GT350 article on weight, price, Z28

[FPCV8YO]

Good point, I don't have personal data to back up my claims.

After driving them, on the street, my opinion is auto is faster. Chevy claims auto is faster in both normal and Z06 versions. Several magazines reviews also claim auto is faster, in a straight line & track. I understand if the claim seems outrageous.

I think it was in this same thread where I didn't doubt a good modern AT would win in a 0-60 or a 1/4 mile but, I have my doubts on a road course. It would be an interesting comparison.

Sponsored

 

[Grimace427]

I think it was in this same thread where I didn't doubt a good modern AT would win in a 0-60 or a 1/4 mile but, I have my doubts on a road course. It would be an interesting comparison.

An auto would definitely be slower for me around a racetrack, likely because I would fall asleep from boredom behind the wheel and crash into a wall. :lol:

 

[FPCV8YO]

Road Course. Depends of how rough people play. Don't enjoy body work. So if it's every race, no thanks. But once a session a good rub is ok. back up plan is Time Attack.

I don't know which series or any other rules yet. I know Japan is much different and I have a lot to learn. Many of the racing I participated only required certain class of tire, PPE and general tech inspection for soundness. Most sane people would install cages and other "extra" safety equipment but that was our choice.

I'm thinking Time Attack for that very reason. Also, your competing against yourself. Trying to beat your previous lap time(s).

 

[Mystic_Cobra]

Road Course. Depends of how rough people play. Don't enjoy body work. So if it's every race, no thanks. But once a session a good rub is ok. back up plan is Time Attack.

I don't know which series or any other rules yet. I know Japan is much different and I have a lot to learn. Many of the racing I participated only required certain class of tire, PPE and general tech inspection for soundness. Most sane people would install cages and other "extra" safety equipment but that was our choice.

Before you buy anything take a look at the rule books for classes you are considering and your budget. I started looking at SCCA when I was learning how to drive (on road courses). My car (96 Cobra) didn't fit well into SCCA's A-Sedan so I ended up running in NASA's American Iron class which is all about aftermarket mods. I started NASA HPDE program in 2001 and started racing full time with a comp license in 2005. Istill run the same basic car with a "few" mods. Costs are escalating in our series as people push the limits of the rules, but Spec Iron is a great class that is just as competitive and a lot less money. It's S197 Mustang GTs with a roll cage and a few bolt-ons, basically. My next racecar will most likely be Spec Iron.

 

[Mystic_Cobra]

I'm thinking Time Attack for that very reason. Also, your competing against yourself. Trying to beat your previous lap time(s).

NASA calls that Time Trials and it is the same thing. Think of every session being a qualifying session. Roll cages are not required but HIGHLY SUGGESTED. Some of these cars are SCARY FAST and I would not want to be out there competing with no roll cage (or at least a partial cage) at those speeds. I've had a few on-track crashes so I'm speaking from experience.

 

[FPCV8YO]

NASA calls that Time Trials and it is the same thing. Think of every session being a qualifying session. Roll cages are not required but HIGHLY SUGGESTED. Some of these cars are SCARY FAST and I would not want to be out there competing with no roll cage (or at least a partial cage) at those speeds. I've had a few on-track crashes so I'm speaking from experience.

Appreciate it!

 

[Jimdohc]

Thanks for the advice.
Sounds like fun.
I think spec racing would be a good fit for me. Just want to stay busy and have fun. I'll research NASA SI.

[FONT=Calibri,Calibri]Time trials sounds fun too. I have time to think. I'm existed to get started on something.[/FONT]

[FONT=Calibri,Calibri]I've always run at least a roll bar and later a full cage. But some guys would be running 3 -4 wide at near 200mph down the straight at Fuji Speedway with no cage! Same guys would do 200+mph down toll roads and a tunnel under Tokyo Bay. Not worth it to me.[/FONT]

 

[Mystic_Cobra]

No problem, guys. Let me know if you have any other questions. Everything is online, of course. We just published the 2015 rules packages for American Iron, American Iron Extreme, and Spec Iron. We have events nationwide!
https://www.nasaproracing.com/rules

 

[Trackaholic]

I've followed the C7 forums for a while, and my understanding is the following:

Drag Racing:
A6 and A8 are both faster than the M7 (due mostly to launch advantages, but also in part to gear selection and shift speeds).

Road Course:
A8 may be faster than the M7, but both autos are more likely to over heat. With that said, I've seen several complaints about various parts of the car overheating, so it's not yet clear whether a manual is better overall in that respect, since it could be the diff that gets ya.

Still, I'd much rather have the stick in all these cars, since the interaction advantage is insurmountable no matter how much faster the automatic is.

I don't plan on any wheel-to-wheel racing, but might be interested in the Time Trails (but I'd be keeping my car stock, except for tires). I have a friend who is doing TT and having lots of fun (except for some reliability issues).

If you do want some wheel-to-wheel action, getting involved in a LeMons team might be an interesting way to go. I have several co-workers who have a team, and it looks like quite a rush. Not sure I trust the other yahoos out there, but since the cars are mostly rolling roll cages with minimal power, the speeds never get that high. Also, the consequences for rubbing fenders are pretty minor given how crappy the cars tend to be.

-T

 

[RocketGuy3]

I just noticed this:

"He said that while steering may not be quite as nimble-feeling as that of the 2.3-L Ecoboost Mustang (lighter in front and thus better balanced)..."

That seems slightly discouraging to me... I would think that with the 5.2-L supposedly being a smaller, lighter engine, plus them using an aluminum hood and fenders, plus other weight saving bits, the weight up front would be fairly significantly reduced and not very noticeably different from the EB. I mean maybe it would still be like 75 lbs more up front or something, but that wouldn't be very noticeable, would it?

... Although on the other hand, maybe the beefier transmission that is necessary to handle all that power adds back all the reduced weight up front?

I'm not so sure that's true of lap times on a road course. 0-60 or 1/4 mile sure.

The only disadvantage on a road course (other than potential heating issues on some cars) is weight, but that is negligible considering the speed advantages with shifting.

In some circumstances however there may be reliability concerns. At the BMW board there have been many who've taken delivery of brand new M3/M4's with DCT transmissions. Some are less than reliable. One guy in particular was stranded on the side of the freeway when his DCT crapped out. His car had less than 700 miles on it I believe. The DCT is a $2K+ option. They had to replace the whole transmission as the dealers do not know how to work on them. Imagine the cost if you were off warranty. The safer option is a manual no doubt about it.

I'm torn between the benefits. It would be great to have a multi functional transmission depending on what you're using it for but I also like to row my own gears.

True. Like I said, cost is definitely a consideration, too. If you can drive stick comfortably and enjoy it, and even if you track your car you're not interested in having the very fastest lap time among all Mustang owners, it seems like a no brainer to go with the manual.

 

[Grimace427]

I would think that with the 5.2-L supposedly being a smaller, lighter engine, plus them using an aluminum hood and fenders, plus other weight saving bits, the weight up front would be fairly significantly reduced and not very noticeably different from the EB.

The 5.2 is supposed to be smaller and lighter than what? It's based on the same block architecture as the Coyote so other than the crank it's going to be just as heavy as the regular GT's engine.

... Although on the other hand, maybe the beefier transmission that is necessary to handle all that power adds back all the reduced weight up front?

The Tremec 3160 was specifically chosen for its light weight.

 

[Mystic_Cobra]

The 5.2 is supposed to be smaller and lighter than what? It's based on the same block architecture as the Coyote so other than the crank it's going to be just as heavy as the regular GT's engine.




The Tremec 3160 was specifically chosen for its light weight.

Maybe RocketGuy was reading on the Z28 forums? ;)

 

[Trackaholic]

I just noticed this:

"He said that while steering may not be quite as nimble-feeling as that of the 2.3-L Ecoboost Mustang (lighter in front and thus better balanced)..."

That seems slightly discouraging to me... I would think that with the 5.2-L supposedly being a smaller, lighter engine, plus them using an aluminum hood and fenders, plus other weight saving bits, the weight up front would be fairly significantly reduced and not very noticeably different from the EB. I mean maybe it would still be like 75 lbs more up front or something, but that wouldn't be very noticeable, would it?

I have not heard any rumors about the 5.2 being smaller or lighter. The crankshaft will be lighter due to less counterbalance weight, but the rest of the engine is likely about the same size as the 5.0. Sounds like it has essentially the same stroke, which means probably the same deck height and width. It will fit the modular tooling requirement of 100mm bore spacing, so the length will be about the same. Would they go to titanium rods to allow the higher speed? Doubt it, but if they did it would save some weight. Still, not seeing a whole lot being taken out of the engine.

As far as the hood and fenders are concerned, the regular Mustangs already have aluminum for those components. So there won't be anything saved, and since the car is wider up front there is likely to be weight added.

Everything they said so far was that the weight will be about the same as a GT. It would be nice if they were able to save a lot of weight off the front, but then I think you'd be looking at something much more expensive.

-T

 

[Jimdohc]

PTWA saved ~8lbs on 5.8L. maybe ~5lbs on Voodoo?

 

[Grimace427]

PTWA saved ~8lbs on 5.8L. maybe ~5lbs on Voodoo?

Bores are about the same diameter so I would guess any weight savings would be about the same. The Condor/Trinity had a much longer stroke than the other mod motors.

Sponsored