Automobile - Ford GT vs. Corvette ZO6 vs. Dodge Viper Coupe

[Force4.6]

They are closely matched

It is clear however that the ZO6 is the easiest to handle around the track with the way its suspension and driver aids are setup (Chevy engineers should be given alot of credit for that). The GT on the other hand is more difficult to get the full potential out of it. The ZO6 would help us novices look like we had an idea of what we are doing where as the GT would probably bite us in the end.

 

[Formula51]

Agreed. Lets close this one and start another one when the time comes.

 

[Paul Vincent]

Looking at MT 1/4 mile time and speeds, I cannot see how the Z06 would ever catch let alone pass the GT. Less time and higher speed for the heavier GT in the 1/4 mile. Just where does the Z06 catch and pass the GT after the weight advantage (that the Z06 supposedly has - if you wonder what I mean, look at wheel hp to weight) evaporates at the outset of any top end run?

 

[GTSpartan]

Looking at MT 1/4 mile time and speeds, I cannot see how the Z06 would ever catch let alone pass the GT. Less time and higher speed for the heavier GT in the 1/4 mile. Just where does the Z06 catch and pass the GT after the weight advantage (that the Z06 supposedly has - if you wonder what I mean, look at wheel hp to weight) evaporates at the outset of any top end run?

My final post on this thread. C&D has the new Z's 0-150 time like ~2 sec faster than the GT. I believe thats what they are talking about 17.5 to 19.1 sec

 

[DBK]

My final post on this thread. C&D has the new Z's 0-150 time like ~2 sec faster than the GT. I believe thats what they are talking about 17.5 to 19.1 sec

C&D themselves tested another GT at 16.9 seconds to 150.

 

[Force4.6]

Seems the GT's tests have a greater variation while the ZO6 is more consistant. I think this can be contributed to the fact the GT lacks many of the aids the Z has and depends more on the abilities of the driver.

 

[E. Green Cobra]

Can't let die!

Hmmm, not sure your point. The track where the Z beat the GT by over 4 seconds was about the same length as Gingerman, where the GT beat the Z06 by 0.3 seconds. I don't know the length of Willow Springs off the top of my head, but most tracks are tighter than the high speed track that is Willow Springs, again, not sure your point.

The margin of victory by the Z06 in the Motor Trend test is ASTRONOMICAL compared to the margin of victory by the GT in the Automobile test and apparently an upcoming Edmunds test where the GT edged out the Z06 by less than a second on a high speed track.

Thats right Astronomical- against a different car- so that "test" doen't really count does it, that'd be like comparing times on different tracks, days, etc. They change more than one variable so unfortunately for you the test is null and void. If ya can't beat em- hope they break! ;-)
I also noticed they commented the Gt not the mighty Z stopped the hardest- while the "peak" 60-0 numbers show the Gt is way back- I don't seem to recall any of the tracks requiring complete stops so is the standard 60-0 really relevant or is it just another braggin right? i.e. dyno numbers/hp etc.

regarding acceleration, you can see the shift point offsets from .1 to .4, without the exception of the 1/4, possibly the vette is making up ground. not sure about the traps, 126mph to 126.8? or is that 6 an 8? can't tell.
by 150mph, I wonder if the vette would make the pass.

If you're referring to the MT test that'd be an 8 (.7)
I can't see the vette tagging the Gt at 150, and after that I can't imagine the vette is that much more slippery to overcome the obvious hp deficit and gearing. This aint a Mustang afterall

Seems the GT's tests have a greater variation while the ZO6 is more consistant. I think this can be contributed to the fact the GT lacks many of the aids the Z has and depends more on the abilities of the driver.

doesn't help when they use an engineering car either

 

[Formula51]

Can't let die!
I also noticed they commented the Gt not the mighty Z stopped the hardest- while the "peak" 60-0 numbers show the Gt is way back- I don't seem to recall any of the tracks requiring complete stops so is the standard 60-0 really relevant or is it just another braggin right? i.e. dyno numbers/hp etc.

Darn it, you had to say stupid sh*% again and I cant leave it alone. They commented that the GT was the most out of control under hard braking, I believe "wagging the rear" was the phrase they used. This is also why the test driver did not have "big enough balls" (or something like that) to really push it. I fully believe the GT is capable of better than it ran with a more experienced driver, but who knows if it is capable of more than 4 seconds better, that is a LOT.

As for 60-0mph braking, braking distances are relatively linear with speed (they are actually a little more exponential but that only enhances my point and is harder for some to think about). Thus, the car that stops shorter from 60-0mph will reduce its speed from 120-60mph in a shorter distance/less time. Thus, the car which stops shorter/reduces speed faster can drive into the corner deeper. It is not just a bragging right number.

 

[fordification]

bet an evo would've run a better time then the GT too with that setup.

 

[Big 8]

bet an evo would've run a better time then the GT too with that setup.

Perhaps with the same Pussy driver I would imagine it would. All you need is a few electronic aids to make sure your cars driving you and your in. Great fun, now why not the auto tranny while your at it. op:

By the way C&D did Viper vs Z06 and they speak of the precious Z06 being a squirly fjcker, even tossing its ass end out on a small nole on their road test. They also comment on its low rent interior shabby materials and sh!t seats. So I guess its not all golden either? :shrug:

 

[Captain Beyond]

I don't need to claim it, at this point that is what the numbers show. When it comes to overall performace, the Z is equal or better, so far.

The same can be said about the GT. :-D

 

[E. Green Cobra]

Darn it, you had to say stupid sh*% again and I cant leave it alone. They commented that the GT was the most out of control under hard braking, I believe "wagging the rear" was the phrase they used. This is also why the test driver did not have "big enough balls" (or something like that) to really push it. I fully believe the GT is capable of better than it ran with a more experienced driver, but who knows if it is capable of more than 4 seconds better, that is a LOT.

"Braking Performance on the track was stellar, with the Gt decelerating .1 to .2 g harder than the others" pg 56. Wouldn't one expect that the best braker in the group would also break the hardest? As for the rear end stepping out under hard breaking- that ain't the cars shortfall its the drivers- kinda like the older vipers without ABS and go figure they couldn't get the things to stop either

 

[Formula51]

The same can be said about the GT. :-D

Actually it can't, but I am not going to change your opinion. Go forth with you blissful ignorance. You must be a liberal arts major, they really struggle with numbers :coolman:

 

[Formula51]

"Braking Performance on the track was stellar, with the Gt decelerating .1 to .2 g harder than the others" pg 56. Wouldn't one expect that the best braker in the group would also break the hardest? As for the rear end stepping out under hard breaking- that ain't the cars shortfall its the drivers- kinda like the older vipers without ABS and go figure they couldn't get the things to stop either

G-forces during braking are essentially irrelevant as they do not directly correlate to which car stops shorter, primarily due to inertia (super critical here because of large weight difference) among other things. I don't feel like getting into all the technical stuff at the moment, but if you actually care then PM and I will explain it to you. XXmph to 0mph braking tests are done by mags because they are easy from an equipment and reproducability standpoint (although there are still lots of variables here).

The things to remember. The reduction of speed vs. distance is roughly linear. Thus, if Car A stops shorter than Car B, it can drive XX feet deeper into each turn before braking given they are traveling at the same speed and enter the corner at the same speed. Additionally, if Car A can sutain higher lateral g's in the corner than Car B, then it can maintain a higher speed through the corner than Car B.

This is why, on paper, the Z06 should best the GT on a track with lots of turns, ESPECIALLY if they are low speed turns requiring lots of reduction in speed (braking). This is why the Z06 shines at Nurburgring with its 80 or 90 something turns. The tests of the Z06 and GT thus far have been on high speed tracks with a realtively low number of high speed turns (Willow Springs has 9 turns I believe). The fact that the two were neck and neck at Gingerman and Willow Springs (high speed, low number of turns), coupled with the logic I have laid out above, is what leads one to believe the Z06 can turn the tables at other tracks. This is why it would be so nice to see the layout of the course Motor Trend used for the comparison. Hopefully we will get some future tests at the types of tracks I am talking about and we will have some more data to go on. Thoughts?

 

[Ford GT Fan]

G-forces during braking are essentially irrelevant as they do not directly correlate to which car stops shorter, primarily due to inertia (super critical here because of large weight difference) among other things.

Uhhh... G-forces DO directly correlate to which car stops shorter.

One "g" is 32ft/sec/sec, which if you do the math, works out to a change of speed of about 22mph per second.

So if a car is going 22mph, and stops in one second, it has averaged 1.0 g deceleration.

If a car is going 66mph, and stops in 3 seconds, it has averaged 1.0 g.

If a car is going 66mph, and stops in 4 seconds, it has averaged .75 g.

 

[Formula51]

Actually, NO, it does not work that way.

We have to consider rolling resistance, traction force, inertia of other rotating parts (engine and drivetrain), net torque applied to the wheel (includes brakes and gears), friction coefficients, axle loads, weight transfer, brake force distribution, any skid/lookup, etc. As you would expect, the results of the two cars differ, this is largely due to the weight difference because many of these factors have a relationship to weight and its distribution. The overall difference off all these factors working together is shown in stopping distance tests, where the Z06 stops shorter than the FGT in All tests thus far from All speeds.

It would take me forever to type the equations, so you will have to take my word on it or go rent a vehicle dynamics book from the library.

 

[E. Green Cobra]

Actually, NO, it does not work that way.

We have to consider rolling resistance, traction force, inertia of other rotating parts (engine and drivetrain), net torque applied to the wheel (includes brakes and gears), friction coefficients, axle loads, weight transfer, brake force distribution, any skid/lookup, etc. As you would expect, the results of the two cars differ, this is largely due to the weight difference because many of these factors have a relationship to weight and its distribution. The overall difference off all these factors working together is shown in stopping distance tests, where the Z06 stops shorter than the FGT in All tests thus far from All speeds.

It would take me forever to type the equations, so you will have to take my word on it or go rent a vehicle dynamics book from the library.

I'm always interested- you seem to keep bringing up the weight issue as the primary factor of the Z's shorter stops- yet the Viper which has been a brutal stopper as of late is roughly the same weight as the Gt, yet stops shorter than the Z-(it does have slightly larger rears, and significantly larger tires than both, but are those two factors enough to overcome ~300lbs. Also I thought braking was exponetial as opposed to linear?

 

[Captain Beyond]

Actually it can't, but I am not going to change your opinion. Go forth with you blissful ignorance. You must be a liberal arts major, they really struggle with numbers :coolman:

:nonono:
Why can't the same be said about the GT's overall performance being equal to or better than the almighty Z? :shrug: Please enlighten me. Haven't you been reading the mag comparos as well as the one review from the GT forums? I guess they don't teach reading in school these days. Please put down the crack pipe and get your head out of the Z's ass.

 

[fordification]

how does the weight distribution come into play? fore or aft for ballast?

 

[Formula51]

I'm always interested- you seem to keep bringing up the weight issue as the primary factor of the Z's shorter stops- yet the Viper which has been a brutal stopper as of late is roughly the same weight as the Gt, yet stops shorter than the Z-(it does have slightly larger rears, and significantly larger tires than both, but are those two factors enough to overcome ~300lbs. Also I thought braking was exponetial as opposed to linear?

The Viper stops roughly the same as the Z06 (slightly better in some tests) and without calculating everything, I will say it is possible that the factors you mentioned can be enough to overcome the weight difference, among other things such as front and rear braking force and weight distribution, which we know is different than the GT's.

Braking is slightly exponential, but it is easier to think of it as linear for arguments sake. You are correct that it is slightly exponential though.