Is there an argument to be made that the 2016 GT350R is more better in some way than the later versions?

[Hack]

I remember the tramlining bugged me too. I figured out over time I could relax and let the car find an area on the road where the tires would pull less. I ended up really liking that feature of the car (it wants to turn). The GT350 does force the driver to be a little more aware and alert compared to most other vehicles. I'm sure the R CF wheels with Cup 2s amplify this tendency.

Sponsored

 

[IPOGT]

I remember the tramlining bugged me too. I figured out over time I could relax and let the car find an area on the road where the tires would pull less. I ended up really liking that feature of the car (it wants to turn). The GT350 does force the driver to be a little more aware and alert compared to most other vehicles. I'm sure the R CF wheels with Cup 2s amplify this tendency.

Those big ole honkers wanna go where they want don‘t they…But they grip like crazy and look cool.

 

[Hack]

Those big ole honkers wanna go where they want don‘t they…But they grip like crazy and look cool.

I think it's possible Ford also tuned the EPAS on GT350/R to allow more feedback from the road.

The Mach 1 HP style wheels/tires I have on my 2017 are wider than the tires from the 2016 GT350 (305 vs. 295). I have similar TW rating Super Sport vs. Pilot Sport 4S tires. The 2017 PP1 doesn't tramline at all. Kinda sucks in my opinion. I realize Ford got a lot of complaints about tramlining, but I didn't mind it.

 

[Blwnsmoke]

Let's hear it. Just as a hypothetical...

I have recently owned a 2019 tramliner GT350R and a 2020 bulldozer GT350R... Now I'm going back to the 2016 because I think I found the right car in the spec that I like.

No, it is just the most bestest.

 

[TonyNJ]

So, maybe it's time to move on from this platform

I think you're correct. It's time to move on.

 

[Zombo]

I think if you asked Randy Pobst, he prefers the early 350. In his initial review/test of a 2016, he gushed praise. When his revisited a newer one years later ('18 or '19?) he complained about too much understeer.

 

[Markmarkmr]

I think if you asked Randy Pobst, he prefers the early 350. In his initial review/test of a 2016, he gushed praise. When his revisited a newer one years later ('18 or '19?) he complained about too much understeer.

Interesting. Do you have the link for that interview or video?

 

[Zombo]

2016 - this was one of the go to videos I was watching as I sought out my 350 at the time.

https://www.motortrend.com/videos/0...0-an-8200-rpm-muscle-car-to-shame-sports-cars

Newer model - this isn't the video I was referring to, but Randy also complained about understeer here. The video I was looking for started with a review of the changes that were made to that year 350 - may have been 2019? When did they change the tires of the 4 seat 350 to Sport Cup 2s?

 

[PP0001]

My frame of reference is a Sunbeam Tiger.

Now that is a FUN car and no one would call it a pig.

Back in the late 80's I was auto crossing a couple of vehicles ('86 Dodge Omni GLH & '87 Mustang LX 5.0 Notchback) in the Pacific Northwest and came up against a couple of Mark II Sunbeam Tigers.

Started to campaign a third unit namely a '65 Mustang 2+2 K-Code 289 but eventually backed off due lack of time and extra cost. Used to be able to redline that engine at ~7,000 RPM which was quite impressive back some ~38 years ago.

I remember the Mark II Tiger's weighing in at ~2,550 which was extremely light when they launched in 1966 but even between the Rootes Group and Carroll Shelby modifying these cars were not all that fast especially when up against a 1967 TVR Tuscan which were outfitted with a K-code 289 and were also somewhat lighter than a Sunbeam Tiger.

Ran up against a TVR Tuscan a couple of times and there were very impressive to say the least.

 

[dudeabides]

I am really torn between getting a higher mileage 16/17/18 example to daily or a low mileage 19/20 R and keeping it pristine.

I'd love to get a low mileage 19/20R but I don't want to ever hesitate to take it for a drive. Then again I am not optimistic about the economy (and therefore the market for these cars) so maybe I'll just wait and see what's on sale in a year or two in my favorite shade of blue

 

[K4fxd]

I remember the Mark II Tiger's weighing in at ~2,550 which was extremely light when they launched in 1966 but even between the Rootes Group and Carroll Shelby modifying these cars were not all that fast especially when up against a 1967 TVR Tuscan which were outfitted with a K-code 289 and were also somewhat lighter than a Sunbeam Tiger.

Stock they are very nose heavy and over steer easily. Kind of like a mustang, only much worse. Snappy small block, skinny bias ply tires and no nannies.

We pulled the 289 and installed several variations of Ford small blocks. I have no idea what was done to the suspension but it was very balanced as long as you controlled your right foot.

This is the car I learned how to road race in.

 

[Hack]

I think if you asked Randy Pobst, he prefers the early 350. In his initial review/test of a 2016, he gushed praise. When his revisited a newer one years later ('18 or '19?) he complained about too much understeer.

You're thinking of the head to head comparison vs. the Supra, where the Mustang GT350 (not an R) kicks the Supra's butt everywhere, including the dragstrip.

Randy complained about understeer on track, but the front splitter hadn't been attached properly and it actually fell off the car. I always figured I could disregard his comments as I think they pertained only to a car without the front splitter. Who knows what kind of alignment was on the GT350.

They acted shocked that the GT350 was quicker around the track. They even upgraded the Supra's tires to try to make it competitive, but that wasn't enough.

 

[PP0001]

Stock they are very nose heavy and over steer easily. Kind of like a mustang, only much worse. Snappy small block, skinny bias ply tires and no nannies.

We pulled the 289 and installed several variations of Ford small blocks. I have no idea what was done to the suspension but it was very balanced as long as you controlled your right foot.

This is the car I learned how to road race in.

When racing my '87 Mustang LX it had a great deal of understeer and I had front tire pressures up well over 40 PSI.

Put as much negative camber as I could in the LX and that helped somewhat but was sponsored by Goodyear for tires and unfortunately they did not do very well compared to the incredible Yokohama A008R tires that I ran on my GLH which were well ahead of their time back in 1987.

 

[wingnutt]

Put as much negative camber as I could in the LX and that helped somewhat but was sponsored by Goodyear for tires and unfortunately they did not do very well compared to the incredible Yokohama A008R tires that I ran on my GLH which were well ahead of their time back in 1987.

i knew I liked you, but didn’t know why until today…I also had a GLH but with an S back in the 90s, along with a Shelby Charger, and a Shelby Daytona Z up until 1995 when my first wife had other plans

 

[Inthehighdesert]

We actually got the factory good years to work well back then for autocross and twisties, but we really cranked the pressure up to get them to work. The much bigger issue was the fred flinstone brakes, those were almost criminal to have been put on those cars. Couple pass’s and we’d smoke the front brakes pretty easily. Even the five lug upgrade wasn’t much of an upgrade.

When racing my '87 Mustang LX it had a great deal of understeer and I had front tire pressures up well over 40 PSI.

Put as much negative camber as I could in the LX and that helped somewhat but was sponsored by Goodyear for tires and unfortunately they did not do very well compared to the incredible Yokohama A008R tires that I ran on my GLH which were well ahead of their time back in 1987.

Sponsored