2018 GT vs 2016 Camaro - Track Times Compared w/Video

[ALUSA]

Well, don't mean to derail this conversation again, but just read that the Ford GT just ACCIDENTALLY set a production car lap record at VIR, beating the Viper ACR by a whole 1.4 seconds... just something cool to mention!

Knowing GM, they really may tried to benchmark the Viper ACR in their ZR1 testing, but i am not sure about the Ford GT. Who would have lend them the car is a good question! Maybe the GM ceo or a board member owns one lol

Sponsored

 

[cosmo]

Well, don't mean to derail this conversation again, but just read that the Ford GT just ACCIDENTALLY set a production car lap record at VIR, beating the Viper ACR by a whole 1.4 seconds... just something cool to mention!

*During Car and Driver's Lightning Lap testing.

It is not the fastest lap there by a production vehicle.

http://fastestlaps.com/tracks/virginia-international-raceway-grand-east-course-post-01-2014

 

[millhouse]

*During Car and Driver's Lightning Lap testing.

It is not the fastest lap there by a production vehicle.

http://fastestlaps.com/tracks/virginia-international-raceway-grand-east-course-post-01-2014

Old list. The latest the GT ran was a 2:38.6

https://www.autoevolution.com/news/...roys-viper-acr-porsche-918-spyder-122932.html

 

[cosmo]

Well, don't mean to derail this conversation again, but just read that the Ford GT just ACCIDENTALLY set a production car lap record at VIR, beating the Viper ACR by a whole 1.4 seconds... just something cool to mention!

Old list. The latest the GT ran was a 2:38.6

https://www.autoevolution.com/news/...roys-viper-acr-porsche-918-spyder-122932.html

Impressive! Good job GT. I had only seen the LL information, I didn't know there was a concurrent attempt by him.

 

[jake_zx2]

It was just uploaded to Road and Track about 20 minutes before I posted here. Ran a 2:38.6 with Johnson behind the wheel, and it wasn't even a record attempt. They went there to diagnose an issue that the R&T car was having, and in the process, accidentally set the lap record. It wasn't a competition model and didn't have titanium exhaust, either. Ford said they probably could have gone faster, but they're not worried about that or worried about trying to set lap records at other tracks. They said "We have other cars to work on right now". Perhaps that puts some weight behind their lack of Nring testing? They aren't worried about bragging rights, they're worried about making better cars

 

[Baron95]

That's strange, I haven't seen that in ANY review of the car... I see a lot of comments that it has very linear power delivery due in part to the advanced anti-lag system on the car... )

Well, I posted the lap times at BiG Willow by Randy, the link to the entire review. You could tell that Randy did not like the car at all on how it drove.

Here is the link, again:
http://www.motortrend.com/cars/ford/gt/2017/2017-ford-gt-first-test-review/

All that Ford GT anti-lag is marketing hype. Here is the reality and the EXACT quote from Randy Pobst:

“I have to drive with turbo foot—in other words deliberately start feeding power in early to spool up the turbos. It’s a little bit more of a vintage feel—it’s more like a classic turbo engine. "

"Vintage feel" and "classic turbo" are code words for "this bitch has so much lag that I can't drive it".

 

[Baron95]

And then there are the exact quotes from Randy on the braking...

"Randy’s real issue, though, was with the braking."

“It just doesn’t build confidence to go super deep on the brake, because there’s this time element where I’m on the pedal hard and I’m expecting full brake g, and I don’t have it yet,” he said.

So, there is a bitchy amount of lag on the go pedal, and also lag on the stop pedal.

Is this really up to par with the very linear GT350s, Camaros and Corvettes?

 

[millhouse]

Here is a review from another pro driver…

http://www.automobilemag.com/news/2017-ford-gt-pro-racers-perspective/

“There is no appreciable turbo lag, just a build in power all the way up the power band.”

“That is because the steering correction to chassis reaction is so immediate. This is not the same reaction time you would feel with most high-performance production sports cars. It would be more normal to have a longer recovery event.”

"The GT chassis and suspension setup in Track mode is probably one of the best I have ever felt on a street-legal car."

"This suspension compliance combined with grip and aero make the GT so quick and fun to drive on the track. It is not scary twitchy at all, and it inspires confidence."

The only complaint…

“I believe the GT braking behavior is linked to the ABS algorithm. My guess is, the algorithm is not capable of keeping up with the GT when encountering certain track nuances”

 

[Baron95]

So, of the "pro racing" car drivers who have driven the Ford GT and commented in print, 100% of them complain about unacceptable brakes and 50% of them complain about turbo lag.

Correct?

 

[jake_zx2]

From Road and Track:

"Power delivery is linear in the 3.5 liter, 647-horsepower twin-turbo V6 with a clean pull from around 3000 rpm all the way to redline"
"part of that is because it has anti-lag (Anti-lag. In a road car.) that keeps the turbo spooled to 20,000 rpm in Sport and Track mode."
"Braking from high speeds requires you to recalibrate your brain. That's because of just how powerful the brakes are and how the downforce helps with initial braking grip"
http://www.roadandtrack.com/new-cars/first-drives/a33471/what-you-learn-after-driving-the-ford-gt/

From Autocar:

"but it’s an honest, effective noise and it comes with minimal lag (in Sport mode, there’s a very effective anti-lag system, too) and an extra kick in the back from 5500rpm to 7000rpm to make it feel as fast as the claimed sub-3.0sec to 60mph and all-in 216mph."
https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-review/ford/gt

Randy seems to be the minority in this, and it really doesn't surprise me that he would say shit like this about a Ford. He loves to nitpick at them

 

[Baron95]

Seems to me that the other reviews talk about "minimal lag", so there is some.

The frame of reference may be the difference. If you have been driving a steady diet of "designed for EPA/NEDC ratings" sports cars that have nearly all gone turbo, you come to accept turbo-lag as "minimal" or "not a big deal".

For those of us fortunate to still be driving normally aspirated Mustang, Corvette, Camaro V8s or their no-lag supercharger variants, it would be annoying.

It's like my gf who normally shoots 9mm thinks .40 has too much recoil. I came from the .45 world and .40 recoil is "not bad" for me.

The point is almost every single article on the Ford GT has to talk or excuse some amount of lag (it is not part of the conversation on the Mustang GT, GT350, Camaro, Corvette in any variation). And the fact that several article mention some weirdness about the brakes is disturbing.

 

[Baron95]

But lets not lose sight of the fact that the Ford GT is an awesome vehicle, with its FIA spec cage, it's sexy looks, great aerodynamics, etc.

I'm glad Ford built it. I just wished they'd keep it in production and not got the route of the Toyota LFA, another short run and done project. Keep it in production continuously to go head to head with the McLaren's and mid-engine Ferraris.

 

[ALUSA]

I am ok for Ford putting an even tuned down version of that twin turbo v6 in a mustang, losing some weight and calling it s650 GT350R!

 

[jake_zx2]

I totally get that, but lets also not forget that's just what it is; a street car. Corvettes sure, don't have this, but they also have a lot of other compromises made to effectively run a supercharger, and even at that, the Vette's future is in small displacement and turbos (Per a leaked document that showed a twin turbo 4.5 liter DOHC engine for the next generation Vette). And really, if you want to talk about long term trackability, you should be willing to have a minimal amount of turbo lag in exchange for all-day trackability. Sure, an N/A engine would be bliss, but it's just not doable for a factory car with modern emissions and CAFE standards

 

[Baron95]

I totally get that, but lets also not forget that's just what it is; a street car. Corvettes sure, don't have this, but they also have a lot of other compromises made to effectively run a supercharger, and even at that, the Vette's future is in small displacement and turbos (Per a leaked document that showed a twin turbo 4.5 liter DOHC engine for the next generation Vette). And really, if you want to talk about long term trackability, you should be willing to have a minimal amount of turbo lag in exchange for all-day trackability. Sure, an N/A engine would be bliss, but it's just not doable for a factory car with modern emissions and CAFE standards

Yes. Sadly that is where the world is going. I am 100% sure that the turbo Corvette engine, like all downsized turbo engines from Porsche to BMW on down, will end up sounding worse, being heavier, being less linear.

I get it that it is needed to keep these cars viable. But boy we will be missing the V8 NA/SC engines when they are gone.

Sponsored