11 GT500 on Motor Trend Cover

[bigsnake]

April issue of Motor Trend magazine under hottest performance cars under $100K. Pretty good stats on the three !

[JWG223]

April issue of Motor Trend magazine under hottest performance cars under $100K. Pretty good stats on the three !

 

I think most impressive were the braking stats. A couple feet were all that separated the best/worst performers. Brakes have come a long way.

[John Canfield]

The article on the Mustang GT vs Camaro SS is pretty good also, but the best parts of the whole magazine are the really cool Goodyear ad featuring a 2011 FRPP GT500 and the article on the (we don't get it here) FPV Falcon GT from Australia.

[bpmurr]

I think most impressive were the braking stats. A couple feet were all that separated the best/worst performers. Brakes have come a long way.

 

 

Impressive considering the other two cars have bigger front and rear brakes. I have a feeling those other cars would handle more hot laps better.

[Bill Hamilton]

The '11 Shelby finished third as it was "down" $40,000 in price (LOL). A dyno test to see the rwhp on all three cars tested that day would have been interesting. The GT-R is truly a beast with 0-60 in 2.9 and four-wheel drive but it was even heavier that the Shelby by nearly 100 pounds. A better car in this test would have been a Ford GT as that would have been closer to the class of cars being compared.

 

Interesting test but they sure made the Shelby out to be a "cheap" car instead of what a great bargin for the performance.

[JWG223]

The FGT sold for 230+. Msrp 153k. Still lopsided on $.

[Bill Hamilton]

The FGT sold for 230+. Msrp 153k. Still lopsided on $.

 

 

It'd be just as fair as the original comparison only the Ford GT would be up in the price (if that's fair). Most people will focus on this as the Shelby finished third instead of what a tremendous performance bargain it is when measured against World Class Sports Cars. A new Mustang GT 5.0 could have finished third in this test at 1/3 the price instead of half. Have the Shelby GT-500 comparison test again with other $50,000 sports cars.

[jsarkis]

To bad they would't give the "under dog" some new shoes. Having the same size tire on the GT500 would of made these results much closer.

[Cabinetman]

To bad they would't give the "under dog" some new shoes. Having the same size tire on the GT500 would of made these results much closer.

 

 

I would blame Ford for that. Most magazines are going to test cars just as they come from the manufacturer because the majority of car owners do not mod their cars.

 

I've owned the older and slower 2011 GT-R and I can say without a doubt the way it puts power down out of the hole is incredible. The only other car I have driven that does even better from a dig is the 2010 911 Turbo PDK with launch control. Luckily, the 2012 GT-R I have on order also has launch control so it should be pretty close to the 911.

[JWG223]

It'd be just as fair as the original comparison only the Ford GT would be up in the price (if that's fair). Most people will focus on this as the Shelby finished third instead of what a tremendous performance bargain it is when measured against World Class Sports Cars. A new Mustang GT 5.0 could have finished third in this test at 1/3 the price instead of half. Have the Shelby GT-500 comparison test again with other $50,000 sports cars.

 

 

You're right, I'm just saying that it wouldn't be fair price ways.

 

I would love to see that comparo, FWIW.

 

GT-R

FGT

ZR1

Viper

599GTB

LP670

GT2

 

lets see what the worlds best bring to the table. And don't let those bastards send 2 599GTB's, one for cornering, one for drag. Make them send just ONE car, no pit-crew, no adjustments. I hate how Ferrari does things. Always sending 2 cars for testing, censoring things, etc.

Meh.

 

I would blame Ford for that. Most magazines are going to test cars just as they come from the manufacturer because the majority of car owners do not mod their cars.

 

I've owned the older and slower 2011 GT-R and I can say without a doubt the way it puts power down out of the hole is incredible. The only other car I have driven that does even better from a dig is the 2010 911 Turbo PDK with launch control. Luckily, the 2012 GT-R I have on order also has launch control so it should be pretty close to the 911.

 

 

As much smack as I talk about the GT-R, I would honestly be hard pressed to have not bought it if I had the finances to do it. Nissan really stepped up the game there.

[Cabinetman]

As much smack as I talk about the GT-R, I would honestly be hard pressed to have not bought it if I had the finances to do it. Nissan really stepped up the game there.

 

 

I got pretty used to all the internet bashing of the GT-R when I had my first one. I quickly learned that the car was built for the video game generation and any knuckle head could go fast because, as we all know, the GT-R drives itself. I've also been told never to race any cars from a roll because once the advantage of all wheel drive goes away the GT-R is basically no faster than a Civic Si. Then there is the fact that you can take basically any other car that stickers for less than $40k and put $5k of mods on it and it will destroy the GT-R thus making the Nissan a tremendous waste of money. I always take the smack talking with a grain of salt because I know what the car can and can't do. I picked the car I wanted within my budget restrictions and I'm good with that.

 

One thing I found interesting when I had my Nissan was that the internet smack talking didn't translate into much bashing in the real world. When I was out in my car I got almost universally positive feedback from other drivers. Even a few Z06 and 911 owners gave me a nod or thumbs up. I also had very few cars try to race me even from a roll. I guess they just didn't want to waste gas showing my how slow my lowly Nissan really is.

[darthracer777]

I got pretty used to all the internet bashing of the GT-R when I had my first one. I quickly learned that the car was built for the video game generation and any knuckle head could go fast because, as we all know, the GT-R drives itself. I've also been told never to race any cars from a roll because once the advantage of all wheel drive goes away the GT-R is basically no faster than a Civic Si. Then there is the fact that you can take basically any other car that stickers for less than $40k and put $5k of mods on it and it will destroy the GT-R thus making the Nissan a tremendous waste of money. I always take the smack talking with a grain of salt because I know what the car can and can't do. I picked the car I wanted within my budget restrictions and I'm good with that.

 

One thing I found interesting when I had my Nissan was that the internet smack talking didn't translate into much bashing in the real world. When I was out in my car I got almost universally positive feedback from other drivers. Even a few Z06 and 911 owners gave me a nod or thumbs up. I also had very few cars try to race me even from a roll. I guess they just didn't want to waste gas showing my how slow my lowly Nissan really is.

 

 

I assume that you have a '12 GT500 on order? Just askin'........

[Cabinetman]

I assume that you have a '12 GT500 on order? Just askin'........

 

No sir. I currently have a 2011 GT500 in the garage and have a 2012 GT-R on order. I ordered the Nissan back in December and should be looking at delivery later this month. The Shelby has been fun, but I prefer the GT-R.

[JWG223]

I got pretty used to all the internet bashing of the GT-R when I had my first one. I quickly learned that the car was built for the video game generation and any knuckle head could go fast because, as we all know, the GT-R drives itself. I've also been told never to race any cars from a roll because once the advantage of all wheel drive goes away the GT-R is basically no faster than a Civic Si. Then there is the fact that you can take basically any other car that stickers for less than $40k and put $5k of mods on it and it will destroy the GT-R thus making the Nissan a tremendous waste of money. I always take the smack talking with a grain of salt because I know what the car can and can't do. I picked the car I wanted within my budget restrictions and I'm good with that.

 

One thing I found interesting when I had my Nissan was that the internet smack talking didn't translate into much bashing in the real world. When I was out in my car I got almost universally positive feedback from other drivers. Even a few Z06 and 911 owners gave me a nod or thumbs up. I also had very few cars try to race me even from a roll. I guess they just didn't want to waste gas showing my how slow my lowly Nissan really is.

 

I appreciate the GT-R. It's just not my cup of tea. They are awesome cars, I'm just into lighter cars with standard transmissions. If I ever encounter one, though, I would be curious how it does from a roll. From a dig, it would slaughter.

 

I have read the '12s are sick from a roll, too, trapping 126 in one mag test.

 

Still have to respect how the GT500 did with the limited budget. The only place it had trouble seems to be the getting started part. Everything else about it proved to be very close to the others.

[Cabinetman]

I appreciate the GT-R. It's just not my cup of tea. They are awesome cars, I'm just into lighter cars with standard transmissions. If I ever encounter one, though, I would be curious how it does from a roll. From a dig, it would slaughter.

 

I have read the '12s are sick from a roll, too, trapping 126 in one mag test.

 

Still have to respect how the GT500 did with the limited budget. The only place it had trouble seems to be the getting started part. Everything else about it proved to be very close to the others.

 

 

I have respect for the GT500. It is a tremendous car for the price. My biggest complaint is the traction issue in lower gears, but no car is perfect.

[Ezareth]

I have respect for the GT500. It is a tremendous car for the price. My biggest complaint is the traction issue in lower gears, but no car is perfect.

 

 

Which is why when people ask "What are the first mods I should put on my GT500? A pulley or a tune?" I end up shaking my head.

 

More power is the last thing the GT500 needs. Better traction, less weight, and a more accurate shift are things the GT500 needs.

 

I picked up that Motor Trend magazine. Definately a good read although they have a typo on the last page of the article that puts the GT500 within a few 10ths of a second of the GT-R around the track when it is more like 3 seconds + a few tenths.

 

All in all though, for $55K you cant find a better performing car or one with more potential.

[JWG223]

I have respect for the GT500. It is a tremendous car for the price. My biggest complaint is the traction issue in lower gears, but no car is perfect.

 

Enter the Boss 302 turning better times in a straight line than the GT500 even though power/weight is way different.

 

Other than the 1/4 mile trap speed, I think the Boss would have been a better candidate for that test, and a $43K car hanging with the Carbon Z and GT-R on the track, etc. would have been just painful for them.

[Cabinetman]

Enter the Boss 302 turning better times in a straight line than the GT500 even though power/weight is way different.

 

Other than the 1/4 mile trap speed, I think the Boss would have been a better candidate for that test, and a $43K car hanging with the Carbon Z and GT-R on the track, etc. would have been just painful for them.

 

 

I think it is a bit much to assume the Boss 302 would hang with a Z06 or GT-R on most road courses assuming equal drivers. I know Nurburgring times getting thrown around a lot, but if you look at the time of 7:24.22 that Nissan is claiming in it's 2012 GT-R brochure you will see that very few cars can hang with the GT-R on this big track. Supposedly this time was set in less than ideal conditions and there is video proof. The Z06 did a 7:42.99 back in 2005. I'm sure the carbon edition would bring that time down some. The E9x BMW M3, which seems to be the car Ford wanted to beat with the Boss, posts 'Ring times of over 8 minutes for comparisons sake.

 

Any area wear the Boss may very well have an advantage is in the ability to string more hot laps together without issues. The GT-R is a big and heavy car that can be hell on tires, brakes and fluids when you flog it. Transmission cooling and brake fade seem to be the most common issues that come up on the track. The 2012 has made some changes to help in both areas, but I still doubt a GT-R will go as many laps as the new Boss without a few cool down laps mixed in. Add in the cost of tires and brakes for the GT-R (pads and rotors through a Nissan dealer run north of $5k installed!) and it becomes obvious that the GT-R is only a good track car for those that have money to burn. I know if I was a track junkie I would choose the Boss LS over the GT-R just because I think it will be cheaper to run and likely less finicky.

 

I have to admit, if the Boss 302 had been available when I bought my Shelby I would have probably gone that route. I've owned M3s, 911s as well as the GT-R and I think sports cars suite me better than muscle cars. In my mind the Boss is a sports car while the Shelby is still more of a muscle car. To each his own.

[JWG223]

I think it is a bit much to assume the Boss 302 would hang with a Z06 or GT-R on most road courses assuming equal drivers. I know Nurburgring times getting thrown around a lot, but if you look at the time of 7:24.22 that Nissan is claiming in it's 2012 GT-R brochure you will see that very few cars can hang with the GT-R on this big track. Supposedly this time was set in less than ideal conditions and there is video proof. The Z06 did a 7:42.99 back in 2005. I'm sure the carbon edition would bring that time down some. The E9x BMW M3, which seems to be the car Ford wanted to beat with the Boss, posts 'Ring times of over 8 minutes for comparisons sake.

 

Any area wear the Boss may very well have an advantage is in the ability to string more hot laps together without issues. The GT-R is a big and heavy car that can be hell on tires, brakes and fluids when you flog it. Transmission cooling and brake fade seem to be the most common issues that come up on the track. The 2012 has made some changes to help in both areas, but I still doubt a GT-R will go as many laps as the new Boss without a few cool down laps mixed in. Add in the cost of tires and brakes for the GT-R (pads and rotors through a Nissan dealer run north of $5k installed!) and it becomes obvious that the GT-R is only a good track car for those that have money to burn. I know if I was a track junkie I would choose the Boss LS over the GT-R just because I think it will be cheaper to run and likely less finicky.

 

I have to admit, if the Boss 302 had been available when I bought my Shelby I would have probably gone that route. I've owned M3s, 911s as well as the GT-R and I think sports cars suite me better than muscle cars. In my mind the Boss is a sports car while the Shelby is still more of a muscle car. To each his own.

 

 

Noone is assuming anything (Well, you threw the word "Most" in there...so...most tight/technical courses! Lol). The Boss lapped Leguna Seca faster with MOTORTREND (not some Ford guy like what happened with what i consider the bogus VIR numbers for the GT500) driving, quicker than the 2007 Z06 (shocks, etc. revised now, so maybe a slightly different outcome) and the 2009 GT-R's best lap times.

 

The car is a rocket, and this is coming from a Z06 owner.

 

Respect where it's due!

 

*Around the 'Ring, or VIR, where there are more long straights, I think the Boss would indeed take a back seat to the GT-R and Z06 of any year, though. On a tight, technical track, it seems to do VERY! well.

[Cabinetman]

Noone is assuming anything (Well, you threw the word "Most" in there...so...most tight/technical courses! Lol). The Boss lapped Leguna Seca faster with MOTORTREND (not some Ford guy like what happened with what i consider the bogus VIR numbers for the GT500) driving, quicker than the 2007 Z06 (shocks, etc. revised now, so maybe a slightly different outcome) and the 2009 GT-R's best lap times.

 

The car is a rocket, and this is coming from a Z06 owner.

 

Respect where it's due!

 

*Around the 'Ring, or VIR, where there are more long straights, I think the Boss would indeed take a back seat to the GT-R and Z06 of any year, though. On a tight, technical track, it seems to do VERY! well.

 

 

Your points are valid. It is just so hard to compare cars on the track unless they are driven in identical conditions by the same driver. Really to be truly fair you would also need to make sure that all the cars are running the same tire brand and compound.

 

You are absolutely correct that the track layout makes a lot of difference. A tight track that never lets you get above third gear will tighten the gap between the big horsepower cars and the more moderately power cars. I still think the GT-R's traction advantage coming out of corners will make it hard to beat on most courses assuming equal drivers.

 

I feel like we are truly in the golden age of sports cars. There are so many great car currently available even at moderate price points. The Boss 302 just adds another fantastic option for the guy that wants a dual purpose street/track day car and doesn't want to spend $100k plus. I'm sure there are going to be some Porsche 997 GT3 owners that will be scratching their heads when that can't shake the $45k bone stock Mustang at local track days.

[JWG223]

Your points are valid. It is just so hard to compare cars on the track unless they are driven in identical conditions by the same driver. Really to be truly fair you would also need to make sure that all the cars are running the same tire brand and compound.

 

You are absolutely correct that the track layout makes a lot of difference. A tight track that never lets you get above third gear will tighten the gap between the big horsepower cars and the more moderately power cars. I still think the GT-R's traction advantage coming out of corners will make it hard to beat on most courses assuming equal drivers.

 

I feel like we are truly in the golden age of sports cars. There are so many great car currently available even at moderate price points. The Boss 302 just adds another fantastic option for the guy that wants a dual purpose street/track day car and doesn't want to spend $100k plus. I'm sure there are going to be some Porsche 997 GT3 owners that will be scratching their heads when that can't shake the $45k bone stock Mustang at local track days.

 

 

Once again, fair enough.

 

However, you are never going to convince me that a 0-60 of under 4 seconds isn't better than the GT500, unless of course we assume that the motortrend test of the BOSS occured on better pavement in better conditions than EVER BEFORE available when testing the GT500. I just don't buy it.

 

The BOSS comes so close to GT500 performance that if you plan on staying stock and roll-racing and dyno measurements aren't your only focus, if performance is the goal the GT500 is a monumental waste (Granted, you get a lot more, interior etc. which is why I say if performance is the end-goal).

 

The BOSS raised the bar, and the GT500 needs to step it up, it's emberrassing. It is like the 370Z accelerating faster than the GT-R, or the Grand Sport turning better lap times than the Z06, or a regular 3-series out-slaloming the M3.

 

I hope that Ford has something absurd planned for the GT500 when they come out with the new mustang platform. I think it would be an interesting tweak if the Shelby returned to the Cobra name and took more after the A/C Cobra and went lightweight with big power. Maybe a modified FGT type vehicle, splitting off from the mustang line.

[Cabinetman]

Once again, fair enough.

 

However, you are never going to convince me that a 0-60 of under 4 seconds isn't better than the GT500, unless of course we assume that the motortrend test of the BOSS occured on better pavement in better conditions than EVER BEFORE available when testing the GT500. I just don't buy it.

 

The BOSS comes so close to GT500 performance that if you plan on staying stock and roll-racing and dyno measurements aren't your only focus, if performance is the goal the GT500 is a monumental waste (Granted, you get a lot more, interior etc. which is why I say if performance is the end-goal).

 

The BOSS raised the bar, and the GT500 needs to step it up, it's emberrassing. It is like the 370Z accelerating faster than the GT-R, or the Grand Sport turning better lap times than the Z06, or a regular 3-series out-slaloming the M3.

 

I hope that Ford has something absurd planned for the GT500 when they come out with the new mustang platform. I think it would be an interesting tweak if the Shelby returned to the Cobra name and took more after the A/C Cobra and went lightweight with big power. Maybe a modified FGT type vehicle, splitting off from the mustang line.

 

 

You will get no argument from me. I think that Ford definitely needs to reboot the GT500 and create a Mustang that has the performance numbers to back up the power to weight ratio of the car. 550hp means nothing if you can't get it to the ground consistently. I don't necessarily care if Ford has a track day special that is a little quicker around a road course, but the GT500 should be the fastest street car while still offering the comforts and conveniences buyers in this segment seem to expect.