Does the ZR1 feel noticeably faster than the FGT or is it only a marginal difference? For example, from 0-150mph???
For me the ZR1 feels faster than it really is, the way is sounds is unreal and feels like it will run low 10's! In real life though side by side both cars stock the GT would probably hang in fairly good from a roll but it would still be looking at the rear of the ZR1.
Does it matter ? We are turning up some amazing American muscles. Speed for the ZR1 and a timeless design for the F-GT
100%. Fact is, I would love to own either of these cars and could care less which is faster than the other. The GT is already one of the most sought after cars on the market and I believe once and if the ZR1 proves itself, it too will enter those ranks. The Ford GT is a stunning car and huge thumbs up to Ford for building this work of art.
Well its on the Corvette Forum so of course it is going to be the Corvette. But from a non-biased opinion I would say yes to the Corvette being faster in all of the areas except top speed.
The GT does tend to be slightly quicker to 150 mph in most tests, but they are close. Same-day test in Autocar showed:
Ford GT - 17.1
Z06 - 17.8
This is also confirmed by Auto Motor und Sport's test at VW's test track. Both cars recorded identical 0-250 kph (155 mph) times of 19.0s. However, by 300 kph (186 mph), the Ford GT was much quicker: 33.6 vs 41.8.
That Motor Trend test is not a true indicator of the GT's top speed. On the same track, the ZR1 hit "only" 200.4 mph and we know it can go faster than that. Ford's APG doesn't have a straight long enough for these cars to hit their true top speed.
TopGear no longer has this linked on their site, but they wrote back in 2004: "In fact, it seems they over-achieved. A couple of days earlier, this very Ford GT cracked 190mph at Nardo. And it didn't stop until it hit... 212mph. Not just once, but on three occasions, driven by three separate drivers.
Now, due to some unfathomable bureaucratic decision, Ford has decided to down-play the GT's top speed, planning to publish it as a still-mighty 205mph - a figure high enough to make this the fastest Ford road car ever."
Re: Aero figures
Here are the results from the same wind tunnel, used by Sport Auto magazine. Figures taken at 200 kph. The ZR1 produces quite a bit of lift, compared to the GT, but it is better than the Z06.
Re: tires
I don't think the GT's tires are that much grippier than the Z06's. The Z06 is hampered by the runflat construction, yes, but both Goodyears have the same treadwear rating and very similar tread patterns. In most head to head tests I've seen, the Z06 pulls more g's and stops shorter than the GT, and braking can tell a lot about relative tire grip. As an example, see this test. 100-0; Skidpad
Z06: 283' ; 1.01g
GT: 321' ; 0.96g
"The GT trailed with stops in 114 and 321 feet, which we suspect was tire-traction limited."
A GT with modern rubber should pull more g's, brake shorter, and produce lower lap times. Though probably not lower than the ZR1.
Good information as usual. The only thing I would take exception to is the Nardo results. Nardo top speeds are generally useless because the track (a perfect banked circle) simulates something that effectively does not exist in real life, an infinitely long 200 mph road. http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...ph_tracks.html As a result I actually value the Motor Trend Ford GT test more not so much as a barometer of true top speed but more as an indicator of realistically achievable top speed relative to tested company. That is, to the degree that top speed is important. I have always said on this site that top speed is little more than academic as few will ever actually spend sustained time at 200 mph even on a racetrack.
But, again, Nardo results are useless and I suspect the Ford engineers knew that enough that they would not want to go out with any numbers achieved there as it would seem strange when nobody was able to repeat them.
But the Nardo is a favorite of companies such as Ferrari because they do let them go out with great marketing numbers. But as this Ferrari owner discovered when he had to sue Ferrari to take back his 360 Challenge Stradale when it couldn't hit the advertised top speed, sometimes you have to ask how some companies come up with top speed numbers. http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?set_i...9948684756F660
Nardo top speeds are generally useless because the track (a perfect banked circle) simulates something that effectively does not exist in real life, an infinitely long 200 mph road. But, again, Nardo results are useless and I suspect the Ford engineers knew that enough that they would not want to go out with any numbers achieved there as it would seem strange when nobody was able to repeat them.
But there are 200 mph roads out there in real life, and there are roads out there where these cars can hit their true top speeds. They exist on German autobahns and rural highways of Italy, the US, the Middle East, and Australia.
Ford's APG track is no more useful for obtaining top speed info due to the lateral loads imposed and the fact that there is a bump on one of the straight sections. The Z06 in that link you provided hit a top speed 20 mph lower than the factory claim. Does that raise suspicions about GM's claimed top speed for the Z06? It shouldn't; Z06 owners have gone faster than 177 mph on real-life roads. It raises questions as to whether that venue (Ford's track) is truly conducive to finding a vehicle's true top speed. An infinitely long 200 mph road does precisely that. I can pretty much guarantee that a Veyron or Aero SSC won't be finding its true 250 mph top speed on Ford's track.
But there are 200 mph roads out there in real life, and there are roads out there where these cars can hit their true top speeds. They exist on German autobahns and rural highways of Italy, the US, the Middle East, and Australia.
Outside of the Autobahn if you actually tried to hit 200 mph on any of the venues you cited you would be looking at very serious penalties if caught as there are strict laws against those speed and they would take such a violation very seriously. It’s a lot like saying there are places, including public ones, where you could empty an automatic weapon. Yes, theoretically. But pray the authorities don’t catch you. Even on the now heavily trafficked Autobahn such speeds are not routine though when traffic clears they do get high. But the fact is that for the majority of the world’s drivers, both in terms of the legal ability, routine traffic conditions in even the only permitted venue on earth and even more fundamentally the car’s sheer ability to reach 200 mph is relatively rare.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guibo
Ford's APG track is no more useful for obtaining top speed info due to the lateral loads imposed and the fact that there is a bump on one of the straight sections. The Z06 in that link you provided hit a top speed 20 mph lower than the factory claim. Does that raise suspicions about GM's claimed top speed for the Z06? It shouldn't; Z06 owners have gone faster than 177 mph on real-life roads. It raises questions as to whether that venue (Ford's track) is truly conducive to finding a vehicle's true top speed. An infinitely long 200 mph road does precisely that. I can pretty much guarantee that a Veyron or Aero SSC won't be finding its true 250 mph top speed on Ford's track.
The Z06 in the link I posted was not gunning for top speed. It was involved in a standing mile test performed at California's Lemoore Naval Air Station. I actually do believe that you could get to a Z06's top speed on the APG’s main straight. An infinite 200 mph road by its very nature does not exist outside of the effectively lab conditions of the Nardo. To rely on its results, as did the Challenge Stradale owner I posted above who had to sue to have the company take back his car, is to be seriously misled about the real world capabilities of the given vehicle.
I don’t believe you can guarantee that the Veyron would not hit 250 mph at APG. The APG has a 2.1 mile straightaway for high-speed runs. You feed into the straightaway off a 206 ft. radius turn with a low 45 mph safety limit which can easily be taken at 75 mph by a competent sports car/driver. As such, a Bug would enter the APG’s 2.1 mile straight at 75 mph. So what you would be trying to assure us is that the Bug, a vehicle with the ability to accelerate to 200 mph in well under a mile from a standing start, could not hit 250 mph given not one but two miles AND a 75 mph head start.
Pretty sure I wouldn’t be betting against the Bug under those conditions.
Outside of the Autobahn if you actually tried to hit 200 mph on any of the venues you cited you would be looking at very serious penalties if caught as there are strict laws against those speed and they would take such a violation very seriously. It’s a lot like saying there are places, including public ones, where you could empty an automatic weapon. Yes, theoretically. But pray the authorities don’t catch you.
We were talking about the existence of 200-mph roads. Whether law enforcement precludes us from hitting 200 mph is not really relevant. Yes, these roads do exist. And out in rural Australia and in parts of the middle east, law enforcement is practically non-existent anyway. One could also close down such a road (in the US), such was done for the SCC Aero. And thus the limitations of Ford's APG are bypassed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bwright
The Z06 in the link I posted was not gunning for top speed. It was involved in a standing mile test performed at California's Lemoore Naval Air Station. I actually do believe that you could get to a Z06's top speed on the APG’s main straight.
I don’t believe you can guarantee that the Veyron would not hit 250 mph at APG. The APG has a 2.1 mile straightaway for high-speed runs. You feed into the straightaway off a 206 ft. radius turn with a low 45 mph safety limit which can easily be taken at 75 mph by a competent sports car/driver. As such, a Bug would enter the APG’s 2.1 mile straight at 75 mph.
The 2.1-mile straight doesn't really figure into this, since none of the cars mentioned (certainly not the ZR1 and Ford GT) have been tested and documented on that configuration. We are talking about the oval on which all of these cars were tested for Motor Trend. This oval does not allow these cars to reach their true top speeds.
For the Bugatti, it's a lot different going from 0-200 compared to 200-250.
My guess is that since the Z06 has lost in every single head to head comparo with the GT-R, it makes for a better story when the ZR1 is thrown in there instead. Who wants to read another story of the GT-R beating the Z06? Look at Motor Trend's "War of the Worlds" article. Hailed on these forums when it shows the ZR1 coming out on top. But when the ZR1 places in the bottom half of Motor Trend's "Best Driver's Cars" article, Motor Trend's credibility goes to zero.
Since you are using fastestlaps.com results, consider:
Some of this is tire-related, and it's GM's fault for their tire choice for the Z06. A car with that kind of performance deserves better tires. The ZR1 is equipped with much better tires than the Z06, so the tires can no longer be an excuse when the ZR1 shows similar performance to Dunlop-shod 2010 (Euro '09) GT-R's in German tests.
The GT-R has consistently beaten the 997.1 GT3. I can't think of a single head to head test where the 997.1 GT3 came out ahead; odds being what they are, the results should be 50/50 if these two are in the same performance classs.
In head to head tests against the 997.2 GT3, it's still generally faster. Ex: In same-day testing at Goodwood, it is 1.5s faster than the GT3. The 997.2 GT3 is running the GT2 extremely close in terms of lap times.
Same-day testing at VIR shows the '09 GT-R to be only 1s slower than the Scuderia, and that's a nearly 3-minute lap. Would a standard F430 be only 1s slower on VIR? I doubt that very much. Sport Auto tested the F430 on P Zero Corsa R-compounds (like what the Scuderia comes with), and the Scuderia was still noticeably faster than the F430 by some margin.
My guess is that since the Z06 has lost in every single head to head comparo with the GT-R, it makes for a better story when the ZR1 is thrown in there instead. Who wants to read another story of the GT-R beating the Z06? Look at Motor Trend's "War of the Worlds" article. Hailed on these forums when it shows the ZR1 coming out on top. But when the ZR1 places in the bottom half of Motor Trend's "Best Driver's Cars" article, Motor Trend's credibility goes to zero.
Since you are using fastestlaps.com results, consider:
Some of this is tire-related, and it's GM's fault for their tire choice for the Z06. A car with that kind of performance deserves better tires. The ZR1 is equipped with much better tires than the Z06, so the tires can no longer be an excuse when the ZR1 shows similar performance to Dunlop-shod 2010 (Euro '09) GT-R's in German tests.
I see what you're saying, but the ZR1 looks to be quite a bit faster than the GTR most of the time (especially on American tracks - what's going on there???). Even though it beats the Z06 in all the head to heads, it's still closer to the Z06 than the ZR1 in performance. That's why the GTR is in a class just below the ZR1.
You did bring up something that really bothers the Z06 guys (including myself): tires. I'm not sure how much you know about physics, but it seems that you've done quite a bit of car dynamics homework. Do you really believe a GTR is that much faster than a Z06 using the same tires? Given the weight and horsepower of the GTR, something isn't adding up. If Nissan is actually that brilliant, then you realize a "racing GTR" (one less than 3000 lbs) will DOMINATE any class it enters?
Corvette Store
100%. Fact is, I would love to own either of these cars and could care less which is faster than the other. The GT is already one of the most sought after cars on the market and I believe once and if the ZR1 proves itself, it too will enter those ranks. The Ford GT is a stunning car and huge thumbs up to Ford for building this work of art.
