GT350 1/4 mile

[krt22]

Well, they said they bogged at first and then started spinning off the line. The motor trend vids show them spinning for quite awhile before hooking

Sponsored

 

[mustang_guy]

Well, they said they bogged at first and then started spinning off the line. The motor trend vids show them spinning for quite awhile before hooking

ugh what incompetent drivers.

 

[Hack]

The GT350 isn't geared for drag launches. I said that when we first heard about the gearing and people jumped all over me. Granted, once the car is out I'm sure we will see some better times, but if I were setting the car up for a drag race I would step up the rear gear quite a bit. It takes some skill and practice to ride the clutch out, and they might have been afraid they would fry a new clutch if they did that.

I still believe as I said previously that the rear gearing on the GT350 is set up to tame the car down and make it easier for novices to drive. It should have at least 4.11 and maybe 4.56 rear gears to take advantage of the engine's wide RPM band. Probably smart on Ford's part, but not the best for producing hero stats.

On the road course the GT350 will own the SS. No worries there.

 

[Tommy V]

117mph is 11,s easy with a good driver,these magazine drivers are know not to be very good drag drivers,especially when it comes to manual cars.

 

[5.0 435]

Dynomoneter test between the two 350 's

 

[5.0 435]

MT just revealed their 1/4 mile times for the GT350 and GT350R. Not sure if they've been mentioned in another post yet:

http://wot.motortrend.com/does-the-shelby-gt350r-make-more-power-than-the-regular-gt350-wvideo.html

"To the seat of our pants, the R felt stronger than the base GT350. Our Vbox agreed—though there was a negligible 67-pound weight difference between the two, the R beat the GT350 on both 0-60 (by 0.2 second, 3.9 seconds versus 4.1) and through the quarter mile (12.1 seconds at 119.6 mph versus 12.4 at 117.8 mph). We chalked the slight differences up to tire grip (the R wears much more aggressive rubber), and indeed the two cars posted identical 1.7-second 45-65-mph passing numbers."

GT350 = 12.4 @ 117.8
GT350R = 12.1 @ 119.6

Not too bad IMO, given how MT's test conditions usually are.

However, the new Camaro SS was basically the same as the regular GT350 in ET, although 3 MPH slower in trap speed (I think that highlights the torque advantage of the LT1 compared to the Voodoo). And that was with the 6-speed manual. I expect the 8-speed auto to be faster due to a better launch. With that said, I don't think the road course results will be so close between the two.

"The acceleration run from 0 to 60 mph took just 4.0 seconds, and the quarter mile was through in 12.4 seconds at 114.6 mph. "

Camaro SS = 12.4 @ 114.6

That 3 MPH difference at the end is significant IMO.

-T

Auto week has the new SS manual @ 12.7 1/4 mile.

 

[mustang_guy]

What a joke. If you cant even test with a competent driver and equipment. What business do you have doing it in the first place? Magazines piss me off.

 

[bpracer]

The GT350 isn't geared for drag launches. I said that when we first heard about the gearing and people jumped all over me. Granted, once the car is out I'm sure we will see some better times, but if I were setting the car up for a drag race I would step up the rear gear quite a bit. It takes some skill and practice to ride the clutch out, and they might have been afraid they would fry a new clutch if they did that.

On the road course the GT350 will own the SS. No worries there.

Ford seems to have changed the ring gear slightly in the 2015 Mustang, I haven't seen anything higher than a 3.73 available in aftermarket gears. Not sure what they made unique about them. The GT350 has a slighter taller first gear than the normal 6 speed so it is at a disadvantage in that respect. I doubt there is any road course that I will hit top speed so a little gearing change would be nice.

 

[5.0 435]

What a joke. If you cant even test with a competent driver and equipment. What business do you have doing it in the first place? Magazines piss me off.

It not the magazine..... it's people posting info that is not accurate . The magazine was not reporting on 1/4 mile testing. It was reporting on dynomoneter testing between the R and non R and the seat of the pants. "our VBOX agreed ". Where does the article say we tested the 1/4 mile run between the two cars ?

 

[licktensteins]

It not the magazine it's people posting info that is not accurate . The magazine was not reporting on 1/4 mile testing. It was reporting on dynomoneter testing between the R and non R. It wasn't reporting on 1/4 mile times.

Did you read the same article I did?

To the seat of our pants, the R felt stronger than the base GT350. Our Vbox agreed—though there was a negligible 67-pound weight difference between the two, the R beat the GT350 on both 0-60 (by 0.2 second, 3.9 seconds versus 4.1) and through the quarter mile (12.1 seconds at 119.6 mph versus 12.4 at 117.8 mph). We chalked the slight differences up to tire grip (the R wears much more aggressive rubber), and indeed the two cars posted identical 1.7-second 45-65-mph passing numbers.

The subject of the article is definitely addressing a power difference between the two trim levels, but the numbers are clearly there from their own testing.

 

[jcartwright734]

Do they normally test with a VBOX?

 

[nastang87xx]

Why is everyone getting so bent out of shape about 0 - 60? The 1LT had that in a bag before it even started. 350lb ft tq at 2000RPM? That's pushrods for you. But look at the rest of the 1LT. It still has difficulty maintaining a top end torque curve. At peak horsepower, the 1LT is only twisting about 360lb ft in the C7 even. That's a farcry from its 460lb ft peak torque number but it's only at about 4500RPM. It's just how it is. Stomp on the throttle at 5000 - 6000 RPM in a C7 and it still feels lazy like in previous years. But it is much more responsive.

There's a reason why the new C7 at over 3400lbs can run almost the same 0 - 60 as the C7 Z06 that is 200lbs lighter and 50 more peak horsepower. It's because the 1LT can twist a tree out of its roots just at 1500 RPM.

The Camaro torque curve is definitely a street brawler. Nothing wrong with that. The GT350 is clearly road racing focused. Nothing wrong with that either.

 

[mustang_guy]

Why is everyone getting so bent out of shape about 0 - 60? The 1LT had that in a bag before it even started. 350lb ft tq at 2000RPM? That's pushrods for you. But look at the rest of the 1LT. It still has difficulty maintaining a top end torque curve. At peak horsepower, the 1LT is only twisting about 360lb ft in the C7 even. That's a farcry from its 460lb ft peak torque number but it's only at about 4500RPM. It's just how it is. Stomp on the throttle at 5000 - 6000 RPM in a C7 and it still feels lazy like in previous years. But it is much more responsive.

There's a reason why the new C7 at over 3400lbs can run almost the same 0 - 60 as the C7 Z06 that is 200lbs lighter and 50 more peak horsepower. It's because the 1LT can twist a tree out of its roots just at 1500 RPM.

The Camaro torque curve is definitely a street brawler. Nothing wrong with that. The GT350 is clearly road racing focused. Nothing wrong with that either.

I hope you aren't feeling im one of those bent out of shape about 0-60. I just care about the trap speed and ET. They are off by a nice bit

 

[krt22]

Get out of here with all that non-sense. We just care about peak numbers and acceleration times from a dig. I gotta get out of the hot pits with the quickness

 

[nastang87xx]

I hope you aren't feeling im one of those bent out of shape about 0-60.

Nope.

Sponsored