HOW???

[200MPHCOBRA]

This is flywheel numbers, it is assuming a constant loss through the drive-train. See, very accurate.

Sponsored

 

[200MPHCOBRA]

If you want to do it yourself, here is the link.
http://users.erols.com/srweiss/calchpm.htm

Try the 122 on the Cadillac to see a real hot ringer, easy to do with a turbo.

 

[200MPHCOBRA]

What you have to realize is, cars in this power range, if you put slicks on them, will pickup (drop) .3 to .7 et, but the mph won't change much at all, if any. Sometimes they lose a little MPH. You just don't see many stock cars running drag tires, the tune almost always comes first. MPH relates directly to engine power, force over distance, ET tells you how well you are applying it to the ground. The 1/4 mile is mother natures dyno. That's why its appropriate to get numbers for any type of car, its relevant to engine power. Using a 1/4 mile keeps the speed down and makes the inaccuracy of wind drag less important.

 

[mustang the great]

:lol::lol::lol::lol::cheers::cheers::clap2:

If you want to do it yourself, here is the link.
http://users.erols.com/srweiss/calchpm.htm

Try the 122 on the Cadillac to see a real hot ringer, easy to do with a turbo.

 

[02gtnh]

If you want to do it yourself, here is the link.
http://users.erols.com/srweiss/calchpm.htm

Try the 122 on the Cadillac to see a real hot ringer, easy to do with a turbo.

Are not those numbers based off a manual tranny? Those number work with the Camaro if you use the manual tranny.

 

[200MPHCOBRA]

Are not those numbers based off a manual tranny? Those number work with the Camaro if you use the manual tranny.

Horsepower, weight, MPH. Trans doesn't matter. Physics don't discriminate. Slight differences in power-train losses and wind resistance, but still very close. That weigh, moving at that speed, in that distance, end of the story.

 

[02gtnh]

Horsepower, weight, MPH. Trans doesn't matter. Physics don't discriminate. Slight differences in power-train losses and wind resistance, but still very close. That weigh, moving at that speed, in that distance, end of the story.

Then it doesn't work well with autos. The C&D GT premium auto did the 1/4 in 13.0 [MENTION=14590]113[/MENTION] mph and weighed 3850. By that chart you supplied and adding a 200lb driver, it would need 456hp:shrug:

 

[9secondko]

Then it doesn't work well with autos. The C&D GT premium auto did the 1/4 in 13.0 [MENTION=14590]113[/MENTION] mph and weighed 3850. By that chart you supplied and adding a 200lb driver, it would need 456hp:shrug:

Actually, it's 434 (rounded from 433.559)

Or pretty much EXACTLY what Ford says it is.

That formula is spot on, using vehicle Weight only.

I'm guessing the developer has already factored in exactly a 200 lb driver Weight estimate.

The Camaro time seems to jive with that formula as well.


Actually, it appears the developer offers that simple calculator for free perhaps a sample if his work. A $60 purchase for his software sounds like a decent investment if you don't know how to do the calculations yourself.

 

[347CobraII]

........because a lighter car with more power has a straight line advantage ;)

Because you say so I see

 

[ZaneWayne]

Because you say so I see

If you believe that car A and car B will the same in performance when one is lighter (marginally, but still), and more powerful, good for you I guess. How is that hard to grasp?

 

[bluebeastsrt]

I just wonder how many more wishy washy whiny Camaro threads are going to be started this week???:doh:Who leaves a performance car stock??? I beat a ZL1 and a C63 AMG last outing. A good driver and a few mods go a long way. These stock comparisons are for forum jockeys only!

 

[347CobraII]

If you believe that car A and car B will the same in performance when one is lighter (marginally, but still), and more powerful, good for you I guess. How is that hard to grasp?

NO NO just you bragging at what magazine did that's funny part. Beside can you do the same? You may lose to mustang every time because you can't drive it.

 

[ZaneWayne]

NO NO just you bragging at what magazine did that's funny part. Beside can you do the same? You may lose to mustang every time because you can't drive it.

Who said I can't drive? And I don't think anyone saying that Joe Shmoe can beat a professional drag racer just because he has a Camaro or vice versa. But if you can't accept that the Camaro is better out of the box, I don't know what to tell you lol. I don't need a magazine to tell me that the lighter more powerful car is faster. Kinda already had that one figured out.

 

[9secondko]

The Canaro is faster than the Mustang in v6 and GT trim comparisons right now.

And we all knew it would be this way for a year or two.

Ford soft launched and let the design sell the car.

Chevy came out with everything they had.

Good for them.

The Camaro is a great car now. Looks good and is very fast.

That said, I wonder how much potential is in the platform. I can really only see it getting heavier, while the Mustangs across the board have a lot of room to diet.

The addition of direct injection the the Coyote would likely see it outperforming the LT1. but Ford won't stand still with the current Coyote setup.

Both cars are worthy of admiration. But the factory Camaro performance is worthy of performance praise a bit more at this time except when compared to the GT350.

The price of the Camaro reflects the additional oomph they've given it. If it sells well, then I expect that will allow the others to do similar things. If it doesn't... Then we can expect adjustments like standard items becoming optional.

But I kind of like forced standard equipment as the economy of scale means it's actually cheaper than it would have been with options.

I've a feeling the 2017 GT may be a bit of a beast.

And the cycle continues.

The last gen was a big win for Mustang in terms of performance and surprisingly the Camaro led in sales for 4 years.

Now the Mustang is killing the sales charts and Camaro has respectable performance.

The Camaro guys recognize the gt350 is a monster. So the mustang guys can give the SS it's due as well.

It's simply faster than the current GT. Congrats Camaro.

Now on to round 2.

 

[200MPHCOBRA]

Then it doesn't work well with autos. The C&D GT premium auto did the 1/4 in 13.0 @113 mph and weighed 3850. By that chart you supplied and adding a 200lb driver, it would need 456hp:shrug:

The only things that can throw off the formula are large temperature changes, windy conditions, and low or high frictional losses in the driveline. There is always a mph or 2 diffrence between autos and manuals due to friction losses, in the past being higher in autos. The geartrain of an auto can be heavy, and has friction losses like the hydraulic pump that a manual does not have. Modern autos are getting much better and may in some cases exceed, but its hard to know without making changes to even out the inconsistency. Like gearing each car for max rpm in the 1/4, slicks to allow the manual to uses its flywheel inertia, and no lift shifting the manual. A good example is NHRA stock and super stock class records. When I first started racing, auto's were about .2 behind the sticks, class to class, now 38 years later they are ahead.

Now with all that being said, we should also be told what the density altitude and the wind speed and the direction is. Also, we should be using weights that are measured and not manufacturer reported. I don't know what all those are, to get a more accurate result. Remember I said these are flywheel estimations, that means a standard loss percentage is being applied equally against all set-ups in the formula, and that is also a small inconsistency. It also assumes 0 wind and standard temperature and pressure.

After all that, you should be asking yourself, why is the Camaro so far off compared to the others? Is it all the A8's phenomenally low fictional efficiency, or has it been tweeked. Have different A8's run the same times in different hands in similar conditions. Do we see the same difference in the corvette between trans and exteme HP spreads. I believe its far too early to tell.

I am a Ford man, I give the benefit of the doubt to Ford, many here apparently to the chevy, but last I checked, this is mustang6g, and I don't care for a lot of chevy guys coming over here to defend in my eyes what I feel is shady practices by GM. Did you do the math on the 122 caddy? Probably not, you are here to bash Fords and give chevy a pass..

Sponsored