The Vs. Thread

[Formula51]

lmfao so you think just because you supercharge a car that it makes it faster on the ring?, What about wheelspin, suspension, and everything else that could be turned bad if that extra power is let out. They would have to make a whole new tune just to compensate. And it wouldn't be a supercar it would be a hypercar then the Saleen S7 will just kick its ass. The Top Gear time on the samll track was very biased since he drove the car like it was a golf kart.

No, no, no, I dont think that at all. They will do all that is needed, including testing to make sure it is faster around the track than the Z06. You know this FordGTGuy.

Not sure what the difference between a supercar and a hypercar is, but I dont care what you call it. The Saleen S7 cant even make it around a track without breaking! :-D I hate Top Gear and always have, but it is funny how Ford boys will claim it like its God for the good numbers (drag time) and then say it sucks for the numbers they dont like (track time). I say it sucks period and is always biased towards American cars.

 

[Formula51]

not sure if this is relevant but the Z06 bested 1.18g at the ring and the GT hit 1.34 at willow during near 100f temps. the willow track is the only test of the GT I have numbers on so..

Remember that "on track" lateral acceleration is very tricky and there are many many variables. Even if you were comparing the two cars in the same turn of the same track.

A good way to compare lateral acceleration numbers is on the exact same skid-pad. Car and Driver has the Z06 at 0.98g's and the GT in the low 0.9g's. I do not know for a fact that both of these tests were done on the same skid-pad, but if they were that would be a good comparison. Even if both cars were tested on different skid-pads of the same radius it would be better than trying to compare "on track" lateral acceleration numbers from two different tracks.

 

[Big 8]

Remember, that in the tests thus far, the Z06 can essentially equal the acceleration of the GT (depending on what GT test you go with), out brake, out slalom, and out grip the Ford GT. Therefore it would likely fall in my 7:45 to 7:49 range.

The blue car has been confirmed and reported by Dave Hill himself as a stock Z06 on stock tires. The early articles were media crap. The Blue Devil does not exist remember, but when it does, expect it to challenge the Carrera GT!

I would agree with you, but I would say it will better the 7:45. If the Blue car was stock then we know it already did better then a 7:45. The Z06 is no joke. I think it will easily best the GT3 times of 7:49. Just like I think the Ford GT would best the GT3 times as well. Which would be faster Zo6 or Ford GT? I am not really debating that. All along I have simply said that the FGT will put up stellar numbers at the ring. Problem is now it will have to be a privateer who does it? I dont know if that will ever happen? Maybe Damon Hill will give it a run?



FORDGTGUY
As far as adding a supercharger making a car faster around the ring? Hell yes are you kidding me? That extra 120 to 145 hp is very much indeed going to allow that car to open up big time. No matter where you go in racing the higher horsepower cars are going to be faster. Could it ruin balance? sure if it werent designed for it. Simply look at any race series. ALMS GT1 is Faster then GT2 because the cars are more powerful. An extra 100 hp would save seconds on the long last straight at the ring. The ability to employ that power would be saving a lot of time. Let me just ask you this? DO you think the Ford GT would be faster around the ring if you took the supercharger off and ran a regular intake pellum?

 

[Formula51]

I would agree with you, but I would say it will better the 7:45. If the Blue car was stock then we know it already did better then a 7:45. The Z06 is no joke. I think it will easily best the GT3 times of 7:49. Just like I think the Ford GT would best the GT3 times as well. Which would be faster Zo6 or Ford GT? I am not really debating that. All along I have simply said that the FGT will put up stellar numbers at the ring. Problem is now it will have to be a privateer who does it? I dont know if that will ever happen? Maybe Damon Hill will give it a run?

I would say it could better the 7:45, but I think that would be more unlikely than a 7:45 to 7:49 pass. Remember that the Z did 7:42.9, which is a tenth quicker than the GT3 RS, and on paper the Z is a better track car than the GT. Therefore, you could say that by thinking it will run faster than 7:45 you are thinking that it will run between 7:43 and 7:45? Thats a hell of a narrowed down estimate. But hey, it is absolutely possible.

 

[FordGTGuy]

FORDGTGUY
As far as adding a supercharger making a car faster around the ring? Hell yes are you kidding me? That extra 120 to 145 hp is very much indeed going to allow that car to open up big time. No matter where you go in racing the higher horsepower cars are going to be faster. Could it ruin balance? sure if it werent designed for it. Simply look at any race series. ALMS GT1 is Faster then GT2 because the cars are more powerful. An extra 100 hp would save seconds on the long last straight at the ring. The ability to employ that power would be saving a lot of time. Let me just ask you this? DO you think the Ford GT would be faster around the ring if you took the supercharger off and ran a regular intake pellum?

Example: Koenie CCR 800 hp Z06 is seconds from it. ALMS GT1 vs. GT2 is a dumb example since you doamn right know that they redid the tuning on the car for the extra power. Would the Ford GT be faster at the ring w/o the S/C no but on smaller tracks it may just be seconds away from w/ S/C. Thats also a stupid comparo since the Ford GT already has a tune to compensate for its S/C when All I hear they are going to do for the Blue is strap on a S/C and let it go. Why the hell do you think a porsche is so damn fast its not because it has alot of power but it uses its power to its advantage with a great power to wieght ratio, suspension, and tune.

 

[PaulVincent]

Check out this link: http://www.kw-suspension.com/en/40_News/10_KW_News/10_Company/newsentry.php?we_objectID=827
It might put everything else in perspective. Also, there is a video link as well which you may choose to download.

 

[Big 8]

Example: Koenie CCR 800 hp Z06 is seconds from it. ALMS GT1 vs. GT2 is a dumb example since you doamn right know that they redid the tuning on the car for the extra power. Would the Ford GT be faster at the ring w/o the S/C no but on smaller tracks it may just be seconds away from w/ S/C. Thats also a stupid comparo since the Ford GT already has a tune to compensate for its S/C when All I hear they are going to do for the Blue is strap on a S/C and let it go. Why the hell do you think a porsche is so damn fast its not because it has alot of power but it uses its power to its advantage with a great power to wieght ratio, suspension, and tune.

The only thing dumb here would be to think that GM just took and mounted a S/C to a Zo6 without doing the rest of the tunning. :banana: I am sure the multi billion dollar corporation just said hey bag the tunning just add power? Sounds like the standard Zo6 recipe to me? (sarcasim) The zo6 is a well balanced car and bet your ass if the engineers on that program placed a S/C on it it would be just as balanced and a whole lot faster, even around the ring. I can actually believe your trying to make the argument that a less powerful car would be slower around the ring? :shrug:

 

[Formula51]

I understand both of your points. Power without a way to efficiently utilize it is useless. However, we have all seen what kind of research, design, testing and tunning goes into a Corvette Z06 and the Blue Devil will not be anything less. If anything it will require and get more of those things.

 

[Lethalchem]

take a ride in the new Z06 at the ring. M/T test.

This article made me think, especially the section which lists the power to weight ratio of the various cars.

The Vette is 3147lbs at 505hp, which puts the ratio at 6.2 according to the article. The Ford GT is listed as 3468lbs at 550hp, with a 6.3 ratio. If these numbers were correct, I've be more likely to believe the GT would have a hard time running closer to the Vette times at the Ring. However, since a conservative generalization of stock Ford GT power output is 515rwhp, the numbers used in figuring power to weight should be 3468lbs at 605hp (515/.85 for 15% DT loss). This brings the power to weight ratio down significantly to 5.7, which I feel gives the GT more than enough performance to be running 7.45 laps I'd think. :shrug:

 

[PaulVincent]

Well, if a magazine wants to use horsepower figures that support its thesis, why should it bother to use accurate horsepower figures that disprove its thesis? Besides, aren't we all being just a bit foolish even caring if the 2006 Z06 is a better track car than the 2005 Ford GT? After all, the GT was based on a forty year endurance race car and made larger and heavier to be more practical in the twenty-first century (than the LeMans race winning Ford GT of the sixties was). Really, the argument shouldn't be, "The Z06 is a better car as it has posted a quicker time at the "Ring" than could the GT." Rather it should be, "If the C6 Z06 doesn't dominate the 2005 Ford GT in every possible performance category - both on the track and the street, than how would it perform against a non-retro 21st century Ford two door sports car that had set the goal of besting the C6 Z06 as its target?" Right?

 

[Big 8]

Well, if a magazine wants to use horsepower figures that support its thesis, why should it bother to use accurate horsepower figures that disprove its thesis? Besides, aren't we all being just a bit foolish even caring if the 2006 Z06 is a better track car than the 2005 Ford GT? After all, the GT was based on a forty year endurance race car and made larger and heavier to be more practical in the twenty-first century (than the LeMans race winning Ford GT of the sixties was). Really, the argument shouldn't be, "The Z06 is a better car as it has posted a quicker time at the "Ring" than could the GT." Rather it should be, "If the C6 Z06 doesn't dominate the 2005 Ford GT in every possible performance category - both on the track and the street, than how would it perform against a non-retro 21st century Ford two door sports car that had set the goal of besting the C6 Z06 as its target?" Right?

NO! Were not here to be logical its the internet!

I was reading an old EVO last night. They had an articale on the SLR and said that during ring testing Porsche and Merc shared time at the track. They also said the SLR was faster around the ring in the wet then the CGT and matched or bettered its times quite often in the dry. They also made mention that the CGT (Wlater Rohrl) stated its a tricky car to hustle around the ring! He crashed two cars during testing! op:

 

[Formula51]

Well, if a magazine wants to use horsepower figures that support its thesis, why should it bother to use accurate horsepower figures that disprove its thesis? Besides, aren't we all being just a bit foolish even caring if the 2006 Z06 is a better track car than the 2005 Ford GT? After all, the GT was based on a forty year endurance race car and made larger and heavier to be more practical in the twenty-first century (than the LeMans race winning Ford GT of the sixties was). Really, the argument shouldn't be, "The Z06 is a better car as it has posted a quicker time at the "Ring" than could the GT." Rather it should be, "If the C6 Z06 doesn't dominate the 2005 Ford GT in every possible performance category - both on the track and the street, than how would it perform against a non-retro 21st century Ford two door sports car that had set the goal of besting the C6 Z06 as its target?" Right?

I'm with you for the most part, but remember that the only thing "retro" about the Ford GT is it's appearance. You could also say that "If the C6 Z06 bests the Ford GT in every performance category then why pay more than twice as much for it?" I know the answer to this and so does everyone else so don't aswer it (I would gladly pay the extra cash if I had it), but it is still a question that will be raised and in some respects is a valid one. The fact that the Z06 equaled or exceeded the performance of the very impressive GT and did it for $65k is what makes me impressed and demands respect from car enthusiasts. Try telling that to the people who own Ferrari's and Lambo's though, haha. They are both incredible cars and the fact that Chevy came out with a car of this caliber for this price is a great thing for ALL car enthusiasts.

We will have to wait for a 21st century Ford two door sports car to know how it will perform against it. However, we will likely have a new 21st century Blue Devil to compare it to instead.

 

[fordification]

And I mentioned this before in saying that Chevy really did pull out all the stops and put out the most potent vette yet. And at a critical point in time where their financial situation is unstable, they needed some positive, and as did Ford with GT really.

It's really too bad that Ford couldn't have kept the production and racing development going for the Mk's of the 60's. Who knows where it would be today?
335hp, 164mph top speed.

Fords next car will be using the GT platform. Hopefully they can start in on some racing r&d.

 

[fordification]

Oh, and I say 7:35. 1.35g in 100f weather at willow is an indication.

 

[Formula51]

Oh, and I say 7:35. 1.35g in 100f weather at willow is an indication.

Well that is retarded. I wouln't laugh at you, but most car enthusiasts would. No way in HELL will it run a 7:35. Who cares about that one random number, in all other tests done on the car it can not sustain the level of lateral g's of the Viper, Porsche, or Z. Much more importantly, let us not forget that the Z06 stops SIGNIFICANTLY shorter than the GT. We also do not know how much the GT will be affected by heat soak on a long track like the Ring and how much, if any, brake fade it will experience on top of its less than stellar brakes (not in quality but in ability to stop the car quickly).

7:35 is IMPOSSIBLE for a stock FGT. You guys are so blinded by your love for the car that you probably think it can run on banana peels and fly back to the future too. Serisouly man, 7:35 is ludicrous.

 

[FordGTGuy]

GT-40 MK IV the last MK had 600+ hp with a top speed of 220+ mph

 

[50 BMG]

It's really too bad that Ford couldn't have kept the production and racing development going for the Mk's of the 60's. Who knows where it would be today?

Unfortuneately from 63-67...I've heard that Ford as much as 250 million (in 1960's dollars) on the GT40 program.

And there was no real point after 67 (especially in hindsight...Can-Am designs and spec'd cars really took over racing from mid 68 till the SCCA killed it off). Not only that, but an Italian and German manufacturer finagled the FIA to ban 5.0L or more displacement engines. I'm suprised Wyer did what he did with the MK1B's and the 289's.

To this day the GT40 is still the stick in the 917's ass ...nothing in racing history makes me prouder.

GT-40 MK IV the last MK had 600+ hp with a top speed of 220+ mph

Carrol Shelby said it went 235 MPH on mulsanne in 67 in 1 of his books. The J-cars were insane, espeically for their time.

 

[FordGTGuy]

Carrol Shelby said it went 235 MPH on mulsanne in 67 in 1 of his books. The J-cars were insane, espeically for their time.

not only that but they were also the first cars to beat 200 mph barrier at LeMans and the GT-40 MKI beat the best laptime set at LeMans with the tiny 289.

 

[Big 8]

Well that is retarded. I wouln't laugh at you, but most car enthusiasts would. No way in HELL will it run a 7:35. Who cares about that one random number, in all other tests done on the car it can not sustain the level of lateral g's of the Viper, Porsche, or Z. Much more importantly, let us not forget that the Z06 stops SIGNIFICANTLY shorter than the GT. We also do not know how much the GT will be affected by heat soak on a long track like the Ring and how much, if any, brake fade it will experience on top of its less than stellar brakes (not in quality but in ability to stop the car quickly).

7:35 is IMPOSSIBLE for a stock FGT. You guys are so blinded by your love for the car that you probably think it can run on banana peels and fly back to the future too. Serisouly man, 7:35 is ludicrous.

You and the breaks? Please. Latest shows a difference of about 11 feet? Thats for a car with plus 300 pds or so? Heat soak ? Again please its going to be under 8:00 min, heat soak wont be much of an issue at all? Heat soak didnt kill any other supercharged cars out there look at the Mercs? Also the M5s 4400 pds in a ring taxi has brakes that run lap after lap and they arnt close to half as good as the stock FGT?

 

[satx]

Well that is retarded. I wouln't laugh at you, but most car enthusiasts would. No way in HELL will it run a 7:35.

what's retarded is how your keep riding the Z06's nuts. If the GT outruns the GT3 and 360 stradale rather convincingly, why would you think it can't run a 7:35. Think about this, the GT is faster than the Z06 and produces downforce instead of lift like the Z06. It would almost certainly outrun the Z06 at the "ring" or any other track. Now go find another thread to talk about the Z06........or better yet go to the Z06 board as you will find lots of people to discuss tupperware with.