2013 ZR1 Vs. 2013 GTS

[Mile30]

The Ford GT... how you make a Mustang competitive with real supercars.

[TheGlassMaker]

If ford would put a IRS in the mustang it would be all over for the competiton. I like the fact it has the live rear though the fact they can tame the rear enough to compete with 100k supercars is a feat all in its own. Its not fords fault the competition is so far behind. That the mustang can keep up with them. Yea it may not surpass but it can keep up. I mean 660hp 630tq and 200 mph for 60k for a legit pony car is nothing to sneeze at. Give ford a couple more years.

Sent from my LGL55C using FF Mobile

[Joeywhat]

No it wouldn't, it'd still be too heavy and tall.

It's just not made for going around corners like some other cars...and that's just fine. Make the handling better and it'll end up a different car (and more expensive as well). It's fine how it is...there are other options for if you want to go around corners quickly.

It doesn't need to compete with everything out there.

[kylesvt720]

If I'm spending that money on a new car, It's the Viper. If I'm buying a Vette, I'm buying a used base C6, and building an 800whp monster with it.

[mac.mogul]

The handling on the new GT500 is just fine. It has the most advanced suspension of any Mustang to date.

The power is the problem. It is just too powerful to be useful on a track. Streets of Willow, VIR, those are not the best tracks to have a car like the GT500. Sebring would be a good choice.

[kylesvt720]

Originally Posted by mac.mogul

The handling on the new GT500 is just fine. It has the most advanced suspension of any Mustang to date.

The power is the problem. It is just too powerful to be useful on a track. Streets of Willow, VIR, those are not the best tracks to have a car like the GT500. Sebring would be a good choice.

That's partially true. It's too much power for that chassis and suspension setup. Corvettes can easily handle 700+ horsepower on the track. As the mustangs go up, they get a worse and worse weight distribution, and that couples with 1970s suspension really hurts them. The GT500 should have a lot more suspension upgrades than it does, shove the firewall back, and get rid of the back seats to make room in the cockpit.

[LouBomb]

Originally Posted by whynotthinkwhynot

Or $130k Porsche Carerra 4s which has a back seat and 4WD, and can be had as a convertible. Sure, it's only 400 hp, but it's a Porsche. You could also get a Mercedes AMG E63 Coupe that looks like some ricer stuck a carbon fiber wing on the back of their dad's hand-me-down. Sure, it's not as fast as these 2, but it has a back seat that is bigger than the one in the Shelby. The smarter thing to do would be get a ZL1 Camaro and a Hennessey 800 (or 1000) upgrade, then you can run the Lightning lap around Laguna Seca as fast as a Ferarri- with a back seat.

end thread/

[kylesvt720]

Except Hennessey is MASSIVE RIP OFF.

[mac.mogul]

All I'm saying is that the track-tuned hardcore Boss 302 Laguna Seca runs 3 seconds slower around Laguna Seca than the new GT500. It may be heavy and overpowered but it is still an amazingly balanced car on a track. It belies any notion of what a Mustang is or has ever been.

[TheGlassMaker]

Originally Posted by mac.mogul

All I'm saying is that the track-tuned hardcore Boss 302 Laguna Seca runs 3 seconds slower around Laguna Seca than the new GT500. It may be heavy and overpowered but it is still an amazingly balanced car on a track. It belies any notion of what a Mustang is or has ever been.

This^^ for what the mustang is it's nothing to sneeze at never said it should be better than everything out there. As for the camaro, it feels heavy, it feels slow and you can't see anything out of it. It looks cool sitting at a car show and people will drool on it but seat of the pants I don't think it's worth it.