Understand that Ford still has it's curb weight listing as estimated so until it is in fact official, it is all speculation.

I will guess official will land around 3,590.

I think there will be a lot of sad SS owners out there once it hits the streets.

 

I'm betting it wont, simply by dint of having 1.2 extra liters which all harkens back to "no replacement for displacement".

To explan things further; yes, the '11 GT Mustang will be a fast car in the right hands, however its performance will not be as accessible as the SS Camaro's

If I had to guess, I'm willing to bet the '11 GT will probably remind people more of N/A Cobras and Machs more than anything else.

 

I don't know either. However, folks were claiming it was the extra power that would cause Ford to have to upgrade all kinds of other parts in order to handle that extra power - not upgrade for future safety standards.

 

I think it will at the very least be more accessible than those, if not as accessible as the LS3. This is a direct injection motor we're talking about, is it not?

 

I finally got around to reading the actual Lightning Lap article yesterday, and I was interested to find that where the Camaro's performance was best relative to the field was not in a straight section, but instead in a hairpin. That doesn't smell like bad handling to me (although I'll grant that the power and brakes certainly help there too).

 

Huh?

I have the article in front of me right now. Nowhere do they laud hairpin performance. The closest they come to this is mentioning that after the initial hesitation experienced at turn in due to the "sluggish steering" and "roll compliance", the car does take a set and delivers grip due to the Pirelli tires. They also mention that the delay in changing direction "made the car feel massive as it sluiced through the essess, exhibiting the gracelessness of a freighter".

This all may be fine for a modern day Chevelle-type cruiser but having to wait for the car to settle down and take a set when driving hard is obviously leaving time on the table and certainly does not inspire driver confidence.

Additionally, they mention that "helping to offset its husky build is a 426 hp V8". They also point out the exemplary straightaway speed of the car in comparison to the rest of its class.

Explain how its advantage is not in the straight sections but rather the tighter corners.



Also, it seems either C&D didn't actually run the Grand West course as they claimed or they simply have the wrong course outline in the article. The article shows several insets of the Grand East course.



An editorial mistake on their part?

 

Exactly. I'd wager that nothing more than a wider set of meats up front will do the trick. Cheaper than the track pack and easily accomplished in anywhere. Since 99.999% of racers out there mod their cars I don't see the issue.

I still am waiting for the official announcement but it is rather fishy that this car is only gaining something like 50 lbs after adding the GT500's brakes and suspension. In all, I really do hope that the car does come in as light as the media site says.

Just going by an approximation of what I have read in the press release. 3580 for the 2010 GT and 3630 for the 2011. The press release stated something like 30 lbs but yes, in all actuality, it is closer to your number.

You'd be suprised. Actually its getting quite a bit more equipment from the GT500 than what was on last years car.

That would be amazing but I don't see it happening. I would guess closer to 3700 once the official announcement is made.

What does it really matter. It's still 4 seconds a lap faster than its closest class rival. Once again, if you are racing on a track that is that tight then any high hp V8 car is going to be at a disadvantage.

 

I've explained earlier why it matters. Not going to repeat it for the sake of bickering.


I will, however, add the following.....

1) I have purchased a 5th gen
2) I plan to purchase a 5th gen
3) I have competed in a contest relying heavily upon handling with a previous gen F car.
4) I plan to compete in a contest relying heavily upon handling with my 5th gen.

It seems to me that if someone can't agree with at least two of those statements, then they don't understand what all the fuss is about. This is probably because they simply can't relate to it through personal experience. You sound like such a person (not an insult, just observation - feel free to correct).

That's fine. I understand that what "my side" wants from the car is probably not what the majority wants. It appears obvious though, that many on the "other side" don't understand that their wants are not universal to F car purchasers.

I can easily see a situation where both sides can have their desires met by one car (not model). This situation did not come to fruition for "my side" with the 5th gen, hence our angst.

 

Your numbers are incorrect. Specifically, Ford says 3603 lbs in the press release, not 3630. If the 2010 GT is 2580 as you stated, then that is less than 30 lbs, not more.

As for official numbers.....agreed that we need to wait and get actual numbers of actual production cars. However, what is out there IS OFFICIAL FORD releases. It is also close to what was speculated on by those that had knowledge of such things, and thus is likely very close - even if the number is still given as "estimated".

Bob

 

Last page of the article, they break down five subsections of the track for a more detailed analysis -- charts only, no article text. It shows average speeds, entry speeds, exit speeds, max cornering G's, etc, as appropriate for each section, and it ranks each car tested according to its time through that section.

One of the subsections (section 1, IIRC... don't have the magazine in front of me anymore) is the hairpin, which is in the bottom-right corner of the track map in your post above. The Camaro ranks in the top half of all cars tested this year for that subsection. Close to the top third (but again, I don't have the mag in front of me to count them up and confirm). This is its best subsection ranking by a large margin.

The article itself never mentions it, but the data is still there. You'll note that I never said that they mentioned it specifically -- just that I was interested to find that out.

 

Ah, I see what you're referring to now.

Yes, the Camaro is in the upper middle of the pack... but so is the Mustang.

The Camaro's sector 1 (Horseshoe) time through that hairpin is identical to the Mustang GT's (8.8 seconds) but the Mustang shows greater peak grip (0.93g vs 0.90 g) with a higher exit speed (66.2 mph vs 65.4 mph) than the Camaro.

Ruh roh.

Seems to me that the Mustang made up in mid corner what it lost to the Camaro under braking and perhaps (depending on where the timing began) in terminal speed.


While we're on the topic, I'll type out the other sector times....

Sector 2 - Climbing Esses

Mustang: sector time - 8.9 sec, entry speed -113.7, avg speed - 109.4, exit speed - 98.4
Camaro: sector time - 9.4 sec, entry speed -116.2, avg speed - 104.0, exit speed - 99.2


Sector 3 - Spiral

Mustang: sector time - 14.0 sec, entry speed -75.0, min speed - 38.1, exit speed - 68.1
Camaro: sector time - 13.9 sec, entry speed -86.2, min speed - 40.4, exit speed - 71.4


Sector 4 - apparently turns 20 - 23 of the Grand East course illustrated above

Mustang: sector time - 15.3 sec, entry speed -66.2, avg speed - 73.6, exit speed - 83.6
Camaro: sector time - 15.4 sec, entry speed -64.0, avg speed - 73.2, exit speed - 82.0


Sector 5 - Hog Pen

Mustang: sector time - 9.9 sec, entry speed -77.6, min speed - 59.0, exit speed - 98.2
Camaro: sector time - 9.9 sec, entry speed -71.6, min speed - 64.6, exit speed - 92.7



I don't know guys... it is now even more obvious (at least to me) that GM Powertrain pulled this one out for the car on the straightaways.

 

So? I don't think anyone here is saying that the Camaro outhandles the Mustang or that the Mustang handles like poop. I don't think anybody is going to deny that Mustang GT w/ Track Pack is the better-handling car of the two.

Looks like Camaro walked away from the Mustang through the "Spiral" section (turns 16-18 in your track map), and that's not particularly straight...

My point is ONLY that the Camaro handles a lot better than the term "poop" would lead you to believe. Not that it's better or worse than any other car out there, not that it doesn't have room for improvement, and definitely not that I don't want it to be better -- just that it's pretty darn good.

 

Have we been reading the same board?

0.1 second is walking away? Also, it had more than an 11 mph entry speed advantage. Probably more than a tenth right there.

 

I was predicting 3,650# for a long long time. Seeing as the base model is 3,603# with 235 series tires on 18" wheels and wimpy little brakes, I think I will be almost dead on for the Track Pack car with its 19" wheels, 255 tires and Brembo brakes. And I have read that the Getrag tranny Ford chose is lighter than the TR6060 and I was not expecting that move.


CAMARO HANDLING

I see what Scott is saying, but as others have said, including some of the racers quoted, fixing understeer is not hard.

Scott and others have somewhat elluded to the idea that the understeer could not be fixed without compromising ride and thus appealing to less people and selling less cars. I think that is completely FALSE.

The majority of understeer can be fixed with sway bars. If we look at an example of decreasing the rear bar and/or increasing the front bar, this would have fixed the majority of the understeer without compromising ride. Perhaps Pedders can chime in her. Shoot, why doesn't GM give them a call and see what sway bar sizes they have had success with and start from there (hopefully they have long since done this or their own testing).

Now, it would not have fixed the steering or some of the other complaints, but that SIMPLE and more importantly CHEAP adjustment would fix the biggest single complaint of the Camaro. As for the steering, just boost the caster a little bit. Is that really going to turn off buyers? I would think it would turn them ON! That is a very big part of what gets the boners on the BMW fan boys going and I have to agree with them, it makes the car "feel" great. I run 5.5 or as high as I can get in my car for that reason.

Lets hope the 2011 Camaro comes with revised sway bars. That should be a no brainer with the new Mustang GT coming out. And a more aggressive Track Pack equivalent with wider tires and less compliant suspension would be a great option.

 

We won't know if the current brakes will be adequate, either. One would expect the '11 to gain about 10mph at the end of the quarter and a higher entry speed into corners at various test circuits - one improvement usually shows up inadequacies in other areas.

If that's the case, then expect the brakes to get bigger, the tyres/wheels to get bigger (to accommodate bigger rotors) etc... and overall the car to get heavier... unless some exotic materials are used to bring the weight down.

All chatter at this point.