Motor Trend gives the Nod to the ZL1..............

[William Rodgers]

Anyone read the New Motortrend, to me it was a pretty well written review. Would I buy the ZL1 over the 2013 GT500, NO. Is it a better Daily Driver for the money, I would say yes. It is cheaper and has superior technology. The fact that the GT500 can not do more than one lap with-out the brakes fading is ridiculous for that price. Also the fact it does not have IRS and it is more expensive than the ZL1 to me is a big mistake.

 

At the end of the day for me the Looks of the Exterior and especially the Interior is far superior on the GT500, but if bang for the buck goes to the ZL1.

[svt13]

You are essentially paying for the extra hp. An unjustified premium. Ford is dumb. They should have put 4 piston rears and cooling for the brakes and charged way less than a 5k increase in power. I picked the Shelby over outside looks and inside. Otherwise I would have bought a zl1. Way way better tech and it shows. But it's interesting to note why at road Atlanta there was no issue of brake fade. Not one magazine in the 40 track runs complained about it. I would ignore this comment from motor trend. As far as comfort. This car is as comfortable as a BMW. That's good enough for me. It's a sports car not a caddy.

 

Ford should have added a watts link and torque arm since no IRS. But I will be adding this to mine sure enough

[Whammer]

I posted the following on another forum regarding this comparison-

 

Absolutely stupid.

Daily driving comparison is basically subjective, it's really just personal opinion. Victory is given to the ZL1.

Drag strip- GT500 roasts the ZL1 and is given a close victory.

Laguna Seca track- GT500 beats the ZL1 on the Hot Lap but not happy with the results they keep lapping the cars until they find fault with the GT500 brakes and then give the victory to the ZL1. When have successive laps ever been done in these comparisons? It's always been the Hot Lap time that determines the winner.

 

The best analogy I can come up with is Boxer vs. Slugger. Boxing writers usually hate sluggers. These writers of the "sweet science" prefer the skillful boxer. Writers always believe in "the pen is mightier than the sword"; and "brains over brawn". And with the ZL1 vs. the GT500 we have the same thing happening.

 

It's the crude (live rear axle), brutish (660hp) slugger (GT500) vs. the scientific (magnetic suspension), refined (easy to drive) boxer (ZL1). The car magazine writers WANT the boxer to win and they downplay anything the slugger does. They make subjective, opinion based comparisons and praise the boxer. Then it's fight night (drag strip and test track) and the two fighters stand toe to toe. The slugger pounds the boxer with crude right and left hooks, swinging for the fences, awkward and unrefined. The boxer remains poised and balanced.

 

The fight ends with the boxer being overwhelmed by the power of the slugger, his only victory coming from showing more style and class. Savage power has overcome science and the writer's world has been turned upside down and they just cannot accept what they have just witnessed. Had the fight been longer, they speculate, surely the slugger would've punched himself out and the boxer would've been victorious. Thus they award the championship to the boxer....it doesn't matter to them that the slugger left the ring wearing the Championship Belt, in their eyes the boxer won.

__________________

[svt13]

I posted the following on another forum regarding this comparison-

 

Absolutely stupid.

Daily driving comparison is basically subjective, it's really just personal opinion. Victory is given to the ZL1.

Drag strip- GT500 roasts the ZL1 and is given a close victory.

Laguna Seca track- GT500 beats the ZL1 on the Hot Lap but not happy with the results they keep lapping the cars until they find fault with the GT500 brakes and then give the victory to the ZL1. When have successive laps ever been done in these comparisons? It's always been the Hot Lap time that determines the winner.

 

The best analogy I can come up with is Boxer vs. Slugger. Boxing writers usually hate sluggers. These writers of the "sweet science" prefer the skillful boxer. Writers always believe in "the pen is mightier than the sword"; and "brains over brawn". And with the ZL1 vs. the GT500 we have the same thing happening.

 

It's the crude (live rear axle), brutish (660hp) slugger (GT500) vs. the scientific (magnetic suspension), refined (easy to drive) boxer (ZL1). The car magazine writers WANT the boxer to win and they downplay anything the slugger does. They make subjective, opinion based comparisons and praise the boxer. Then it's fight night (drag strip and test track) and the two fighters stand toe to toe. The slugger pounds the boxer with crude right and left hooks, swinging for the fences, awkward and unrefined. The boxer remains poised and balanced.

 

The fight ends with the boxer being overwhelmed by the power of the slugger, his only victory coming from showing more style and class. Savage power has overcome science and the writer's world has been turned upside down and they just cannot accept what they have just witnessed. Had the fight been longer, they speculate, surely the slugger would've punched himself out and the boxer would've been victorious. Thus they award the championship to the boxer....it doesn't matter to them that the slugger left the ring wearing the Championship Belt, in their eyes the boxer won.

__________________

 

 

I mean if the boxer was jason stathem then we know who would have won that fight. Everyone seen transporter 1 I assume when he whoops the brute with technique over strength? lol.

[2001SilverGT]

The fading brakes story is strange, as Car and Driver says that the GT500 had fade free brakes, even after a full day of testing at the track :glare:

[svt13]

The fading brakes story is strange, as Car and Driver says that the GT500 had fade free brakes, even after a full day of testing at the track :glare:

 

And no one at road atlanta complained about the brakes too. They are the only ones who complain about the brakes. The zl1 and shelby both have 6 piston. The 4 piston in the rears on the zl1 though are for the 300 extra pounds it has. The increased rotor size should be sufficient to compensate for not having a 4 piston rear. Or maybe even the 1 piston is not enough, maybe ford should have at least increased it to 2. I don't even understand how 1 piston works because there has to be a piston on each side doesn't there? I may have read this wrong and the rear may have 2 piston.

[patrickshelby]

Motor Trend gives the Nod to the ZL1..............

 

Who cares?

If you are a SHELBY fan you don't give a .... what they say. Good or bad.

You know what you like and why you like it.

[txcobra]

+1

[blackonblack]

+1

+1 +1

[devious_stang]

+1 +1

 

+1+1+1

[William Rodgers]

So because it is a "Shelby" it is automatically better??? Sorry I love my Shelby, but I will never think that way. I am a Car Enthusiast, not a Only Shelby Enthusiast. I have owned Porsches, BMW M Series, Audi's, ect, still have an Audi today and absolutely love it. Some I liked better than others, none were because of the Brand Name.

 

I think the review was a little biased, but it did bring up good points. By the way I wrote I would definately buy the GT500 over the ZL1, but for the money you are fooling yourself if you think the GT500 is the better bang for the buck. I find it amazing how biased so many folks are based on what they own.

[Chris410]

Here is the video:

 

 

 

Looks like Randy really enjoyed the GT500, he did note the brake issue so each track will demand different brake points so it is possible that the OEM brake setup does not hold up well once it heats up.

[txcobra]

I am certainly not saying because it is a shelby it is automatically better, what I am saying is that I dont care what a magazine says, that doesn't define what I like or what I think. I do not think the camaro is better bang for the buck at all...for me, Ford did exactly what I wanted with this car. The performance that I am looking for is in the Shelby and I dont see any "technology" or performance measure out of the ZL1 that makes it a better decision overall....except for maybe brakes, which is easy to remedy.

[svt13]

If the shelby had a griggs system from the factory and the damptronic shocks that are constantly adjustable not the weird damptronic/ride control combo they had bilstein made they could replicate the mrc. Then the griggs like system would make it have even better handling than the zl1 has already. Note that randy did say the shelby handled better than the camaro. And if you put 4 PISTON CALIPERS LIKE i WAS BITCHING ABOUT A MONTH AGO OR BETTER BRAKE PADS and people said it wouldn't help, the shelby would be the best bang for buck.

 

You have to think of it like this. There is not much extra work to make the suspension perfect. There is a lot of work to make that camaro have 600 rwhp. But then it already gets 14mpg what would happen after you had all that hp? You get 8 mpg?

 

That is not a daily driver then.

[svtkeith]

Here is the video:

 

 

 

Looks like Randy really enjoyed the GT500, he did note the brake issue so each track will demand different brake points so it is possible that the OEM brake setup does not hold up well once it heats up.

 

 

 

 

Looks like Randy really enjoyed them both...great reviews from both guys and two awesome cars..thats what muscle car wars are all

 

about right there..thanks for posting that vid.

[Whammer]

Here is the video:

 

 

 

Looks like Randy really enjoyed the GT500, he did note the brake issue so each track will demand different brake points so it is possible that the OEM brake setup does not hold up well once it heats up.

 

 

The video presents a much more fair comparison than does the write up.

I don't have a dog in this fight so I'm not being biased. I do prefer the GT500. But if the ZL1 had won the drag and track testing and the GT500 was deemed the better daily driver I would still be left scratching my head if they declared the GT500 the winner.

 

Randy even states that the GT500 would be the much better track performer if the brakes were upgraded. Since no other reviews mention anything about brakes fading perhaps this was just a one off?

[patrickshelby]

Here is the video:

 

 

 

Looks like Randy really enjoyed the GT500, he did note the brake issue so each track will demand different brake points so it is possible that the OEM brake setup does not hold up well once it heats up.

 

Randy Pobst is a reliable test pro driver and an enthusiast muscle car fan.

The video is great!

Both cars are great!

[William Rodgers]

I am certainly not saying because it is a shelby it is automatically better, what I am saying is that I dont care what a magazine says, that doesn't define what I like or what I think. I do not think the camaro is better bang for the buck at all...for me, Ford did exactly what I wanted with this car. The performance that I am looking for is in the Shelby and I dont see any "technology" or performance measure out of the ZL1 that makes it a better decision overall....except for maybe brakes, which is easy to remedy.

 

 

Got it, that makes perfect sense. I may have written my statement wrong, best Bang for your buck is certainly dependant on what your intended use is, I was speaking about all the technology you get for a cheaper price, not so much that it beats it at any one thing. You would think with the IRS the Camaro would cost as much or more, but that is not the case.

 

Strange how times have changed, back in the 80's and 90's the Mustang was Cheaper by a good amount and the Camaro had more power, now it is the other way around. Also the Mustang out-sold the Camaro back then and now the Camaro is out-selling the Mustang by a good amount. I knew it would the first year or so because it was "New", but did not think it still would be at this point. Maybe price does matter????

[YZD263]

I am certainly not saying because it is a shelby it is automatically better, what I am saying is that I dont care what a magazine says, that doesn't define what I like or what I think. I do not think the camaro is better bang for the buck at all...for me, Ford did exactly what I wanted with this car. The performance that I am looking for is in the Shelby and I dont see any "technology" or performance measure out of the ZL1 that makes it a better decision overall....except for maybe brakes, which is easy to remedy.

 

 

That's also how I feel. If I had based my car buying decisions on magazine reviews, I guess the list of cars that I've owned would be quite different.

 

It also seems to me that car magazine often look as if they are working extra hard to chose the car that doesn't have the mesurables, but rather the intangibles. Kind of like the film critics that praise little known underground movies that nobody cares to see over blockbusters that a vast majority of the public enjoys, as if to proove that they can appreciate something that the "common man" can't. I guess that also applies to car journalists; If you're a car journalist, praising a car that wins most of the measurables in a head to head comparison makes you look as if you're simply stating the obvious (no merit in doing that) while choosing the one that is a close second, while rationalizing your choice in a nicely written piece, makes you look like you can appreciate something that the general public can't. In other words, it may be good for the journalist's ego but shows disregard for the facts. When personal preferences takes precedence over factual evaluation, a comparison becomes biased. As car enthusiasts, it is normal that we have preferred rides that are not necessarily the best from an objective standpoint; I would probably not buy a Camaro even if it tops the Shelby in all measurables, because I don't care for the look, mainly inside. This is obviously highly subjective, but I'm just a fan, not a paid journalist. I would expect a journalist to leave his personal preferences asides and stick to the facts.

 

The set of comparos seen so far between the GT500 and ZL1 (MT, C&D and InsideLine) clearly shows that the Shelby is the quickest in a straight line, and that the results on the track are too close to call (in some instances, the ZL1 wins because its times are more easily repeatable, in another, because it is easier to drive, but never because it actually laps faster that the GT500 on a single lap). I don't think however that this type of situation shows a bias against Ford or in favor of GM. Remember all the comparos between the 2010 Mustang GT and Camaro SS that the Mustang won despite 100hp less and acceleration times slightly lagging. This was no more rational than what we are seing right now.

[William Rodgers]

That's also how I feel. If I had based my car buying decisions on magazine reviews, I guess the list of cars that I've owned would be quite different.

 

It also seems to me that car magazine often look as if they are working extra hard to chose the car that doesn't have the mesurables, but rather the intangibles. Kind of like the film critics that praise little known underground movies that nobody cares to see over blockbusters that a vast majority of the public enjoys, as if to proove that they can appreciate something that the "common man" can't. I guess that also applies to car journalists; If you're a car journalist, praising a car that wins most of the measurables in a head to head comparison makes you look as if you're simply stating the obvious (no merit in doing that) while choosing the one that is a close second, while rationalizing your choice in a nicely written piece, makes you look like you can appreciate something that the general public can't. In other words, it may be good for the journalist's ego but shows disregard for the facts. When personal preferences takes precedence over factual evaluation, a comparison becomes biased. As car enthusiasts, it is normal that we have preferred rides that are not necessarily the best from an objective standpoint; I would probably not buy a Camaro even if it tops the Shelby in all measurables, because I don't care for the look, mainly inside. This is obviously highly subjective, but I'm just a fan, not a pad journalist. I would expect a journalist to leave his personal preferences asides and stick to the facts.

 

The set of comparos seen so far between the GT500 and ZL1 (MT, C&D and InsideLine) clearly shows that the Shelby is the quickest in a straight line, and that the results on the track are too close to call (in some instances, the ZL1 wins because its times are more easily repeatable, in another, because it is easier to drive, but never because it actually laps faster that the GT500 on a single lap). I don't think however that this type of situation shows a bias against Ford or in favor of GM. Remember all the comparos between the 2010 Mustang GT and Camaro SS that the Mustang won despite 100hp less and acceleration times slightly lagging. This was no more rational than what we are seing right now.

 

 

Well said

 

In the end it is better for us that they came out with the ZL1, put pressure on Ford to one up them.

 

Now what is the deal with Dodge????????

[Freak]

 

Strange how times have changed, back in the 80's and 90's the Mustang was Cheaper by a good amount and the Camaro had more power, now it is the other way around. Also the Mustang out-sold the Camaro back then and now the Camaro is out-selling the Mustang by a good amount. I knew it would the first year or so because it was "New", but did not think it still would be at this point. Maybe price does matter????

 

 

Yep, and when the LS1 Camaro was killing the Mustang with times, but not selling as well, it was the bowtie guys spouting off about how the only thing that mattered were performance numbers, and the Ford guys saying sales numbers were more important.

 

As far as the Camaro's looks? Love it or hate it. Almost everyone falls into those two catagories. The styling is very polarizing, and there are few people on the fence. I think that's also helping sales.

 

As is the IRS, even if it's simply a talking point, it can be used to convince the average joe that the Camaro uses more technolgy than the Mustang.

[Bill Hamilton]

..........................

 

As is the IRS, even if it's simply a talking point, it can be used to convince the average joe that the Camaro uses more technolgy than the Mustang.

 

 

How high tech is their overhead valve V-8 compared to the 32-valve DOHC motor in the Mustangs?

[Freak]

 

 

How high tech is their overhead valve V-8 compared to the 32-valve DOHC motor in the Mustangs?

 

 

The V6 is the bigger seller, especially to the average joe, and the near identical power and mileage numbers go a long way towards convincing people that DOHC isn't that big a deal.

 

IRS on the other hand is harder to quantify.

[OneTrickPony]

And no one at road atlanta complained about the brakes too. They are the only ones who complain about the brakes. The zl1 and shelby both have 6 piston. The 4 piston in the rears on the zl1 though are for the 300 extra pounds it has. The increased rotor size should be sufficient to compensate for not having a 4 piston rear. Or maybe even the 1 piston is not enough, maybe ford should have at least increased it to 2. I don't even understand how 1 piston works because there has to be a piston on each side doesn't there? I may have read this wrong and the rear may have 2 piston.

 

Why didn't they just put matching Brembo's on in the first place and wider wheels and tires too. Two of my main reasons for not buying the 2013.

[Bill Hamilton]

The V6 is the bigger seller, especially to the average joe, and the near identical power and mileage numbers go a long way towards convincing people that DOHC isn't that big a deal.

 

IRS on the other hand is harder to quantify.

 

 

I believe we were comparing the ZL1 to the GT-500.

[dave c]

Here's the video version

 

 

[William Rodgers]

Why didn't they just put matching Brembo's on in the first place and wider wheels and tires too. Two of my main reasons for not buying the 2013.

 

I have to agree for that price they should have.

[Freak]

 

 

I believe we were comparing the ZL1 to the GT-500.

 

I'm comparing overall sales. The post I quoted talks about how the Camaro is still outselling the Mustang after 3 years. I don't know the sales figures for the ZL1 or Shelby at this point. But since it's only a few months old, the ZL1 numbers are going to be screwy (as will the Shelby's if you only include the '13).

[Bill Hamilton]

I'm comparing overall sales. The post I quoted talks about how the Camaro is still outselling the Mustang after 3 years. I don't know the sales figures for the ZL1 or Shelby at this point. But since it's only a few months old, the ZL1 numbers are going to be screwy (as will the Shelby's if you only include the '13).

 

There again this topic was GT-500 vs ZL1. When it comes to your topic, Ford would rather put 3.7's and 5.0's in pickup trucks as that's where they make their money rather than have dealer lots filled with Mustangs. Could be why one didn't take the government bailout money and the other did. As far as ZL1 vs GT-500 sales, Ford will build and sell around 5000 as they do each year. Hopefully GM will too. As a taxpayer, I'd like to get some of my tax money back for a brand I do not own.

[Captain Beyond]

I posted the following on another forum regarding this comparison-

 

Absolutely stupid.

Daily driving comparison is basically subjective, it's really just personal opinion. Victory is given to the ZL1.

Drag strip- GT500 roasts the ZL1 and is given a close victory.

Laguna Seca track- GT500 beats the ZL1 on the Hot Lap but not happy with the results they keep lapping the cars until they find fault with the GT500 brakes and then give the victory to the ZL1. When have successive laps ever been done in these comparisons? It's always been the Hot Lap time that determines the winner.

 

The best analogy I can come up with is Boxer vs. Slugger. Boxing writers usually hate sluggers. These writers of the "sweet science" prefer the skillful boxer. Writers always believe in "the pen is mightier than the sword"; and "brains over brawn". And with the ZL1 vs. the GT500 we have the same thing happening.

 

It's the crude (live rear axle), brutish (660hp) slugger (GT500) vs. the scientific (magnetic suspension), refined (easy to drive) boxer (ZL1). The car magazine writers WANT the boxer to win and they downplay anything the slugger does. They make subjective, opinion based comparisons and praise the boxer. Then it's fight night (drag strip and test track) and the two fighters stand toe to toe. The slugger pounds the boxer with crude right and left hooks, swinging for the fences, awkward and unrefined. The boxer remains poised and balanced.

 

The fight ends with the boxer being overwhelmed by the power of the slugger, his only victory coming from showing more style and class. Savage power has overcome science and the writer's world has been turned upside down and they just cannot accept what they have just witnessed. Had the fight been longer, they speculate, surely the slugger would've punched himself out and the boxer would've been victorious. Thus they award the championship to the boxer....it doesn't matter to them that the slugger left the ring wearing the Championship Belt, in their eyes the boxer won.

__________________

 

 

Yeah, all this BS kinda reminds me of the decision of the last Pacquiao fight.