Track Review - 2.3 High Performance v 5.0 GT

[BEERCHAMP]

I kept looking for sheep. Nice shifter-cart track. Now how do we get Americans to build something similar on the side of a pasture and hill

Or an occasional Kangaroo!

Sponsored

 

[mustangmango]

Interesting stuff, 2 seconds doesn't seem like a lot but it is.

 

[theruleslawyer]

Interesting stuff, 2 seconds doesn't seem like a lot but it is.

And 2 seconds on a tight track where the hp is hard to use.

 

[SVO MkII]

Interesting stuff, 2 seconds doesn't seem like a lot but it is.

And 2 seconds could easily be attributed to tires alone. Again, would be nice to see an "apples to apples" comparison.

 

[xSouthSyde]

It would've been nice if they had run both cars on the same tires. I have no experience with the PS4s, but I can tell you that the PZeros that came on my EB PP car were lousy on track.

Also, I noticed that neither car had a strut brace. That is standard on the PP cars here in the states. Although, the GT used in the video may not have been a PP car. It sounds like they made some of the GT PP equipment standard down there (brakes, wheels/tires, etc.).

Unfortunately our GT’s don’t come with the strut brace as standard, I think they are a combination of the PP1 and the Premium.

 

[TeeLew]

2.4 seconds, but the video looks like they were pushing the 2.3 far harder.

It's an easier car to push because it's a bit lighter and the power difference means that it's much less prone to biting the driver in the ass.

 

[TundraOnKings]

Aren’t the S550’s de-tuned on that side of the water? I never pay attention to any non-US version comparison because of this.

I didn’t know a HPP 2.3 existed lol. So it’s the Focus RS engine, PP Diff, GT brakes and sway bar, and Magneride, with corsa tires. Not bad, and cool they bumped up the EcoBoost. Looks like on a bigger track it did the Lightning Lap at 3:04 while the 18 PP 5.0 did 2:53.
Not bad.

 

[LSchicago]

Funny thing is that used to be called an export brace (some still do).

 

[mustangmango]

And 2 seconds could easily be attributed to tires alone. Again, would be nice to see an "apples to apples" comparison.

True but it's not always apples to apples at the lights

 

[SVO MkII]

True but it's not always apples to apples at the lights

Hmm, not exactly sure what this means in this context. But to reiterate my point, on a road course, tires make a huge difference. I don't know how much of a difference there is between the Michelins and the Pirellis on these two vehicles. But the best way to see which car is faster around the track, would be to put them on the same tire.

 

[SVO MkII]

Yes, that should be telling, in some respects. However, as I mentioned previously, I tried to some track days with the 220 TW Pirellis and they were awful. I have run Dunlop Star spec 200 TW tires on a '72 911 and they were fantastic. similarly, RE71 200 TW on a 944 Turbo, also awesome. Based on my previous experience with other 200 TW tires, I was expecting a lot more from the Pirellis. But it is certainly possible that the Michelins are just as bad.

I got some dedicated track wheels eventually for the Ecostang, and put Supercar 3Rs 100 TW on them. Out of this world!

 

[shogun32]

But the best way to see which car is faster around the track, would be to put them on the same tire.

indeed. Or take 10 minutes in the pits and swap the wheels between the cars and re-run. How does this NOT occur to "testers"? NOBODY gives a damn how a car performs on factory tires aside from a useless throwaway datapoint that no one who is remotely serious will care about nor duplicate.

 

[TeeLew]

I just removed my Pirelli 60 TW Corsa whatever and replaced them with 320 TW Firestones. For sure the Firestones are the faster tire. I doubt the Pirellis are that big of an advantage.

Sponsored