- Jul 13, 2006
- 4,782
ZL1 = 580hp
- Thread starter Kayvan
- Start date
Cobrar
GT Owner
ZL1 @ Nurburgring
Hey Aaron, before you ship that baby back home to the states, I have a contact for you at ZF/Sachs (right there in Germany) if you need some help with those front dampers. :frown
http://www.autoweek.com/article/20111007/VIDEONEWS/111009910
Hey Aaron, before you ship that baby back home to the states, I have a contact for you at ZF/Sachs (right there in Germany) if you need some help with those front dampers. :frown
http://www.autoweek.com/article/20111007/VIDEONEWS/111009910
The ZL1 did a 7:41 at The Ring this week. Not bad for a car that’s “not nearly as good to drive as the Mustang”. As a comparison a pullied GT did 7:40 when the car was tested at The Ring back in 2004 while driven by the head Jaguar test driver.
Perhaps the ZL1 does have “a CTS-V motor (LSA), not a ZR-1 motor (LS9)” but I have a CTS-V and that car did a 7:59 at The Ring three years ago. The engine is fantastic. The only other four-door sedan to do a faster Ring time is the $137K Porsche Panamera Turbo with Walter Röhrl at the wheel. For that money I could buy two loaded CTS-Vs. My understanding is that the CTS-V engine is the same as the ZR-1 with a smaller blower but, no matter, the car is a screamer and is one of the best looking sedans on the market today.
I’ve often wondered why Ford has never published a time for any Mustang at The Ring. Ever. I know they’ve tested the car there. I have heard that the Ring times for the GT 500 were “not very good”.
I love Ford and my GT but GM is making some pretty good cars for the money these days and it’s worth recognizing this. If they make a ZL1 convertible I’ll buy it. It’ll be a really fun car for the money.
Last edited:
I was comparing the SS to the Mustang GT, as those are the two versions that are out. You're not going to find many people that don't own Camaros that think the Camaro is better to drive than the Mustang out of those two. I was browsing the auto blogs post-ZL1 ring time and read some Camaro guys complaining after a reviewer was unkind and his review was harsher than mine:
"There are so many things to hate about it: The driving position is terrible, so bad that I literally needed multiple chiropractor visits after driving it. You can't see out of it when reversing or making a right turn. The whole dash is made of cheap feeling, hard plastic. There's no Nav screen available. The doors are also cheap feeling plastic. The engine sounds like it's going to tear itself to pieces at high RPM, unlike the nicely tuned Corvette exhaust. The shifter is chunky, and the steering wheel isn't designed to be held with actual human hands. The build quality is just a tiny step above awful. And most importantly, it's just not any fun to drive compared to the Mustang."
GM has found the perfect niche marketing. Ship cars to Europe, close course, have nobody there to verify independently what's been done to a car and then put a video on YouTube and watch the internet go. I'm not saying the car didn't run the number they claim it did, but nobody spends the time and effort to produce numbers at the Ring GM does because they know it's cheap advertising for the internet, and that started back with the original C5 Z06. I have heard that GM "has cheated" with pretty much every car they've ever sent to the Ring. Hand shaved tires on the C5 Z06, underweight and extra downforce on the CTS-V...if they are doing it with one, they are doing it with all of them...if they are doing something someone with a big mouth blabs at a bar, they are doing worse. There's no question the car is fast, but I put little to no stock in Ring times, especially when it's a benchmark of how much fun something is to drive.
As for GM, I don't care if GM builds a 10,000 hp 600 mpg plane-car that runs on garbage it subsequently turns into rainbows and gold coins, my Z06 was the last GM I will ever own.
"There are so many things to hate about it: The driving position is terrible, so bad that I literally needed multiple chiropractor visits after driving it. You can't see out of it when reversing or making a right turn. The whole dash is made of cheap feeling, hard plastic. There's no Nav screen available. The doors are also cheap feeling plastic. The engine sounds like it's going to tear itself to pieces at high RPM, unlike the nicely tuned Corvette exhaust. The shifter is chunky, and the steering wheel isn't designed to be held with actual human hands. The build quality is just a tiny step above awful. And most importantly, it's just not any fun to drive compared to the Mustang."
GM has found the perfect niche marketing. Ship cars to Europe, close course, have nobody there to verify independently what's been done to a car and then put a video on YouTube and watch the internet go. I'm not saying the car didn't run the number they claim it did, but nobody spends the time and effort to produce numbers at the Ring GM does because they know it's cheap advertising for the internet, and that started back with the original C5 Z06. I have heard that GM "has cheated" with pretty much every car they've ever sent to the Ring. Hand shaved tires on the C5 Z06, underweight and extra downforce on the CTS-V...if they are doing it with one, they are doing it with all of them...if they are doing something someone with a big mouth blabs at a bar, they are doing worse. There's no question the car is fast, but I put little to no stock in Ring times, especially when it's a benchmark of how much fun something is to drive.
As for GM, I don't care if GM builds a 10,000 hp 600 mpg plane-car that runs on garbage it subsequently turns into rainbows and gold coins, my Z06 was the last GM I will ever own.
- Jul 13, 2006
- 4,782
I think a lot of these Camaro "reviews" are from young guys used to driving Asian "Sporting" cars or hopped up Euro cars (Golf, etc); not from American muscle / pony car drivers...use to Tremec trannys and rumble and rattle of clutches of hi-po American cars. The Tremec tranny actually has its own 'rattle snake', they call it the "marbles in a can" on the Vette forum.
The Camaros outside looks clearly blow away what they are used to. And they are not willing to divorce the comfy / tactile interiors of their former cars.
The Huyndai Genesis Coupe R Spec Track is an amazing car and its interior is like a Mercedes SLK.
Its just ugly as spit.
I will be happy when all these race-boys go back to their bland rice burners.
The Camaros lines are gorgeous and the interiors is the first GM cars not to do the bar of dove soap dash. Its pods, and 4-pac guages and roboto head seats will be cult classics.
Im saving up for a ZLI and my Vette is still warm.
The Camaros outside looks clearly blow away what they are used to. And they are not willing to divorce the comfy / tactile interiors of their former cars.
The Huyndai Genesis Coupe R Spec Track is an amazing car and its interior is like a Mercedes SLK.
Its just ugly as spit.
I will be happy when all these race-boys go back to their bland rice burners.
The Camaros lines are gorgeous and the interiors is the first GM cars not to do the bar of dove soap dash. Its pods, and 4-pac guages and roboto head seats will be cult classics.
Im saving up for a ZLI and my Vette is still warm.
The guy that wrote that review owns a Corvette and a Raptor. Has nothing to do with Asian or european cars.
Do you really believe this Jeremy Clarkson-like rhetoric?
As for GM "cheating" with its cars at The Ring... the best stock GT Ring time, as tested by Ford in 2004, is an 8:00. The 7:40 was not a stock car. It was a pullied car. To my knowledge Ford has never acknowledged, anywhere, that this 7:40 time was with a modified car. I agree with you, "If they are doing it with one they are doing it with all of them." Ford is no exception. The GT 500 was tested at The Ring. What was the time? I can't seem to find it anywhere.
I'm not intending to start an argument but rather suggesting that bashing everything GM seems a little trite. Give me one FMC vehicle that can match the CTS-V or, for that matter, the Jeep Grand Cherokee SRT-8. We should all be proud that such interesting high-horsepower cars are made in America, by Ford and others, and buying them rather than bashing banners that compete with the one we like the most.
Cheers.
Sinovac
GT Owner
For the reasons DBK mentioned (and others), Ring times are not very helpful. We will see how the ZL1 does during the inevitable same day/track/driver test once the car is released. I think the Camaro looks cool but the SS I drove was nowhere near as fun to drive as the Mustang. The cabin is a very poor design, but it is true to the concept car.
BlackICE
GT Owner
He's a writer and TV host being hyperbolic. It's what they do. Point stands.
Ford never ran a Ring time with a Ford GT. End of story. Any time put forth by anyone as run by Ford is false, so whoever you're getting 8:00 from is pulling your chain. They will run a ring time with 2013 GT500, but again, Ford doesn't and has never put forth the effort GM does to produce ring times. it's not a marketing strategy they pursue.
I'm not bashing everything GM. I do not like the Camaro, especially how it looks. Thats an opinion. I think the CTSV is a fine car that looks very nice and performs well and if it wasn't produced by GM I would happily drive one.
Ford never ran a Ring time with a Ford GT. End of story. Any time put forth by anyone as run by Ford is false, so whoever you're getting 8:00 from is pulling your chain. They will run a ring time with 2013 GT500, but again, Ford doesn't and has never put forth the effort GM does to produce ring times. it's not a marketing strategy they pursue.
I'm not bashing everything GM. I do not like the Camaro, especially how it looks. Thats an opinion. I think the CTSV is a fine car that looks very nice and performs well and if it wasn't produced by GM I would happily drive one.
From the limited reading I've done on the LS9 & the LSA, they're not exactly "the same".
The internal diffs:
- LS9 = forged titanium 'rods...LSA = "powdered metal" 'rods
- LS9 = forged alum. pistons...LSA = hypereutectic alum.
- LS9 = .562 intake, .558 exhaust...LSA = .480 intake, .480 exhaust
- LS9 = 211* int. duration / 230* exh...LSA = 198* int. / 216* exh. (both hyd. rollers)
Near as I can 'figger', the rest of the internals are all the same. EXTERNALLY, I suspicion the blower on the LS9 is probably a bit bigger...or runs a smaller pulley...or maybe both...but, as yet I haven't read anything specific about that one way or the other. ('Not saying the info isn't "out there" someplace if one wants to look...I just haven't bothered.)
:cheers
(Edit: Well, the blower question began to "bother" me...so I Googled the differences and found out that, according to GM media online, the LS9 uses a 2.3 L/rev supercharger and the LSA uses a 1.9 L/rev...so, those of you who may have been wondering...................)
Last edited:
Gierkink; said:
I've had this conversation many times with Jamal. I just had it again in the two minutes before i posted this to make sure the all parties haven't fried my brains. Ford did not shut the ring down and set out to run a number for the leader board at the Nordschliefe in a Ford GT.
"Chris Porritt (Aston) ran it during the public days. They weren't timing anything. I know, I was there." - Jamal Hameedi, Ford GT program manager.
That yellow car was featured in articles across the continent. It was Jamal driving in many of them. Maybe someone went back on their own and ran one, but it wasn't part of the program, and is therefore irrelevant.
Officially, Ford did not run a GT at the ring in pursuit of a number. I know that. Jamal is a liar, I'm sure, but Ford did not run the car at the Ring in pursuit of a number.
For what it's worth, these guys make hundreds of laps over there when chasing a spot, so hell yes it matters. It makes all the difference in the world as to the relevance. Showing up and putting in a few laps on a 12.8 mile course is a far cry from shutting it down after 2 weeks of non stop 8 hour a day lapping in preparation for the "die trying for the net" lap.
Camaro lines are gorgeous? You mean the 69 SS right? I went yesterday and drove the 3/4 pickups from GM, Ford, Dodge, and the 1/2 ton Tundra. The GM even being brand new already seemed to have more rattles than any of the other three. They just don't make a very tight vehicle. I drove the Escalade with my brother when he was SUV shopping. Not even in the same ball park as the Lexus LX470 he ended up with. Sorry, I don't see how anyone could find a GM product to be anything other than a plastic rattle trap. I think all the modern musclecar replicas are pretty sad facsimiles of the originals. They could have been so much better than the over bloated final product.
Sinovac
GT Owner
Ouch. Don't get me wrong, I love "the originals" but they belong in the past where they came from. I've had my fair share of "the originals" and, with the possible exception of aesthetics, they in no way, shape or form compare to the "modern muscle car replicas" in any performance, safety or comfort measure.
2112
Blue/white 06'
^^^
I think the modern muscle looks bloated because they are trying so squeeze the look and feel of the originals onto the aerodynamics and safety concerns of the 21st century. The new cars definitely out perform the old ones (performance, efficiency, safety and comfort).
I love the originals but they are like driving farm machinery compared to the new. I'm with Kayvan. I really like the current designs. Mustangs first, then Camaros and Challengers a distant 3rd. The Glory days for pony cars are now.
I think the modern muscle looks bloated because they are trying so squeeze the look and feel of the originals onto the aerodynamics and safety concerns of the 21st century. The new cars definitely out perform the old ones (performance, efficiency, safety and comfort).
I love the originals but they are like driving farm machinery compared to the new. I'm with Kayvan. I really like the current designs. Mustangs first, then Camaros and Challengers a distant 3rd. The Glory days for pony cars are now.
I didn't say they ran the cars in "pursuit of a number". I just said Ford ran two cars at the The Ring and the stock car ran 8:00 and the pullied car ran 7:40. I'm not sure why this is becoming such a big issue for you. It appears that I'm now accused of calling Jamal “a liar”. I’ve never met the man and I never said he was lying. Now we seem to be calling into question my integrity. Ford had two press cars in Europe for about a year. Do you think it’s possible that they ran one or both of those cars at The Ring? Guess what, they did.
It appears you are not disputing that a Ford GT (at least one car) ran at The Ring "unofficially" with the head test driver at Jaguar behind the wheel. Do you really think that Ford had the head test driver for Jaguar drive a car around The Ring without a stopwatch in someone's hand? Really?
Trust me, in 2004 Ford ran two cars at The Ring with the head test driver at Jaguar behind the wheel and someone timed the laps. It really happened. I’m not making this up.
I’m done now as I’ve already spend too much time trying to justify a bit of factual information I’ve tried to leave to the Ford GT community.
Cheers.
I didn't say the car never went around the Ring. I said that Ford never ran the GT at the Ring for a number. There is a massive, massive diffence between trying to get a number and making a lap. There's no point in even quoting a number if it's not for the express purpose of getting a lap time on the leader board. The course is 13 miles long. It takes weeks of driving, optimal weather, setup and a closed course to get a number. That ZL1 in the hands of Walter Rohrl himself wouldn't run anywhere near what GM will make it do when just looking for an Internet vid. Every car known to man has been around the Ring at some point. If it's not a "we went to the ring, we closed the ring down, we spent a couple days setting the car up and here is the number we ran," it's meaningless.
You brought up the ZL1 time that GM specifically chased on a closed down track to put up on the big board. Bringing up what a GT ran outside the very specific parameters of obtaining a number that was not an official Ford GT program objective is not relevant and is not the same sport. When I say "ford didn't run a number" and Jamal says "we didn't run the GT at the Ring looking for a number", that does not mean someone didn't drive a Ford GT around the Ring.
You brought up the ZL1 time that GM specifically chased on a closed down track to put up on the big board. Bringing up what a GT ran outside the very specific parameters of obtaining a number that was not an official Ford GT program objective is not relevant and is not the same sport. When I say "ford didn't run a number" and Jamal says "we didn't run the GT at the Ring looking for a number", that does not mean someone didn't drive a Ford GT around the Ring.