I did misinterpret that. The cars have been in the hands of shops for almost a month though.
Last edited by Dark SS; 05-27-2010 at 07:34 PM.
#405
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (6)
Dark SS and AdmiralB, they just came out a day ago and already in the 10's. You know for a fact that the same cannot be said for the 2010 SS. Come on You cant be that biased bro, if that's not the case then You are just in denial. It is what it is... PERIOD. Bore diameter. stroke, C.I.D. etc... Doesnt mean crap. Its just gonna get faster. This is just the beginning. I own GM's but Im not that ignorant and hard headed to be so biased. No matter what You think, it's tail light city for the new SS. Im done with this thread. P.S. its okay for someone to be faster than You. You're just gonna have to accept it cause thats life.
#406
TECH Regular
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Germantown, MD
Posts: 413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh boy, this post makes a ton of sense. First off the car has been in the hands of shops for almost a month. They have been in the 10's for about a week. I'm just failing to see a GT that is faster than a tested SS. It just seems the learning curve has been a lot shorter for the GT. I posted this on another forum, I don't know why people really didn't test the limits of the SS when it came out. There is a handful of owners actually pushing the SS and it is performing just as amazingly as the GT. You can't find a stock SS tested on just D/R's still to this point. I guess since I follow the SS I know what it is capable of. The GT is an impressive car, especially compared to the car it replaces. I just don't see how it's an automatic lock to embarrass an LS3 SS. Most of you in this thread take it as that I'm not impressed with the 5.0 and that's not the case. I have been saying all along that it's a drivers race and it still is. It's OK for someone to be faster, there are a lot of people out there faster than me. But this is a true battle, not a one sided fight.
#407
Since we're not really on topic anyway... Thought I'd bring this either back up, or up for the 1st time.
I never fully read the story till tonight and I've been reading way too much lately... But the article I see now(in your link) says the 2011 GT ran the 1/4 in 13.0 @110.6...
Same as above, but the 2011 GT pulled .91 g's on I/L's 200' skid pad... the 1992 Mustang GT pulled a .88 on M/T's 300' skid pad.
http://www.insideline.com/2011-ford-mustang.html
2011 Mustang quicker than the 2010 Camaro SS??? Edmund's begs to differ.
2011 Mustang GT: 1/4-mile (sec. @ mph) 13.3 @ 107.3
2010 Camaro SS: 1/4-mile (sec. @ mph) 13.1 @ 110.4
2011 Mustang quicker than the 2010 Camaro SS??? Edmund's begs to differ.
2011 Mustang GT: 1/4-mile (sec. @ mph) 13.3 @ 107.3
2010 Camaro SS: 1/4-mile (sec. @ mph) 13.1 @ 110.4
Same as above, but the 2011 GT pulled .91 g's on I/L's 200' skid pad... the 1992 Mustang GT pulled a .88 on M/T's 300' skid pad.
#408
TECH Regular
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: St. Louis
Posts: 470
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh boy, this post makes a ton of sense. First off the car has been in the hands of shops for almost a month. They have been in the 10's for about a week. I'm just failing to see a GT that is faster than a tested SS. It just seems the learning curve has been a lot shorter for the GT. I posted this on another forum, I don't know why people really didn't test the limits of the SS when it came out. There is a handful of owners actually pushing the SS and it is performing just as amazingly as the GT. You can't find a stock SS tested on just D/R's still to this point. I guess since I follow the SS I know what it is capable of. The GT is an impressive car, especially compared to the car it replaces. I just don't see how it's an automatic lock to embarrass an LS3 SS. Most of you in this thread take it as that I'm not impressed with the 5.0 and that's not the case. I have been saying all along that it's a drivers race and it still is. It's OK for someone to be faster, there are a lot of people out there faster than me. But this is a true battle, not a one sided fight.
Now, I'll agree it is close race and it woudn't take much to very quickly level the playing field but bone stock its more than a drivers race. Thats my opinion you ain't gotta agree with it. A little bias you may be, thats cool some of us are but at some point all 2010 camaro owners are gonna have to deal with the reality that there carrying around 250lbs of extra weight. Now maybe these guys are figuring out how to get the weight down and still go out and call the car stock. That may be I know guys that do that. Now if they can figure out how to get some extra weight off the car, sure I'll buy mid 12s then.
#409
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (6)
How can you call all of these 5.0's stock then. You weren't there to see it. How does an internet post or a magazine article prove it was stock. They could be just as modified as you claim the SS was. Just because multiple shops, yes shops not actual people, are running high 12's that doesn't mean everyone will. Please show me a link to an actual Ford document that rates the 5.0 @ 12.6 in the 1/4 mile. Where is Ford shoving it down GM throats? It seems like you along with a lot of people in this thread are living on a one way street. I now most of you are pissed that the 5th gen weighs so much but it still runs very impressive numbers. Now maybe I am more brand loyal than you but please show me a vid or a time slip of a 5.0 running faster than a 12.58 stock. If the 5.0 ran a 12.2 stock I could see everyone's point but that doesn't exist. Why can't people see past the weight and look at actual performance numbers?
Thank you for adding this little snippet of bullshit. Perhaps you should trade in your LS1 for an LS3 since they have been out for a shorter time and posted a faster number. I fail to see how throwing nitrous, bolt-on's and full suspension is leaving room for improvement. Obviously the 5.0 will run faster with more mods. The 5th gen has had multiple cars in the 9's already. What point is being proven??
Thank you for adding this little snippet of bullshit. Perhaps you should trade in your LS1 for an LS3 since they have been out for a shorter time and posted a faster number. I fail to see how throwing nitrous, bolt-on's and full suspension is leaving room for improvement. Obviously the 5.0 will run faster with more mods. The 5th gen has had multiple cars in the 9's already. What point is being proven??
Last edited by Dark SS; 05-28-2010 at 01:09 AM.
#410
How can you call all of these 5.0's stock then. You weren't there to see it. How does an internet post or a magazine article prove it was stock. They could be just as modified as you claim the SS was. Just because multiple shops, yes shops not actual people, are running high 12's that doesn't mean everyone will. Please show me a link to an actual Ford document that rates the 5.0 @ 12.6 in the 1/4 mile. Where is Ford shoving it down GM throats? It seems like you along with a lot of people in this thread are living on a one way street. I now most of you are pissed that the 5th gen weighs so much but it still runs very impressive numbers. Now maybe I am more brand loyal than you but please show me a vid or a time slip of a 5.0 running faster than a 12.58 stock. If the 5.0 ran a 12.2 stock I could see everyone's point but that doesn't exist. Why can't people see past the weight and look at actual performance numbers?
Thank you for adding this little snippet of bullshit. Perhaps you should trade in your LS1 for an LS3 since they have been out for a shorter time and posted a faster number. I fail to see how throwing nitrous, bolt-on's and full suspension is leaving room for improvement. Obviously the 5.0 will run faster with more mods. The 5th gen has had multiple cars in the 9's already. What point is being proven??
Thank you for adding this little snippet of bullshit. Perhaps you should trade in your LS1 for an LS3 since they have been out for a shorter time and posted a faster number. I fail to see how throwing nitrous, bolt-on's and full suspension is leaving room for improvement. Obviously the 5.0 will run faster with more mods. The 5th gen has had multiple cars in the 9's already. What point is being proven??
I think you may have missed the sarcasm in Johns00Z28's post...
Oh, and I agree about the one sided argument, especially these moron GT500 fanboys who can't envision GM coming out with a product that will beat their beloved car. But, but, they can just turn up the boost on the GT500, then GM better watch out. That is the stupidest crap I ever heard, they refuse to see that whatever trick Ford does, GM can do the same. They also conveniently forget that GM is starting with a larger displacement engine. With ultra lightweight wheels, and an aluminum block, and an M6, the new GT500 still weighs 3820lbs. A Z28 equipped with an LSA and a few weight saving measures will be within 50-100 lbs of that, including an IRS rear, so I fail to see how GM is so far off on the weight. Tighten the suspension and the Camaro will waste the mustang on the track and still ride nicer on the street too. I think the Ford fanboys are jumping all over every win they can find with this 5.0 because they realize that if GM makes a few tweaks to the detuned LS3, they will have lost any advantage they have.
Last edited by rayhawk; 05-28-2010 at 07:15 AM.
#411
11 Second Club
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Monroe, Iowa
Posts: 1,024
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All that it was for Evolution, was media hype, they did the same thing with the GT500. Could a 2010 SS go tens with Bolt-ons, gears, bogarts and 100 shot like JPC did; absolutely. OrangeChevyII did it without gears and with 18" drag radials out back on regular Z06 Wheels. Whether it happened one day or two months after the release of the car it really doesn't matter one bit. I'm not sure why nobody pushed this car hard right at release, I think it's mainly because people already knew the potential of the LS3 and didn't see a need to push it immediately.
Last edited by Camaro Z; 05-28-2010 at 09:45 AM.
#412
TECH Regular
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: St. Louis
Posts: 470
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How can you call all of these 5.0's stock then. You weren't there to see it. How does an internet post or a magazine article prove it was stock. They could be just as modified as you claim the SS was. Just because multiple shops, yes shops not actual people, are running high 12's that doesn't mean everyone will. Please show me a link to an actual Ford document that rates the 5.0 @ 12.6 in the 1/4 mile. Where is Ford shoving it down GM throats? It seems like you along with a lot of people in this thread are living on a one way street. I now most of you are pissed that the 5th gen weighs so much but it still runs very impressive numbers. Now maybe I am more brand loyal than you but please show me a vid or a time slip of a 5.0 running faster than a 12.58 stock. If the 5.0 ran a 12.2 stock I could see everyone's point but that doesn't exist. Why can't people see past the weight and look at actual performance numbers?
It ain't about being a ford fan boy, im not. I have no plans to buy one, its about keeping it real. We know damn well if this SS was 250lbs lighter it too would be a CONSISTENT mid to high 12 second car all day regardless of who was driving it and this wouldn't even be a discussion.
#413
Evolution Performance has had theirs for close to a month, and started off seeing how fast they could go N/A. Then they Dynoed on the spray and announced their intentions to go to the track within the next couple days. JPC racing then went and bought a retail car, and brought it straight to the shop where they installed a spool, gears, exhaust, spray, etc. The next day, the went to the track in an attempt to be the first one in the 10s with the new car and succeeded. Evo went the following morning and did the same thing. JPC literally had their car for less than 24 hours when they ran 10s.
#415
TECH Enthusiast
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Louisiana, USA
Posts: 700
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree with you whole heartedly.....these two cars are capable of giving each other all that the other can handle at the track....stock or modded. Some people are always going to want to crown one car the winner over the other, but I honestly see this one as being too close to call that definitively. I still prefer to take the wait and see approach. We'll start seeing privately owned 5.0's hitting the tracks and posting times as the year moves on.
#416
How can you call all of these 5.0's stock then. You weren't there to see it. How does an internet post or a magazine article prove it was stock. They could be just as modified as you claim the SS was. Just because multiple shops, yes shops not actual people, are running high 12's that doesn't mean everyone will. Please show me a link to an actual Ford document that rates the 5.0 @ 12.6 in the 1/4 mile. Where is Ford shoving it down GM throats? It seems like you along with a lot of people in this thread are living on a one way street. I now most of you are pissed that the 5th gen weighs so much but it still runs very impressive numbers. Now maybe I am more brand loyal than you but please show me a vid or a time slip of a 5.0 running faster than a 12.58 stock. If the 5.0 ran a 12.2 stock I could see everyone's point but that doesn't exist. Why can't people see past the weight and look at actual performance numbers?
And what "Shop" actually races a car? It seems to me that those cars are being driven by people... yes, people, not shops. People drive cars, buildings do not. Buildings can house, protect or even damage a vehicle, but they cannot actually drive one... Stupid argument, period. And no, while you may believe that all shops have pro drivers at their beck and call, almost zero shops actually have such a driver. I'm only guessing here, but my GUESS is that more than 99% of all vehicle owners are also the person who races their cars.
I'm not arguing against the performance of the new SS. I think the two are very close, and do believe the GT has more advantages when stock... That said, I'm not going to knock the new GT just because it's not a GM product and I don't care what website we're on, I don't expect others to either. THAT is the epitome of "fanboy" all alone.
My thinking is, when the temps cool down and people get more seat time, don't be upset to see new GT's clicking off 12.4's... stock. It may never happen, but considering how cars typically react to cooler air, I'm hardly going to be surprised to see a car just like the one which ran 12.58 managing quicker times when it's 30 or more degrees cooler outside, particularly with adequate seat time. I suspect gearing other than 3:31 may prove helpful too, and they apparently offer 3.55's or 3.73's.
The Mustang is still lighter, and lacks only about 15hp on paper... RWHP seems to be even closer, and the 3 hundred pound difference may really show up in better conditions, depending on "as run" weight. Some drivers are heavier than others, some will have their baseball gear or school books in the car...
As for seeing past weight alone, okay... To that end, the Mustang stops shorter, skid pad's better and seems, according to those who've driven both on track, apparently handles better, despite it's SRA(which I find to be an incredible advantage anyway). IRS is great, for street driving... On the track, a well balanced and properly adjusted SRA car has been a proven performer for decades. And frankly, I personally believe Ford got this right, period. The common Mustang buyer WANTS an SRA, not IRS and I suspect most, of not close, Camaro owners would opt to stick with a good SRA as well, particularly if GM set it up like Ford does.
#417
Why does it matter when it was done, rather if it was done. I just don't understand what the big deal is with the Mustang getting to the 10's faster than the Camaro. That whole deal was just Evolutions obsession with being "the first to the 11's and 10's!". I think its funny that somebody under-cut them and beat them to the 10's honestly.
Evidently people already knew the potential of the new 5.0... and they went out to show everyone else in short order. So far so good. Doesn't matter to me because I have no intention to go buy a new car and I have the ability to appreciate cars no matter what. I've HAD to walk before, so I ain't gonna complain about whether or not a car runs 12's on the 1/4 mile... I want want that COMPLETES the 1/4 mile and continues to run while I get wherever I'm going. My race car sits unoccupied nearly 100% of the time... I couldn't care less what other cars do. All that matters to me is they're NOT sitting somewhere blocking traffic!
#419
I think you may have missed the sarcasm in Johns00Z28's post...
Oh, and I agree about the one sided argument, especially these moron GT500 fanboys who can't envision GM coming out with a product that will beat their beloved car. But, but, they can just turn up the boost on the GT500, then GM better watch out. That is the stupidest crap I ever heard, they refuse to see that whatever trick Ford does, GM can do the same. They also conveniently forget that GM is starting with a larger displacement engine. With ultra lightweight wheels, and an aluminum block, and an M6, the new GT500 still weighs 3820lbs. A Z28 equipped with an LSA and a few weight saving measures will be within 50-100 lbs of that, including an IRS rear, so I fail to see how GM is so far off on the weight. Tighten the suspension and the Camaro will waste the mustang on the track and still ride nicer on the street too. I think the Ford fanboys are jumping all over every win they can find with this 5.0 because they realize that if GM makes a few tweaks to the detuned LS3, they will have lost any advantage they have.
Oh, and I agree about the one sided argument, especially these moron GT500 fanboys who can't envision GM coming out with a product that will beat their beloved car. But, but, they can just turn up the boost on the GT500, then GM better watch out. That is the stupidest crap I ever heard, they refuse to see that whatever trick Ford does, GM can do the same. They also conveniently forget that GM is starting with a larger displacement engine. With ultra lightweight wheels, and an aluminum block, and an M6, the new GT500 still weighs 3820lbs. A Z28 equipped with an LSA and a few weight saving measures will be within 50-100 lbs of that, including an IRS rear, so I fail to see how GM is so far off on the weight. Tighten the suspension and the Camaro will waste the mustang on the track and still ride nicer on the street too. I think the Ford fanboys are jumping all over every win they can find with this 5.0 because they realize that if GM makes a few tweaks to the detuned LS3, they will have lost any advantage they have.
Its nice that you know so much about are car that isn't built yet. You should be aware of a few things about the 2011 Shelby however. The 2011 Shebly just ran 2.58.48 at VIR [see Video] this is a 9 sec improvement over the 2010 Shelby To give you perspective The 2007 Chevrolet Corvette Z06 ran 2:58.2 and the 2010 Chevrolet Corvette Grand Sport ran 2:58.8. The 2009 Cadillac CTS-V ran 3:04.0. The 2007 Lotus Exige S ran 3:04.5. The 2010 Chevrolet Camaro SS ran 3:09.5. So I wouldn't Depend on the not yet to be built Z28 to " waste the mustang on the track" I'll be surprised if it out runs the C6 Z06.
2011 Shelby VIR
VIR Times
Last edited by FOG52; 05-28-2010 at 11:04 PM.