2018 GT500 Twins?

[BruceH]

The only figures that I have seen is the 1LE SS is projected to beat the GT350 in the 0-60. I haven't seen any track data comparing the two. Most of the sites saying "1LE SS is faster than GT350!!!" are only using the 0-60 data.

Projected 0-60 are really worthless. The ZL-1 was projected to be super fast but they were dogs in straight line acceleration. Same with the SRT8 Challenger. I never did see a stock Challenger break 14 at a test and tune, never saw a Camaro break 13, this was a few years ago but my point is that magazine numbers are slanted to whoever is buying the most advertising. Especially when they post projected numbers, there is too much going on to project a number. Unless the manufacturer is spending a lot in advertising.

 

[07TGGT]

Magazines times don't mean shit when the lights drop to green on the tree. I agree with Bruce.

 

[Fosters]

I don't like how they do lap times either. In the motorcycle world if they have a shoot out between 2-8 bikes and they go to the track with them they run the same tires on all of them to level the playing field. There are literally SECONDS in a set of tires.

And that also prevents the manufacturers that are supplying the "ringers".....did I say ringers?........... I meant cars, from using ringer tires. It's not hard to get a stock looking tire made that has a much higher grip level. It's done ALL THE TIME.

When there can be up to 2-3sec in a set of tires they really should be taken out of the equation. The argument as to why they're not is "that's what the manufacturer spec'd them out with". Which is irrelevant when you're talking about lap times. Who the hell takes their car to a track day on the stock rubber? Maybe the first time they go? After that they're running on sticky-icky stuff. Well, most are.

I hear ya. It's a love-hate with Ford for that reason. Yes, it's nice that the car is cheaper because they saved a few bucks by putting bicycle tires on 420hp cars (235/50/18? really? there are minivans with bigger tires out there), but at the same time, it's always the first thing I usually replace on a mustang...

I always get a kick of the people getting into the whole "oh, so and so car is on all seasons vs so and so car is on super summer ultra sport mega cup 9000 tires!".

orly? I dunno, I'm on et streets.

 

[Candy10]

Discussion for another day, but does anyone besides me see negligence on the part of the manufacturers for the small tires they put on modern, powerful cars?

 

[weather man]

Projected 0-60 are really worthless. The ZL-1 was projected to be super fast but they were dogs in straight line acceleration. Same with the SRT8 Challenger. I never did see a stock Challenger break 14 at a test and tune, never saw a Camaro break 13, this was a few years ago but my point is that magazine numbers are slanted to whoever is buying the most advertising. Especially when they post projected numbers, there is too much going on to project a number. Unless the manufacturer is spending a lot in advertising.

It is interesting that the S550 IRS seems more drag friendly that chevy also.

 

[Department Of Boost]

Discussion for another day, but does anyone besides me see negligence on the part of the manufacturers for the small tires they put on modern, powerful cars?

Shit, selling most people something faster than a Focus is negligence!

 

[Candy10]

Shit, selling most people something faster than a Focus is negligence!

LOL, true.

 

[Boaisy]

Discussion for another day, but does anyone besides me see negligence on the part of the manufacturers for the small tires they put on modern, powerful cars?

Especially an EcoBeast like the F-150. Just put 10" wide wheels on the things.

 

[Pentalab]

Discussion for another day, but does anyone besides me see negligence on the part of the manufacturers for the small tires they put on modern, powerful cars?

Agreed, bare minimum should be 285-40-18's or similar on 10" rims on all 4 x corners. For >500 crank hp, the rears should be a minimum of 11" wide, with a 305 or 315 tire. Skinny tires up front is stupid really. The fronts do all the braking and handling. You don't want huge stagger either, or the under steer will just get worse. The small difference in initial cost is minimal, esp when mass produced. From a safety point of view, it is negligence supplying narrow oem rims / tires. The GT-350 got it right with it's 295 front /305 rear...and the R version gets the 305 front /315 rear.

With a full tank of gas + driver, and one passenger, and some junk in the trunk, drive over the scales for an eye opener. With that much weight, the only thing holding you to the road is the small contact patch. 4 x 285 vs 4 x 235 amounts to a full 8" more rubber on the road. Not having any camber adjustment on the fronts of oem cars is just more negligence. -1.5 deg camber works wonders for a DD car. Funny thing is the oem S-550 cars have up to -2.7 deg camber for the rears, but still no front camber adjustment. All they had to do was install proper front strut mounts on any of these 05-16 cars...with some degree of camber adjustment.

 

[lostsoul]

I was mad at ford too , but I think some of you are forgetting NOW ford will let you add parts of the 350 to your GT order and still have it covered. That is huge and should bet the cumhairo if you get the stage 2 or 3. At least people now have options that are not too crazy

 

[DesertStang06]

I don't like how they do lap times either. In the motorcycle world if they have a shoot out between 2-8 bikes and they go to the track with them they run the same tires on all of them to level the playing field. There are literally SECONDS in a set of tires.

And that also prevents the manufacturers that are supplying the "ringers".....did I say ringers?........... I meant cars, from using ringer tires. It's not hard to get a stock looking tire made that has a much higher grip level. It's done ALL THE TIME.

When there can be up to 2-3sec in a set of tires they really should be taken out of the equation. The argument as to why they're not is "that's what the manufacturer spec'd them out with". Which is irrelevant when you're talking about lap times. Who the hell takes their car to a track day on the stock rubber? Maybe the first time they go? After that they're running on sticky-icky stuff. Well, most are.

Hellaciously late to this party.
But yes, and yes to the other political thread.

Mags have been fudging numbers for years.
Now we have YouTube channel reviews and such.

Not whining, But a prime example.

I watch a review, love the specs.
Drop $30-40k
Take it to the track (let's assume for simplicity I'm a god at the strip)

Still come nowhere near advertised claims...

Now I've a car payment and a slouch?

Nope.
They use IDEAL conditions.
Air density, weather, I'm willing to bed some of my armory their pump gas claims use a higher octane than 93..
Factor all that in and you get a car that looks amazing on paper.

Not knocking cars. Rather their advertising

 

[Deez-67]

http://nseavoice.com/cars/next-ford-mustang-shelby-gt500-flirting-with-740-horses-920014813.html

Next Ford Mustang Shelby GT500 Flirting With 740 Horses

Yes, you read the title right. Various reports on the next-gen Mustang Shelby GT500 have surfaced earlier today and they are all agreeing on one thing. It is that the Shelby GT500 will come out with 740hp to offer.



While Ford has yet to announce on the powertrain for the GT500, an insider is loud in claiming that the car will be equipped with a brand new 5L twin-turbo V8 engine dubbed as the EcoBeast. If the insider is right, then the next Shelby GT500 will not have to worry about killing the Chevrolet Camaro ZL1 or even outdoing the existing Mustang GT500.

The only certainty here is that the next Mustang Shelby GT500 will have its horses managed by Ford’s all-new 10-speed automatic gearbox. The transmission option was developed together with GM and it promises greater power management.

 

[AndrewS197]

I don't understand why people get so butt hurt about camaros being "better" than mustangs and Vice versa. It's a GOOD thing when car makers constantly out do each other. We, as consumers, get better cars.

I happen to love the new Camaro and I love the s550's as well...and I daily drive a Charger. Lol

 

[Department Of Boost]

If it makes 740 with turbo's it will make 900 tuned up with e85.

 

[Deez-67]

If it makes 740 with turbo's it will make 900 tuned up with e85.

True

 

[Boaisy]

http://nseavoice.com/cars/next-ford-mustang-shelby-gt500-flirting-with-740-horses-920014813.html

Next Ford Mustang Shelby GT500 Flirting With 740 Horses

Yes, you read the title right. Various reports on the next-gen Mustang Shelby GT500 have surfaced earlier today and they are all agreeing on one thing. It is that the Shelby GT500 will come out with 740hp to offer.



While Ford has yet to announce on the powertrain for the GT500, an insider is loud in claiming that the car will be equipped with a brand new 5L twin-turbo V8 engine dubbed as the EcoBeast. If the insider is right, then the next Shelby GT500 will not have to worry about killing the Chevrolet Camaro ZL1 or even outdoing the existing Mustang GT500.

The only certainty here is that the next Mustang Shelby GT500 will have its horses managed by Ford’s all-new 10-speed automatic gearbox. The transmission option was developed together with GM and it promises greater power management.

Problem is everyone is bouncing their "source" from HorsepowerKings, who have been wrong multiple times. If it makes 700hp+, then I'm all for it. I just don't trust anything HPK says.

 

[ILW84U]

If it makes 740 with turbo's it will make 900 tuned up with e85.

But will the rods hold up at 900???

 

[Department Of Boost]

Problem is everyone is bouncing their "source" from HorsepowerKings, who have been wrong multiple times. If it makes 700hp+, then I'm all for it. I just don't trust anything HPK says.

I don't think it will have TT's. But I'm 99% certain it will be the most powerful production car ever.

 

[s8v4o]

Smaller tires isn't as much about Ford being cheap with smaller tires as much as it is trying to keep fleet MPG's as high as possible. You can than the EPA for that.