FordBuyer Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 back on subject...am I the only one wondering, because its obvious the GT500 has done a lap of the Ring, why a time HASNT been posted?...could it be that a certain Chevy was perhaps quicker???????.......or were the cars Ford had , just development mules ?.....hmmmm I believe a Corvette ZR1 did it in 7:21 or so and is nice benchmark for anyone trying to beat it. I would put GT 500 in mid 7:30 range which many fast cars have not been able to do. Some all out race cars have broken 7 minutes. I would imagine all use top factory race drivers and pay to close course for record attempt if that is possible as there are many slower cars on track usually and speed differentials can be huge. Lots of horrible wrecks on Autobahn. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 They weren't posted because that's not why Ford uses the ring. cudos to them if thats the reason...this chestbumping bunch of Z71 engineers come off as presumptuous morons....wonder if Ford was even tempted?.... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kstwister Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 I wouldn't be suprised to see the ZL1 be faster around that track. I hope against hope that they (Ford) are waiting to publish the all-important "ring" time until some opportune moment to take the steam out of some bs chevy announement. But that's just me hoping. The jean shorts and mullet crowd seem to have a real car on their hands, even if it's the wrong flavor for my tastes. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 Ford has never publicized a ring time, in no small part because there are zero standards for ring times apart from sanctioned race events. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FordBuyer Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 That's a valid line of reasoning only if you consider your own life to be worthless: "But officer, the only person at risk of dying horribly and leaving behind a devastated family was me." So you set your cruise on SD interstate at 70mph even if you don't see any other vehicle out over SD horizon? That is interesting. Tells me a lot about you. God knows how fast I would drive if I lived in Montana or Nevada out in sticks. I'm only talking limited access interstates, not rural highways with intersections and rural farm vehicles going 15mph ahead while you crest a hill. Flat horizon, gentle high visibility grade and no traffic in front. So if I kill anyone, only victim will be me. I do like to shake up a passenger from time to time by doing a really hard cornering turn where rear end slides out and gentle countersteer brings roadster back into line. They usually giggle or fight to keep themselves upright. I figure you would be the frightened one. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 I wouldn't be suprised to see the ZL1 be faster around that track. Because it has IRS? Please. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 So you set your cruise on SD interstate at 70mph even if you don't see any other vehicle out over SD horizon? That is interesting. Tells me a lot about you. God knows how fast I would drive if I lived in Montana or Nevada out in sticks. I'm only talking limited access interstates, not rural highways with intersections and rural farm vehicles going 15mph ahead while you crest a hill. Flat horizon, gentle high visibility grade and no traffic in front. So if I kill anyone, only victim will be me. I do like to shake up a passenger from time to time by doing a really hard cornering turn where rear end slides out and gentle countersteer brings roadster back into line. They usually giggle or fight to keep themselves upright. I figure you would be the frightened one. Right. Because if you die, it won't affect anyone else. FYI: the speed limit in SD is 75 MPH, and I drive the speed limit because I enjoy aspects of vehicular travel unconnected with how stupid I can be with two tons of metal powered by explosive vapors. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 Right. Because if you die, it won't affect anyone else. FYI: the speed limit in SD is 75 MPH, and I drive the speed limit because I enjoy aspects of vehicular travel unconnected with how stupid I can be with two tons of metal powered by explosive vapors. 65 here, but everyone seems to be about 10 mph above that, and even then some go FLYING by.....I always love being in the HOV lane doing 75 with a guy right on my rear tire, let him pass and 5 minutes later Im cutting traffic waving at him as hes in bumper to bumper.....that said, 20 years ago i was that same impatient person.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FordBuyer Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 Right. Because if you die, it won't affect anyone else. FYI: the speed limit in SD is 75 MPH, and I drive the speed limit because I enjoy aspects of vehicular travel unconnected with how stupid I can be with two tons of metal powered by explosive vapors. Jensen's magic number. Above 75mph you die if you crash no matter what the conditions are and below 75mph you are in some sort of safe womb like before you were born. Around here that magic number is 70mph. Not that many years ago in some unpopulous states like Montana and Nevada you could drive whatever speed you wanted as long as conditions permitted. And on Salt Lake Flats at certain time of year you can go as fast as humanly possible even if you kill yourself. I guess I have a lot of Libertarian in me as if conditions are ideal, and if I have radar detector or behind someone I know that has one, I will determine what speed is safe in that instance and for how long. Unfortunately, as roads become more gridlocked every year, it gets harder to find those ideal conditons where higher speeds are relatively safe. No speed is entirely safe, not even 20mph on a bicycle. But living like without risk is not living in my book. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 (edited) Jensen's magic number. Most SD interstate traffic moves at 75MPH, and driving the prevailing speed is safer than exceeding it or undercutting it. When the speed limit was 65, most SD drivers were going 70, and that's how fast I went. And, again, if your life is such that nobody will be affected by your death, then you really haven't lived. Regardless of how fast you've driven. Edited June 18, 2012 by RichardJensen 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edstock Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 could it be that a certain Chevy was perhaps quicker???????.......or were the cars Ford had , just development mules ?.....hmmmm Could be, if the GT500's brakes weren't up to it. The SRA doesn't seem to be a problem, there's enough power, and it's stable at 200 mph. But, it's now the 2015 development that's important, IMHO. And regardless of time on the 'Ring, the more time Ford engineers spend on it, the better the next Mustang will be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 Could be, if the GT500's brakes weren't up to it. The SRA doesn't seem to be a problem, there's enough power, and it's stable at 200 mph. But, it's now the 2015 development that's important, IMHO. And regardless of time on the 'Ring, the more time Ford engineers spend on it, the better the next Mustang will be. good point, in the meantime sure would be nice to turn some Z71 smirks into welled up eyes... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 Oh, I can't see how brakes could possibly be a problem. They're bigger than the Camaro's and stopping a lot less mass. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Violet96GT Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 After spending a significant amount of time in front of the television this past weekend, watching the 24 hours of Le Mans, I'd venture to say that I'm probably not the only individual who was quite disappointed to see essentially no Ford presence there. Seems that most every other car manufacturer of note had something there, be it a complete vehicle engineered for the track, or merely a powerplant in someone else's chassis. Let's see, we had Audi, Toyota, Nissan (loved that delta wing thing!!), Porsche, Ferrari, Chevrolet, Aston Martin, Honda, and others which I've no doubt missed. Chrysler/Dodge wasn't there, but I'm quite sure they'll be there next year, with some type of competition version of the new-for-2013 Dodge SRT Viper. While I can understand Ford staying away from this type of racing until their consumer vehicle business is well and totally back on track (and it is getting closer to that all the time), it would once again be supremely excellent to see a Ford contingent competing here again, at the very upper echelon. Take a look at Audi, and see how well an intense focus on engineering has paid off for them, both at the race track and in their production car business. As an engineer myself, I think this is really neat to observe. I would love to see Ford have the same type of focus. Isn't this type of racing much more interesting than NASCAR? Just my thoughts! Thanks! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edstock Posted June 19, 2012 Share Posted June 19, 2012 Oh, I can't see how brakes could possibly be a problem. They're bigger than the Camaro's and stopping a lot less mass. Yes indeed. IMHO, the Shelby should have a better lap-time. But the day-to-day changes means that time comparisons on that huge course are largely meaningless. Just the difference in road temperature and air temperature. Then there's tires. They could use Laguna Seca or Road Atlanta or some other US road course, but it's probably easier to keep a low profile using circuits in Europe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FordBuyer Posted June 19, 2012 Share Posted June 19, 2012 Yes indeed. IMHO, the Shelby should have a better lap-time. But the day-to-day changes means that time comparisons on that huge course are largely meaningless. Just the difference in road temperature and air temperature. Then there's tires. They could use Laguna Seca or Road Atlanta or some other US road course, but it's probably easier to keep a low profile using circuits in Europe. I would think doing a hot lap on a course as varied and long is exactly the point as opposed to a much shorter course not that is meaningless either. Nurbugring and LeMans are the top of the racing mountain. Turning a hot lap there means the vehicle is really buttoned down, fabulous acceleration, exceptional braking, great handling, exceptional top end, and all and all and all around superb high performance automobile on exceptional 17 mile course. Not that Ford has to do it, but it certainly doesn't hurt its reputation especially as the next Mustang goes global. Nurburgring is on a lot of enthusiast driver's bucket lists to boot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted June 19, 2012 Share Posted June 19, 2012 (edited) it would once again be supremely excellent It's a vanity race (like the Indy 500). And one with which the Ford family has no longstanding relationship. If you want to see Ford at LeMans, you need to convince one of the Ford family's longstanding partners (i.e. Roush or Yates) to go to LeMans. Short of that, Ford will expend little to no money on that race. And, IMO, they are right not to. The cost of winning at LeMans, like the cost of winning at F1, is unjustifiably high for a publicly traded corporation responsible to its shareholders. That VAG & Fiat spend copious sums on LeMans and F1 respectively (as do PSA and Daimler), is not an indictment of Ford for refusing to spend dollar for dollar, but for the fiduciary irresponsibility of those corporations. An irresponsibility which they are allowed to indulge in partially due to the chauvinistic practices of their home market car buyers. Edited June 19, 2012 by RichardJensen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edstock Posted June 19, 2012 Share Posted June 19, 2012 I would think doing a hot lap on a course as varied and long is exactly the point as opposed to a much shorter course not that is meaningless either. Whatever. Of course you're aware that the 'Ring is so big that weather conditions on one side of the course can be quite different from the other side. The point is, unless you are testing 2 cars on the same day at about the same time, comparing 'Ring times may not have that much relevance, because climate differences can add or subtract seconds, and the 'Ring is never the same twice. That being said, it will still be interesting to find out how well the Shelby did. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edstock Posted June 19, 2012 Share Posted June 19, 2012 If you want to see Ford at LeMans, you need to convince one of the Ford family's longstanding partners (e.g. Roush or Yates) to go to LeMans. Short of that, Ford will expend no money on that race. And, IMO, they are right not to. Even before that, Ford would have to see if there's anything in the FIA rules and regs that offer any opportunities. The FIA is not particularly co-operative, almost like they've never forgiven Ford for winning Le Mans. FWIW, apparently Mazda is going to supply a diesel powertrain for next year's Le Mans. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted June 19, 2012 Share Posted June 19, 2012 Ford would reportedly have to spend upwards of $125M per year to top VW's investment on their LeMans/prototype racing program. When you consider that Ford's total ad spend for the US is about $1.1B, you can see how foolish it is to invest that kind of money in a single race. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted June 19, 2012 Share Posted June 19, 2012 (edited) Something like the Aussie GT Falcon with it's S/C Coyote and IRS would be more fitting for the 'Ring. Is it anything more than a curiosity for American onlookers.... Why not pic a a lap around say, the Laguna Seca track? Because it doesn't have the OMG Aura of the 'Ring Edited June 19, 2012 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FordBuyer Posted June 19, 2012 Share Posted June 19, 2012 Something like the Aussie GT Falcon with it's S/C Coyote and IRS would be more fitting for the 'Ring. Is it anything more than a curiosity for American onlookers.... Why not pic a a lap around say, the Laguna Seca track? Because it doesn't have the OMG Aura of the 'Ring I would vote for Mosport outside of Toronto. Gorgeous track with lots of elevation and very tricky and technical. A racing driver's favorite by many. A real scare ride. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoonerLS Posted June 19, 2012 Share Posted June 19, 2012 Why not pic a a lap around say, the Laguna Seca track? Because it doesn't have the OMG Aura of the 'Ring They're not running the 'Ring to whip out the ol' tape measure, they're doing it for the R&D opportunities. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZanatWork Posted June 19, 2012 Share Posted June 19, 2012 What the hell, Richard? Porsche 356? 907? 917 (in more than one series)? 911 Carrera? 934? 935 (for so many years)? 936? 956? 962? The GT2 and GT3 that dominate their classes in various series? Lemans wins? Did the stint in CART/IndyCar (where Ford hasn't been in years). The 959 in Group B? The more recent open cockpit prototype I can't recall...? Anyone NOT addled would call that a pretty impressive history of mostly UTTERLY DOMINANT machinery. Hell, the 917s and the 935s rewrote record books for years...and the 956/962 owned the 24 at Daytona for a long time as well. I don't know what I'm seeing here, lately...but there are some bizarre attitudes and statements flying around. With GM, BMW, Nissan, Porsche, Dodge/Viper, and others using the 'Ring for testing...Ford has some useful benchmarks to go against. Why spit, sputter, and snarl so much at running the GT500 there...especially when Ford is openly considering exporting the Mustang to European markets in the future? This spittle-fest against the 'Ring makes zero sense, and the remarks about Porsche are borderline madness in the auto racing world. Did I say anything about YouTube videos? I'm talking about sanctioned competition at the highest levels. Where Ford has a long history of winning and Porsche has a long history of not being there. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted June 19, 2012 Share Posted June 19, 2012 Porsche's stint in IndyCars was either a failure, a joke, or both. Using the ring to get bragging rights is ridiculous. And insisting that Ford has some 'catching up' to do vs. the Germans is ill-informed nonsense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.