2017 CHEVROLET CAMARO ZL1 VS. 2017 FORD MUSTANG SHELBY GT350R: THE FOREVER WAR

To arrive at the most apples-to-apples comparison of N-ring lap times, it would be the Sport Auto test (which is still imperfect, but at least the cars are not modified and driven by the same person). GM (and many other manufacturers) have a long history of skewing lap times in their favor.

http://rawautos.com/2012/02/uncooke...g-lap-times-are-flawed-how-it-can-be-changed/

mdmoore23 said:

This has been answered a few times. But, the added downforce is what's affecting the speed on the final straight. The regular ZL1 went over 180mph in the same spot. And to be clear the GT500 broke 200mph on a very long banked oval, not on the Nurburgring. There has never been any concert evidence of what it ran there.

Click to expand...

Again, the Nordschleife (Döttinger Höhe) is not a good place to measure max speed. Even the 180mph at "the same spot" is not a good gauge of the car's ability, because on that track there are too many variables to solve the equation.

The Nordshleife (one of two tracks at Nürburg) is good for apples to apples comparisons of what cars can do on a German road, because you can almost replicate what you do on the ring when you are on the Autobahn and b-roads...almost. Anyplace else, even in Europe, there is no comparison. For that matter, it is difficult to even compare Nordshleife to other tracks when looking at a car's tracking capabilities. It would be more accurate to use the N'burg Grand Prix track for that purpose.

For marketing there is value...one car accomplished X another accomplished Y on the same track. But again, the same would be more useful if done on VIR or Laguna Seca or the Mercedes track in Malsmheim; the results would be more widely applicable, because Nordshleife is so unique, despite having become somewhat of an industry standard for test tracks.

AGGT350 said:

Can someone please give some love to the Camaro :shrug:
"So if Ring times don’t mean much for the overall excellence of a production car, what’s the point in setting a time? Well, there is no point — except for marketing. Which leads to my next complaint about the times: virtually all of them are set by ringer cars. This goes double, triple, and quadruple for forced-induction cars. Given the ease with which some mook in a California strip mall can liberate an extra 200 hp from a supercharged or turbocharged V-8..."

BUT gotta love that NA V8 Mr. :ford: :hail:

Click to expand...

Jack is an idiot. For an American to say the 'ring means nothing is to insult Germany and all of Europe. Ferrari does not use it to sell cars or marketing. They don't need help.

roygriffin2020 said:

Jack is an idiot. For an American to say the 'ring means nothing is to insult Germany and all of Europe. Ferrari does not use it to sell cars or marketing. They don't need help.

Click to expand...

I agree with him that the Ring means nothing by American standards.

Edit: Nordschleife...GP track can be used to measure a car's track capabilities.

roygriffin2020 said:

Jack is an idiot. For an American to say the 'ring means nothing is to insult Germany and all of Europe. Ferrari does not use it to sell cars or marketing. They don't need help.

Click to expand...

Ummm he didn't say the track means nothing... he said the listed 'Ring "times" mean nothing, which is true.

They aren't regulated or sanctioned in any way. There is literally no 3rd party at all conducting inspections of the vehicles or even regulating where the lap officially begins/ends, how it is run, etc. Until that happens, there are infinite opportunities for OEM's to spin the table so that their lap times are better/appear better than is readily achievable with an actual production car.

Personally, I take the MotorTrend's Best Driver's Car lap times far more seriously. Why? Because they are all conducted in the exact same manner; same test equipment, same driver, same track, same day, same conditions. It is as close to "scientific" as you are going to get when it comes to comparing cars.

mdmoore23 said:

That was one of the most bogus comparisons I've ever watched. They clearly had picked the 350R before any testing was done. What they probably didn't realize was that the ZL1 would beat it in every performance metric. That same white ZL1 was 2 seconds faster than the 350R in the Ignition episode (faster than a Mclaren 570s). What exactly is the 350R better at on track? Yet it wins because of its "unrefinement" essentially. Get outta here! I know we all live for our home teams to win, but give credit where it's due. The ZL1 is simply the better car performance wise, and the 1LE package will only widen that gap. Oh, and it costs less and can actually be purchased without the mandatory pre lube.

Click to expand...

A Big, Boosted 6.2 L, pushrod eight...
But, 'unstrap' the blower and see what happens then.... it will 'limp' behind the 'R' in every category. A more compatable opponent would have been the Z/28 with LS7. However, you already know as to who the winner would be there

A few years ago, I had an SS with 1LE package..... And I was actually looking towards the newer model with more HP (455). However, when Chevrolet decided to change the shape.... it was a complete turn-off for me.... Especially the round shape of the hood. It somehow reminded me of my toilet seat.

H6G said:

A Big, Boosted 6.2 L, pushrod eight...
But, 'unstrap' the blower and see what happens then.... it will 'limp' behind the 'R' in every category. A more compatable opponent would have been the Z/28 with LS7. However, you already know as to who the winner would be there

A few years ago, I had an SS with 1LE package..... And I was actually looking towards the newer model with more HP (455). However, when Chevrolet decided to change the shape.... it was a complete turn-off for me.... Especially the round shape of the hood. It somehow reminded me of my toilet seat.

Click to expand...

With all due respect, you can't be serious. GM ALREADY HAS A 6.2L WITH THE BLOWER UNSTRAPPED! Its called the LT1. So when you "unstrap" the blower, You get the SS 1LE, which for purposes of this discussion, has the same lap time as the GT350R at Willow Springs. Or do you want to talk Corvette Grand Sport, which beats it by 2 seconds with that blower "unstrapped"? If you had a 1LE I would think you'd know this information. Besides, we're talking current generation cars here. The Z/28 is a last generation car on last generation's architecture.

You keep forgetting which site you're on. How about YOU give credit where it's due and concede that there's more to the experience of driving a car than simply a lap time and the R has been independently tested as acceling at those things?

Been funny watching you spin your wheels here (car pun!!!) You must be one of those guys who travels to away games to obnoxiously cheer on his favorite team...and then that lonely, nervous walk back to your car after the game is over.....

H6G said:

A Big, Boosted 6.2 L, pushrod eight...
But, 'unstrap' the blower and see what happens then.... it will 'limp' behind the 'R' in every category. A more compatable opponent would have been the Z/28 with LS7. However, you already know as to who the winner would be there

Click to expand...

Without the blower you'd have the LT1 with better internals and less compression ratio (10:1 instead of 11.5:1). So it would have a little less power. But GM made it with more compression to give it the power they needed. However we know GM could have made a higher displacement pushrod engine with over 500 hp. Both companies are capable of making both high HP NA and high HP forced induction engines. Doubting that is just silly.

Z28 vs the GT350R is not even a fair comparison since the Z28 was the previous generation Camaro and the R is the current generation Mustang. It would be like comparing the 14 GT500 to the 17 ZL1. Regardless tho the Z28 is no match for the R. The R wins in every performance category while offering more in the way of creature comforts and (arguably) looks nicer. I don't really care for either of these two car but if I had to pick one and if I could get the R at MSRP then that is what I would choose. But I wonder how the Z28 would do against the non-R.

luls

I totally pictured a dude walking back to his car after the game was over.

When discussing track times it's funny because the only people who don't care or regard those times are the people who can't use it to their advantage in an argument. And the only people who do regard them are the ones who can use them. But if Nurburgring times don't matter, then no track time matter. Even when people go to the track and race their "stock" cars. I mean, you tell the tech inspector your car is "stock" and they send you on your way without checking. Then you race your "stock" car, get a slip, and then post it and say "look what my car did". Meanwhile we're all on the honesty system and we all take what others say at face value. So if you can find fault with any track or any track time then all of them are suspect and shouldn't be respected.

mdmoore23 said:

That was one of the most bogus comparisons I've ever watched. They clearly had picked the 350R before any testing was done. What they probably didn't realize was that the ZL1 would beat it in every performance metric. That same white ZL1 was 2 seconds faster than the 350R in the Ignition episode (faster than a Mclaren 570s). What exactly is the 350R better at on track? Yet it wins because of its "unrefinement" essentially.

Click to expand...

Between cars with essentially the same performance - if you do the math the GT350R runs within a couple percent of the lap times of the far more powerful car. Hell, even its straightline stats are within 5%. Although I'd really, really hate to see it happen, suppose the GT350R was given a few psi of boost, as a flip-side comparison to a blower-less ZL1 against the current R?

Except for run-what-ya-brung-and-hope-ya-brung-enough timed competition with something of monetary value at stake, that's close enough for it to come down to subjectives. So sure, if you're racing for money or contingencies it makes sense to choose based solely on performance (or at least performance potential within any rule set).

There's something neat about "unrefinement" that seems to be escaping you, where a car is built for a singular purpose and intentionally flies in the face of what more conventional cars are about. Goes against the grain, and makes no apologies. Wasn't this the direction that the 5th gen Z/28 was aimed in?

Unrefinement is what hotrodding used to be, before Pro Street and Pro Touring and hugely expensive professional builds entered the picture, and what the post-WWII/Korean conflict sports roadsters were. Keep in mind that I'm not talking about the low level of technical refinement then compared with now; just about how cars in those unrefined niches compared in an overall sense against the more mainstream cars of their day. Their simplicity relative to other cars was part of their appeal. But I guess you had to be closer to those segments of the automotive hobby to appreciate that sort of thing.


The way I see it, driving in an overall sense is one part car, one part driver, and one part "road", and these factors don't carry equal weight (or, obviously, carry the same weighting among different people). In the real world, I'd rather be the guy driving the nominally slower car running closer than expected to the faster car's times than be the guy in the faster car wondering why I didn't "beat" the slower car by more than I did (implications being more about the relative driving skills than theoretical car performances).


Norm

4V Mayhem said:

When discussing track times it's funny because the only people who don't care or regard those times are the people who can't use it to their advantage in an argument. And the only people who do regard them are the ones who can use them.

Click to expand...

Generalizing never produces truth. Comments are focused on the realities of the Nordschleife, not on an argument about any specific car.

stanglife said:

You keep forgetting which site you're on. How about YOU give credit where it's due and concede that there's more to the experience of driving a car than simply a lap time and the R has been independently tested as acceling at those things?

Been funny watching you spin your wheels here (car pun!!!) You must be one of those guys who travels to away games to obnoxiously cheer on his favorite team...and then that lonely, nervous walk back to your car after the game is over.....

Click to expand...

But if someone is excelling (you can't spell) at those things and attained the same number on the same track, then wouldn't that be an experience at the same speed?

4V Mayhem said:

When discussing track times it's funny because the only people who don't care or regard those times are the people who can't use it to their advantage in an argument. And the only people who do regard them are the ones who can use them. But if Nurburgring times don't matter, then no track time matter. Even when people go to the track and race their "stock" cars. I mean, you tell the tech inspector your car is "stock" and they send you on your way without checking. Then you race your "stock" car, get a slip, and then post it and say "look what my car did". Meanwhile we're all on the honesty system and we all take what others say at face value. So if you can find fault with any track or any track time then all of them are suspect and shouldn't be respected.

Click to expand...

Exactly, then no track times mean anything, they are all used for marketing to sell cars, and they don't count if they are not all on the same same day, same driver, same track according to MF's logic.