Car and Driver 2020 GT500 First Test - 11.4 @ 132 quarter mile

[DavidHuff]

So....

Not even remotely close to mineshaft.

You are are correct no mineshaft conditions, the DA was 300/500 on that day with a great track prep.

Sponsored

 

[9secondko]

I don't think anyone is debating that the GT500 is a lot faster than the ZL1 with that mph delta.

Putting that power down efficiently on the street is a valid test, though.

So, you missed my point. The 500 puts the power down on the street much better than C and D is saying.

 

[9secondko]

Honestly, the plan is to hit everything as hard as we can, as fast as we can;
Dealer to dyno, shoemaker is in town he'll tune it, if we can get w track open we'll run it

Dang. You’re a savage.

 

[Deviruchi]

I don't think anyone is debating that the GT500 is a lot faster than the ZL1 with that mph delta.

Putting that power down efficiently on the street is a valid test, though.

Valid yes, useful no. What's the point of bad surface results if you can't compare it to anyone else's testing? Why even do a 1/4 mile in the first place? You can see from this thread alone is just adds noise to the otherwise useful data already out there.

 

[bluebeastsrt]

Valid yes, useful no. What's the point of bad surface results if you can't compare it to anyone else's testing? Why even do a 1/4 mile in the first place? You can see from this thread alone is just adds noise to the otherwise useful data already out there.

Im with you. Its a common sense thing. Vs a magazine racer point of view. I could lose a zero to sixty battle. To a mid 13 second WRX on the street. And I'm making 750ish to the wheels. But at the drag strip. Im ripping off high 9s low 10s depending on time of year. And the same WRX isn't even in the same zip code. You'd think the magazines would have a drag strip. That would let them run for free. Just for the publicity. Hell even drag strip numbers are fuzzy with out context.

 

[Droopy1592]

Im with you. Its a common sense thing. Vs a magazine racer point of view. I could lose a zero to sixty battle. To a mid 13 second WRX on the street. And I'm making 750ish to the wheels. But at the drag strip. Im ripping off high 9s low 10s depending on time of year. And the same WRX isn't even in the same zip code. You'd think the magazines would have a drag strip. That would let them run for free. Just for the publicity. Hell even drag strip numbers are fuzzy with out context.

Or just use some of that ad money to hit up a local strip. It doesn’t cost much. Simple. It baffles the mind.

 

[Big Boss]

I may have used “across the country” too liberally. It’s definitely in Florida and in some major strips in the southeast.

Not doubting its a thing, just never seen it at any of the tracks near me is all lol

You guys are joking right? Roll racing became a thing when cars became too powerful to launch on the street, and when people were tired of breaking drivetrain components. You have low tier events at dragstrips for $15, up to Nascar tracks that cost $250 and up. Different breed of cars to race at each repective level


]

Learn something new everyday. I had just never personally seen it or seen it advertised at any of the local venues near me is all.

 

[Arkarius]

Valid yes, useful no. What's the point of bad surface results if you can't compare it to anyone else's testing? Why even do a 1/4 mile in the first place? You can see from this thread alone is just adds noise to the otherwise useful data already out there.

Because it's a street car. It's not a drag only car. These cars will be driven on the street. Drag strip data is not the only useful data. Some of us could care less what the car does on a prepped surface.

Do I think that is the best it can do? Probably not, but that's what it did that day.

 

[V00D00]

Because it's a street car. It's not a drag only car. These cars will be driven on the street. Drag strip data is not the only useful data. Some of us could care less what the car does on a prepped surface.

maybe, but the same metrics apply. they left out 60' on purpose, without that the ET is worthless, and the mph tells the story

whats the difference between a 2.0 60, 11.4 et/ 125mph and a 2.4 60', 11.4et/132mph? ill tell you, the driver, not the car lololol

 

[BmacIL]

Dang. You’re a savage.

Cars are meant to be driven, particularly these ones.

 

[bluebeastsrt]

maybe, but the same metrics apply. they left out 60' on purpose, without that the ET is worthless, and the mph tells the story

whats the difference between a 2.0 60, 11.4 et/ 125mph and a 2.4 60', 11.4et/132mph? ill tell you, the driver, not the car lololol

I promise that point is going over heads. As I type this.

 

[Droopy1592]

I promise that point is going over heads. As I type this.

True. I’m drunk coming in after a late night and a liquid breakfast, so forgive me. I hope it isn’t going over mine. When I first saw the time, I remember watching a few of the Vegas reviewers fudge up times by really being late off of the light. Let off of the brakes w/ LC and there seems to be a good fraction of a second before the car launches in a lot of the reviews. The last few DCT cars I’ve driven by Porsche or Audi/VW launch much earlier after brake release than the GT500 based off of the eye test. I’m guessing speed phenom factored this in on his launches because he seems to nail it at the light while many of the other reviewers appear to miscalculate the launch. Obviously many of them listed their times but excluded RTs. I know, different conditions, but I noticed a trend on quite a few of the Vegas reviews.

 

[martinjlm]

True. I’m drunk coming in after a late night and a liquid breakfast, so forgive me. I hope it isn’t going over mine. When I first saw the time, I remember watching a few of the Vegas reviewers fudge up times by really being late off of the light. Let off of the brakes w/ LC and there seems to be a good fraction of a second before the car launches in a lot of the reviews. The last few DCT cars I’ve driven by Porsche or Audi/VW launch much earlier after brake release than the GT500 based off of the eye test. I’m guessing speed phenom factored this in on his launches because he seems to nail it at the light while many of the other reviewers appear to miscalculate the launch. Obviously many of them listed their times but excluded RTs. I know, different conditions, but I noticed a trend on quite a few of the Vegas reviews.

Could be true, but every test & tune that I've gone to doesn't include reaction time in the 1/4 mile time. You could literally eat a sandwich when the light turns green, then launch and get a good time. I would expect that Vegas was set up the same way, given the broad range of skillsets of the writers there for the event.

 

[millhouse]

Could be true, but every test & tune that I've gone to doesn't include reaction time in the 1/4 mile time. You could literally eat a sandwich when the light turns green, then launch and get a good time. I would expect that Vegas was set up the same way, given the broad range of skillsets of the writers there for the event.

You could be on to something. Combining hot dog eating with drag racing. Hmmm.

 

[Arkarius]

I promise that point is going over heads. As I type this.

Analyzing a few numbers isn't rocket science. Only looking at the data that you believe is relevant, and making assumptions about the rest, is totally on you if that's what you want to do. But, I'm certainly not missing the point, because I'm looking at all the data and not crafting it to fit my desired perspective.

We know that the GT500 is fast, but why wasn't it able to put the power down that day? You can just say that they all suck as drivers, or you can discuss why it wasn't able to hook up.

Sponsored