Poor Mustang GT lap on "The Grand Tour"?

[Zathras]

I enjoy The Grand Tour (Jeremy Clarkson et al on Amazon Prime Video) but every time they put up the lap times board, it bothers me a bit that their lap time for the Mustang GT (I think it's a 2017 with Performance Pack) is at or near the bottom of the (modern) cars they've tested. Granted I don't expect the Mustang to be up there with Ferrari or even Porsche, but at 1:29.6, it's more than 5 seconds behind the M3 and M5, and even behind the Civic Type R and Focus RS. It *tied* the Tesla Model X (a 5200 lb SUV!).

Link to lap time board:
https://www.motoringbox.com/the-grand-tour-eboladrome-lap-times/

Link to their Mustang lap:


Thoughts?

Sponsored

 

[9secondko]

they have a bias against Mustang. It has been shown even in their old tv show. Forget the name.

But they don’t even try with the Mustang.

Going to be a bit more difficult to downplay the GT5oo with the DCT.

Or... if they cared to test a car from the last couple of years, the A10 GT.

But I am sure they will find a way.

 

[SidewaysMike]

Unfortunately that won't happen. They're reformatting the show. No more lap times, no tent and no audience. Just road trips like on their specials. See the Mongolia episode from this year or the one they went to Georgia and Azerbajan (SP?) Really liked that one!

 

[bnightstar]

Granted I don't expect the Mustang to be up there with Ferrari or even Porsche, but at 1:29.6, it's more than 5 seconds behind the M3 and M5, and even behind the Civic Type R and Focus RS. It *tied* the Tesla Model X (a 5200 lb SUV!).

Thoughts?

Don't open this link then https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Nürburgring_Nordschleife_lap_times

In case you don't know the Mustang GT is not what is considered the best track car in the world in fact Civic Type R is the fastest FWD car around the Nordshleife and is over 20 seconds faster than the GT. The Focus RS is also faster. M3 and M5 are much faster as well. So just the GT is not a great track car. And if you want a car for autocross and track use you are better spending your money elsewhere. However for the price of the mustang you probably won't find a better looking car and that's important.

 

[Hack]

On a small, tight track with lots of turns and cool temperatures with the stock Mustang GT all season tires, it isn't going to be super fast. It's not really indicative of what the car is capable of. Most people who take their Mustang to the track make a few modifications.

Just tires will make a huge difference and catch the Mustang GT up to most of the other cars mentioned. In the real world the GT is quick and will compete well with the other cars mentioned. It's much faster than the RS or the Type R if you put comparable tires on it. Additional mods just mean the GT will be that much quicker.

 

[bnightstar]

On a small, tight track with lots of turns and cool temperatures with the stock Mustang GT all season tires, it isn't going to be super fast. It's not really indicative of what the car is capable of. Most people who take their Mustang to the track make a few modifications.

Just tires will make a huge difference and catch the Mustang GT up to most of the other cars mentioned. In the real world the GT is quick and will compete well with the other cars mentioned. It's much faster than the RS or the Type R if you put comparable tires on it. Additional mods just mean the GT will be that much quicker.

I think we are having this discussion in 3 treads now. You can think the Mustang GT is good but the link in my post clearly show that is not true the Nurburgring tests are done with same driver on the same track and the track is 20 KM long with multiple long straights etc. It's not a small, tight track sure it has lots of turns but the Mustang GT in question is a Performance Pack model with the 275 Pirelli PZero's which are not exactly all season tires. The difference to the RS is 0.5 seconds this is not much and I can agree that overall with few mods the GT will be faster but so will be the RS with the 500 bhp that some of the euro tuners are giving it. However the difference to the Type-R is over 20 seconds and that is a lot. Also if you think the Mustang is a good race car check the GT4 endurance class for example in Blancpain GT4 America where the new GT4 Mustang runs it won a few races but still is regularly beaten by old cars. In Europe there is only one Mustang racing in the GT4 class provided by Marc Australia and his results are not great ether. So it's good car but it's place is not exactly on the track. Also you are driving a GT350 which has nothing in common with the normal GT.

 

[Arthonon]

I think we are having this discussion in 3 treads now. You can think the Mustang GT is good but the link in my post clearly show that is not true the Nurburgring tests are done with same driver on the same track and the track is 20 KM long with multiple long straights etc. It's not a small, tight track sure it has lots of turns but the Mustang GT in question is a Performance Pack model with the 275 Pirelli PZero's which are not exactly all season tires. The difference to the RS is 0.5 seconds this is not much and I can agree that overall with few mods the GT will be faster but so will be the RS with the 500 bhp that some of the euro tuners are giving it. However the difference to the Type-R is over 20 seconds and that is a lot. Also if you think the Mustang is a good race car check the GT4 endurance class for example in Blancpain GT4 America where the new GT4 Mustang runs it won a few races but still is regularly beaten by old cars. In Europe there is only one Mustang racing in the GT4 class provided by Marc Australia and his results are not great ether. So it's good car but it's place is not exactly on the track. Also you are driving a GT350 which has nothing in common with the normal GT.

Maybe I missed it in the link you provided, but what I saw in the list at that link were a bunch of times spread over many years with different drivers, etc. Can you help me out by showing the list done by the same driver and close enough to the same time that would show that the track was the same condition, configuration, etc.?

 

[Hack]

I think we are having this discussion in 3 treads now. You can think the Mustang GT is good but SNIP.

If you don't think putting wider and stickier tires on a base Mustang GT will make it much faster on track, I don't know what else to say to you. Are you saying every Mustang GT time is a GT PP2 car? I was addressing a base Mustang GT here. It has a lot of power, but the factory all-seasons are low on grip. For example, if you install Cup 2 tires on a Mustang GT like the RS has, the GT will be A LOT faster than it is with the crap all seasons. If you add a handling kit with comparably stiff springs, you won't even see the RS in the rear view (unless the track is tiny).

It's ok to hate Mustangs. Nothing wrong with it. But you should own up to it.

 

[bnightstar]

Maybe I missed it in the link you provided, but what I saw in the list at that link were a bunch of times spread over many years with different drivers, etc. Can you help me out by showing the list done by the same driver and close enough to the same time that would show that the track was the same condition, configuration, etc.?

According to the link:

Apart from races and timing events under the rules of their respective sanctioning bodies, there are no official rules that govern the measurement and certification of lap time on the Nordschleife. [4] For the announcement of production car lap times, submission of an official announcement, accompanied by an on-board video with telemetry, and a mention of the tyres used have become customary.[5]

So that's the acceptance way of documenting the laps. This list is very prestigious list though and a lot of times car companies use there times to advertise the cars. For example Porsche used it when the GT2 RS was the record lap holder. As well as now Lamborghini use it with the SVJ.

I do agree that is probably not the best way to measure performance but it's the only fair way we have to compare lap times between different makes and models.

 

[bnightstar]

If you don't think putting wider and stickier tires on a base Mustang GT will make it much faster on track, I don't know what else to say to you. Are you saying every Mustang GT time is a GT PP2 car? I was addressing a base Mustang GT here. It has a lot of power, but the factory all-seasons are low on grip. For example, if you install Cup 2 tires on a Mustang GT like the RS has, the GT will be A LOT faster than it is with the crap all seasons. If you add a handling kit with comparably stiff springs, you won't even see the RS in the rear view (unless the track is tiny).

It's ok to hate Mustangs. Nothing wrong with it. But you should own up to it.

So I show you a fair test between the 3 cars in question and now you come up that if the car is not stock it will be faster hello captain obvious However the test is not with the base Mustang GT is with the PP1 which has stickier tires than the base Mustang GT so it's much faster on the track. Obviously this is Gen 2 Coyote and not Gen 3 with PP2 Car which for sure will be faster than the Focus RS. However I doubt that tires only will be enough to close the 20 seconds gap to the Type R.
And no I'm not hating on the Mustang as I own one and love it. I'm just pointing the obvious fact that Mustang despite what the Ford marketing make you believe is not a great turn key (out of the factory) car for lap times.

 

[Arthonon]

According to the link:

Apart from races and timing events under the rules of their respective sanctioning bodies, there are no official rules that govern the measurement and certification of lap time on the Nordschleife. [4] For the announcement of production car lap times, submission of an official announcement, accompanied by an on-board video with telemetry, and a mention of the tyres used have become customary.[5]

So that's the acceptance way of documenting the laps. This list is very prestigious list though and a lot of times car companies use there times to advertise the cars. For example Porsche used it when the GT2 RS was the record lap holder. As well as now Lamborghini use it with the SVJ.

I do agree that is probably not the best way to measure performance but it's the only fair way we have to compare lap times between different makes and models.

I'm not sure I'd really call it fair, because the conditions change from day to day, so the numbers are just a general indication of capability, not necessarily good for comparing, especially when runs are years apart. For example, changes were made to the track in 2016 where bumps were smoothed out, and a variety of other changes were made, all of which make it easier to go fast. And that's not the first or only time changes have been made. On top of that, there are varying atmospheric conditions, general track condition (potholes, loose pavement, etc.). It's fun to look at the numbers, but I'm not sure it means a lot when comparing specific cars and lap times.

 

[bnightstar]

I'm not sure I'd really call it fair, because the conditions change from day to day, so the numbers are just a general indication of capability, not necessarily good for comparing, especially when runs are years apart. For example, changes were made to the track in 2016 where bumps were smoothed out, and a variety of other changes were made, all of which make it easier to go fast. And that's not the first or only time changes have been made. On top of that, there are varying atmospheric conditions, general track condition (potholes, loose pavement, etc.). It's fun to look at the numbers, but I'm not sure it means a lot when comparing specific cars and lap times.

Same as the Top Gear track though I just find interesting this stats from time to time I do agree it's not the most fair way. Just pointing out the fact that on a number of tracks this is the case with our beloved car. If you wish fair comparison go to the virtual world. I for example use GT Sport and Catalunya to test different cars.

 

[Arthonon]

If you wish fair comparison go to the virtual world. I for example use GT Sport and Catalunya to test different cars.

Hmmm... OK.

 

[Hack]

So I show you a fair test between the 3 cars in question and now you come up that if the car is not stock it will be faster hello captain obvious However the test is not with the base Mustang GT is with the PP1 which has stickier tires than the base Mustang GT so it's much faster on the track. Obviously this is Gen 2 Coyote and not Gen 3 with PP2 Car which for sure will be faster than the Focus RS. However I doubt that tires only will be enough to close the 20 seconds gap to the Type R.
And no I'm not hating on the Mustang as I own one and love it. I'm just pointing the obvious fact that Mustang despite what the Ford marketing make you believe is not a great turn key (out of the factory) car for lap times.

What I was trying to say is that the base GT is set up for cruising and having fun on the streets. Obviously it can be taken to a track, but it isn't optimized for that. The PP1 isn't tuned for maximum track performance, either. If you consider the tires and spring rates of the Focus RS, it's more comparable to the PP2 in how it is set up.

The Type R and PP2 Mustang both ran at C&D Lightning Lap
https://www.caranddriver.com/features/a23290221/lightning-lap-2018/

The PP2 ran a 2:53.8 lap and the Type R ran 3:03.9. The Mustang GT was 10 seconds faster per lap. That is what I was trying to explain about the capability of the Mustang GT. If you put comparable spring rates and sticky tires on the GT, it's much faster than those other cars. And even if you have a base GT it's relatively simple to change out your tires and go whack some Type Rs upside the head.

 

[bnightstar]

What I was trying to say is that the base GT is set up for cruising and having fun on the streets. Obviously it can be taken to a track, but it isn't optimized for that. The PP1 isn't tuned for maximum track performance, either. If you consider the tires and spring rates of the Focus RS, it's more comparable to the PP2 in how it is set up.

The Type R and PP2 Mustang both ran at C&D Lightning Lap
https://www.caranddriver.com/features/a23290221/lightning-lap-2018/

The PP2 ran a 2:53.8 lap and the Type R ran 3:03.9. The Mustang GT was 10 seconds faster per lap. That is what I was trying to explain about the capability of the Mustang GT. If you put comparable spring rates and sticky tires on the GT, it's much faster than those other cars. And even if you have a base GT it's relatively simple to change out your tires and go whack some Type Rs upside the head.

I don't argue that the Mustang GT has a potential to be faster on track that's obvious with the PP2 which is 4-5 seconds per lap faster than PP1. I just argue that out of the box (factory) PP1 is slower than a Type R on the track. If you add SC and some Steeda suspension for example obviously the Mustang GT will be faster but that's not how the car come from the factory.

Sponsored