03 and 04 Terminators, I had an 03 with exhaust and pully swap...475/485 on the Dyno. Extremely quick but too heavy.

 

Definitely a Cobra, just not a Cobra R. The first Cobra R was in '93 and I think they had one in '95 and '98.

 

You are dodging my questions. Why are all of Porsche's Nurburgring lap times rounded to a even number ? I'll tell you !! It's because they segment their times(cheating). Look at the Panamera, Cayman, and Boxter as well. All even numbers. Low sea level elevation does not favor turbocharging. It's just the opposite. I think you better give up!!!

 

I was specifically talking about about the SVT Cobra R, not the first one in that link. I don't know why you're talking about a tuned SLP Camaro. I'm talking about a bone stock production Ford Mustang. If you have to introduce a modded Camaro, then that's probably saying something. But I was never even talking about racetrack performance. I'm talking about overall road manners. And if you must know, C&D drove that Mustang to within 2.4 seconds of the C5 Z06's time at Willow Springs. Would the SS be as fast? I doubt it. The only time I've seen for an SS against the Z06 with that same power was at Thunderhill, where the Camaro trailed the Vette by 8 seconds.
But you never answered the question: Why, if a live axle is just fine, would Ford use IRS on their GT (non-Mustang) supercar?

In their infinite wisdom to cut costs, it appears it actually ended up costing Ford more to develop the live axle to hit their NVH targets (which were still some ways below that of most other IRS cars):
http://blogs.motortrend.com/2010-for...#axzz2Kv42RF4N

And unless your whole point of driving a car is to put it on a smooth, flat skidpad, what's the point of crowing about high g's with a live axle car? Introduce some bumps, uneven off-camber pavement, and ruts and you'll probably see a very different result between a live-axled car that pulls 1.0g vs an IRS car that pulls the same (or even slightly less).

C&D on the GT500 vs ZL1:
"the [Mustang's] suspension jostles up and down over highway-expansion joints. It’s tolerable, but the Camaro has better ride quality.
Admittedly, creature comforts are not the primary aim of these cars, but the ZL1’s unstressed vibe enhances the driving experience. It’s more relaxed and approachable, and ultimately more fun to drive.  At Grattan, the Camaro’s front end seemed like it would never wash out, and a handy dose of trail braking quelled any understeer. The shocks and multilink rear suspension helped the ZL1 use more of  its power around the track."

Motor Trend:
"The GT500, by contrast, suffers from a stiffer ride and too much vertical motion. Every bump gets your head bobbing up and down as the big Shelby bucks like an unbroken colt. Its two-mode Bilstein shocks are simply too stiff for everyday driving, even in Normal mode.The GT500 just isn't meant for everyday driving. It's built for performance, so we got off the freeways and surface streets and headed for the hills. One of two things happens on a canyon road: either a car comes into its element and digs in, delivering a fantastic driving experience, or all the problems you noticed on the way out of town are amplified. The GT500 does both. On the one hand, it handles better than any solid axle car -- save perhaps the Boss 302 -- has any right to, but on the other, that vertical motion grates on your confidence. Real-world roads aren't racetrack-smooth. They have bumps in inconvenient places, such as mid-corner overlooking a gorge.
To be clear, the Mustang never tried to get away from us, but there was always a ****ling suspicion it might. Hit a bump under any condition, be it acceleration, cornering, or braking, and that live rear axle begins dancing around, undermining driver confidence and slowing you down. We also noticed the brakes lose some of their initial bite as they heated up, a problem that later came back to haunt the Shelby.The ZL1, by virtue of its independent suspension and magnetic shocks, did not suffer this problem."

Edmunds on Mustang V6 vs Hyundai Genesis:
"Settle in, find a rhythm and it won't take long to discover that the Genesis is both the quicker and more dedicated tool for dissecting any road. Largely, this is down to its more sophisticated suspension, stronger power plant and lower stance.
The speed difference, however, isn't as substantial as the chasm that emerges in our confidence during aggressive driving. Drive both cars over the same road at the same pace and you'll come away from the Genesis far less aware of your own mortality. Its better damping and body control are a blessing. And if the going gets even remotely rough, the Mustang's axle begins to show itself for what it is: heavy and old.
If you're buying one of these cars for back roads, pick the Genesis."

So this same basic Mustang has been around since 2004. They've had more than half a decade to, as you put it, "fix" the shocks. So why haven't they? They didn't do it for the GT (see M3 comparo). They didn't do it for the Boss 302 (see UK test against the Germans). They didn't do it for the GT500 which has two suspension modes, neither of which seem to fix the underlying problem. You can only blame the shocks for so long...

 

Even if they segment their times, they could still add thousandths of a second. Are you telling me that in grade school, you never added numbers to two decimal places? If so many tests and different sources have confirmed their lap times, then you have a poor case to claim they are cheating.
Where did I say turbocharging helps low sea level elevation?
Regarding the Panamera, the Turbo S did it in 7:52 in the Supertest. Not so far off from the 7:56 claimed for the non-S, which was only 0.3s slower than the Turbo S at the Sachsenring in same-day testing (AutoBild). Where is the independent test of the CTS-V on the Nordschleife?

And it is you who is dodging the questions:
You think 6s is a huge difference from Porsche's time (which came at the end of a few hours worth of lapping) vs HvS (who did his time in only one flying lap)? Then how do you explain the 12-15s differences between GM's claimed times for the base C6 and the ZR1? Why is it so impossible that a car that can do 0-150 in the 14's (where the ZR1 is normally in the 16's) would be that fast on one of the fastest tracks on the planet? Since when is "thousands" of views over many years == multiple millions of buyers?

 

You guys are spending WAY too much time arguing about nothing. Believe me, I know. lol

 

Guibotch will do that following any reference to Porsche that is any way negative or critical.

It's quite predictable.

 

You guys don't know how good you have it.GM will not produce Corvettes in right side drive so any imported into Australia have to have the conversion done at a cost of $30,000 to $35,000 and that's for C6,the C7 will probably be dearer.

 

Notch...you are full of it.And that is a fact.

 

There is no "cheating" as there is no formal "manufacturer lap time" competition and no formal "manufacturer lap time" protocol. Additionally, Porsche uses the Ring as a test track and not a track used in an attempt to establish a lower lap time than some other manufacturer. The current crop of Porsche sports cars do not represent the best performance Porsche is currently capable of designing into each of the cars. Porsche isn't sitting around waiting for new technology to be invented that can then be used to lower lap times. Porsche not only has to pay attention to where they position each model 911 in terms of performance, they also have to manage the performance of the Boxster and Cayman lines relative to the 911.

 

Wow you really don't know anything about cars do you? SLP Camaro is an Option package straight from the factory that gave the Maro a Ram Air induction it's every bit as Real GM as a WS6 TA is. Infact all SS Camaros from 00 to 02 are SLP Camaros. Now you could buy further mods direct from SLP and not void your warranty for your Maro (and many people did), but all it takes to get the monicker SLP Camaro is just the cold air induction package which came standard on all SS cars. It's actually arguable that the SLP Camaro is more factory than the SVT Cobra is. Next you'll be asking us how to start your car everyday.

It's funny you keep talking about how IRS is superior, and yet we keep coming back to the simple fact that Ford went right back to the solid axle on the mustang didn't they. The GT isn't around anymore. We also keep coming back to the fact that a solid axle car with Leaf Springs can still pull .94 Gs on a skid pad and handles every bit as well as a Current Maro, actually it's been described as Superior to the modern camaro repeatedly by testers seems like Hotchkis just maybe figured something out if they could make a 68 Camaro handle that damn well. Not only this but I wonder why Ford dropped the IRS... despite having both the SVT Cobras and the GT... couldn't have anything to do with Drivetrain durability, and lack of overall net gain for the costs of development involved could it? Having driven quite a few IRS and Live axle cars both stock and modded, there is alot more to it than simply if the rear diff is a single solid axle or not, over both smooth pavement, broken pavement, wet or dry conditions.

When it comes crunch time, the Maro and the Bird, and the current stang all handle extremely well. And it also keeps coming down to 2 things as to what really makes or break a suspension. Shock packaging and valving and Rubber Selection. Now on a solid axle car, there's a secondary very large factor to consider as well, the Panhard bar and Trailing arms. Cast jobs don't hold up to the tasks, and infact are a very large portion as to why a live axle rear end will want to deflect, shivver, and snap loose. Which if you were literate you'd have read already Seriously, go find a pair of trailing arms from a Gen 3 or 4 Camaro, put them in your hands and twist. You'll be amazed at how much the twist in your hands. Now again, imagine what a 300+ pony engine does to that on a 3200 lb car. The current stang also has cast trailing arms. The car's even heavier and puts down even more power. At least they are a solid piece of casting and not a stamp and bent job that the Maro had, but that's not enough to cover the heavier car, and higher ponies. You can still twist the factory trailing arms in your hands. The trailing arms are what handles X and Y axis twist and deflection on the axle and keeps it inline with the vehicle. The jittery snap loose condition is from the cast trailing arms. The panhard rod on either the Gen 4 Maro/Bird and current stangs are not much better either. Which is what helps limit axle hop and twist along the Z (and to a much lesser extent the Y) axises. This is what creates the up and down shivver over uneven pavement while under throttle.
Some tires handle being upset alot easier than others. Case in point, Crap Year tires suck outside of the laboratory they were made in. Other factors like sway bars, coil springs play a role.
The Stang's shock package is never going to be fully optimal for several reasons not the least of which is Ford unlike say, myself or someone else does not have all the time in the world to test multiple shock variant, after variant after variant either. Hell for that matter, even the Corvette with it's mag shocks are not 100 percent optimal either, for every given driver. Not even your precious BMW is. I'd probably call your BMW a soft mushy mess of a shock and strut combo.

Ford has development costs to consider, which is something we as enthusiasts do not. Well those of us that buy cars that actually have an aftermarket anyway. You poor BMW clowns are just screwed.
TLDR: I know way way too much about solid axle suspension setups, and what causes 90 percent of their issues.

Oh and speaking of fixing rear end issues
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...ed-test-review

 

Guibo and Notch. Here is a video that the two of you should watch. It's long but will clarify all the Nurburgring Timing issues. During the video Jeff Mosher comments on how Porsche segments there times and does not deny it. Pay attention and the two of you will learn the real truth about Porsche's timing monkey business. Listen at 42.55 for the GT2 RS Comments and all of us at Corvette Forum will forgive you two for your errant ways.
http://www.corvetteblogger.com/2012/...e-nurburgring/

 

And now they're going to IRS again:



Looks like Ford disagrees with your assessment.

 

3 hybrid sportscars from Lexus, Acura and Infiniti are on the way..

Lexus LF-LC




Acura NSX




Infiniti Emerg-E

 

Looks like Acura NSX successfully pulled of the massive Corvette Concept scoops front & rear, and headlights.

And Infiniti E has those retro 59 Impala Cat-eye taillights which would have worked even better on the C7 with it's subtle V line on top.

 

I'm not sure if I love of hate the steering wheel in that Lexus.

The NSX.... It doesn't speak to me at all. It looks ugly compared to the original car. It's also a 3800 lb pig from what I've found out about it so far so it's a double Betrayal.

The Infinity holy damn. Nissan finally made a sexy car. Hot damn that's sexy. First car from Nissan I've liked since the 300 Z left us.

 

The NSX is beautiful. At least the various designers were friends with each other, unlike the C7's designers, and were talking with each other.

No cheap "boy racer" looks as with the C7.

 

 

Which is better? Buying a Honda that is made in Alabama, where thousands of American workers get up each morning and go to work in a Honda plant, or buying a Chevrolet that is made in Mexico, where thousands of Mexican workers get up each morning and go to work in a Chevrolet plant(while the displaced American worker stays at home each morning collecting welfare, that is taken from your paycheck)?

When you buy a GM, Chrysler, or Ford product that is not made in the US, just how loyal are you?

 

I think Corvette is made in the USA. I know they are moving Camaro back to the states from Canada. Really if you took everything out of your house not made in he USA you probably would have a little furniture and be naked.