Now one can...

[wdfifteen]

Originally Posted by john70t

I never understood stoplight racing.
Still don't.

I get it. It was fun back in the day, before it went “pro.” Tractor pulling went the same way.

[rattlsnak]

Originally Posted by Jeff Higgins

No, I have never had the pleasure. Aren't those Turbos shown in those two videos 4WD? And about 1,000 lbs lighter than this Mustang?

The line lock is (or was in my day) only used to keep the car stationary during the burnout.

Launch control limits the throttle and/or feathers the clutch to avoid wheelspin, right? There still has to be a certain level of mechanical grip.

Back in my day, sub-11 second cars ran on slicks. There was no "launch control", but there was plenty of traction. The four speed cars were launched by sitting on the line as the Christmas Tree counted down with the motor turning 6,000-7,000 rpm. Timing this to when we thought the light was going to turn green (looking for that hole shot), we simply stepped off the clutch pedal. Anyone who has ever done this knows just how utterly violent the ensuing mayhem really is - it sounds like you smacked a manhole cover with a sledgehammer. That's what it took to get into the tens.

Maybe they make it up with horsepower now, with the cars accelerating much more aggressively in the top half of the track. I've watched many of the undoubtedly countless videos of these cars supposedly running in the tens, and I just don't see the violent launches that characterized those E.T.'s back when I was playing the game.

Yes, the Turbos are AWD, but GT3s basically run the same times and they are 2WD..

From what I can tell, the Porsche cars are@ 800 ish pounds lighter..

I ran a 427 '67 RS Camaro "back in the day" with a line lock, which is basically a front brake lock and totally agree about dumping the clutch and boooom.. You were gone...

These cars do it all electronically... Combination of clutch slippage, traction control, limiting power etc... I'm here to tell you, it will put you back in your seat the entire way. It's like a slingshot... If you turn all the nannies off, it will burn rubber almost halfway down the track and still run a 12 second QTR mile.. Just insane power from a street car with ZERO mods... The modded ones are stupid fast..

But my point to this thread, was someone stated that the new mustang was "crazy fast for a streeet car" and I was merely pointing out that these cars have been in that realm for 5+ years already..

[Jeff Higgins]

Originally Posted by rattlsnak

Yes, the Turbos are AWD, but GT3s basically run the same times and they are 2WD..

From what I can tell, the Porsche cars are@ 800 ish pounds lighter..

I ran a 427 '67 RS Camaro "back in the day" with a line lock, which is basically a front brake lock and totally agree about dumping the clutch and boooom.. You were gone...

These cars do it all electronically... Combination of clutch slippage, traction control, limiting power etc... I'm here to tell you, it will put you back in your seat the entire way. It's like a slingshot... If you turn all the nannies off, it will burn rubber almost halfway down the track and still run a 12 second QTR mile.. Just insane power from a street car with ZERO mods... The modded ones are stupid fast..

But my point to this thread, was someone stated that the new mustang was "crazy fast for a streeet car" and I was merely pointing out that these cars have been in that realm for 5+ years already..

Hmm... it sounds like I need to see what I can do about getting behind the wheel of one of these modern marvels. I'm still amazed that the actual grip is there, on street tires, for all of the "nannies" to manipulate. They cannot "create" traction - they are still bound by what is available. Amazing.

And yes, the last five years have shown astonishing progress. It seems most of it has come through advancements in these "nannies" rather than through mechanical means.

Oh, and I would have loved to see that Camero go... All of mine were big block MOPARs, 383s and 440s. Simple, reliable, easy to work on.

[911boost]

I had a newer 5.0 Mustang as a rental recently and found a deserted road to test out the launch control. It was an auto since it was a rental, but dang it was quick.

Not surprising folks crash them.

I’ve had a few RT Dodges too and they are fun. Haven’t drive the a Hellcat yet because I know I’d want one. My buddy has a GT350 and it’s a few years old but still a peach, it’s his DD.

[legion]

Jeff, you are correct about mechanical grip. My Mustang (which is a no-option 2016 with a manual) came with Pirelli P-Zero Nero tires stock. The grip from them is insane--both during acceleration and cornering. My point about the launch control is that it removes the driver's skill from getting the car going. Every Mustang made in the past few years can make 100% use of the available traction every time. On my manual Mustang, the launch control will control the throttle, clutch, and engine power.

[masraum]

Originally Posted by legion

Jeff, you are correct about mechanical grip. My Mustang (which is a no-option 2016 with a manual) came with Pirelli P-Zero Nero tires stock. The grip from them is insane--both during acceleration and cornering. My point about the launch control is that it removes the driver's skill from getting the car going. Every Mustang made in the past few years can make 100% use of the available traction every time. On my manual Mustang, the launch control will control the throttle, clutch, and engine power.

So even though the car has a clutch pedal, the clutch is actually drive by wire and controlled by a solenoid/actuator somewhere?

Or is it that the engine and brake management is computer controlled, but the clutch is hydraulic and fully controlled by your left foot?

[legion]

I've never used the launch control. I've read the procedures and they don't involve using the clutch pedal myself. The clutch is hydraulic and I assume there is something in the system that allows a computer to control it. Similarly, the "line lock" is just the ABS system locking only the front brakes.

[911 Rod]

Don't they say "Horsepower is how fast you hit the crowd and torque is how far you go into the crowd"?

[masraum]

Originally Posted by rattlsnak

Porsche is absolutely a normal street car class.. The others, I would consider exotics/rare/etc..

Hmm, they may not be as rare as a Lambo or McLaren, but I don't think I'd consider a 911 TT, GT3, GT3 RS, GT2 RS, etc... remotely on the same level as a Camaro or Mustang. I think they should still be considered exotics, just maybe on the more mundane end.

[GH85Carrera]

Originally Posted by masraum

Hmm, they may not be as rare as a Lambo or McLaren, but I don't think I'd consider a 911 TT, GT3, GT3 RS, GT2 RS, etc... remotely on the same level as a Camaro or Mustang. I think they should still be considered exotics, just maybe on the more mundane end.

They are only mundane because the owners actually drive them and you can see them on the road. Ferrari owners hate to add miles and they know the service is going to be very expensive. And they are nothing as reliable as a Porsche. My 35 year old 911 with 175,000 miles is ready for the fall tour next weekend. I will drive it to California again next year. I have driven it to California three times before.

When was the last time you saw a 1980s Ferrari or McLaren out actually being driven anywhere but maybe a Cars and Coffee?

[svandamme]

Originally Posted by 911 Rod

Don't they say "Horsepower is how fast you hit the crowd and torque is how far you go into the crowd"?

I'm sure I said that somewhere

[svandamme]

Originally Posted by GH85Carrera

They are only mundane because the owners actually drive them and you can see them on the road. Ferrari owners hate to add miles and they know the service is going to be very expensive. And they are nothing as reliable as a Porsche. My 35 year old 911 with 175,000 miles is ready for the fall tour next weekend. I will drive it to California again next year. I have driven it to California three times before.

When was the last time you saw a 1980s Ferrari or McLaren out actually being driven anywhere but maybe a Cars and Coffee?

There's a banker in our Porsche club, he's got a spanking brand new GT3RS
Comes to the trackday, drives the snot out it all day ...

at lunch we talk, and he shows pics of his fancy ferrari's competezzione whatever, i have no knowledge of all the fancy editions they have down there.

I ask him if he tracks it, he says, occasionally yeah... So how is it.
Well it's mostly a pain in the ass... I drive hte Porsche 400 miles to Le Mans for the meet... i run circles all day.. my biggest issue is the need to refuel a lot.
Ferrari , after 10 or so laps it invariably develops some kind of issue and we call Ferrari and then they come pick it up to go fix it...And then we drive home with our daily ...


Same with my Cayman, it's 11 years old, has 150 000 km... I drive it to the track, i do 200 km track laps.. i take off my helmet, and drive 500 km back home..
I doubt many Ferrari's at 11 years old do that on their original engine with nothing but maintenance done to it and 150k on the clock.

[masraum]

Originally Posted by GH85Carrera

They are only mundane because the owners actually drive them and you can see them on the road. Ferrari owners hate to add miles and they know the service is going to be very expensive. And they are nothing as reliable as a Porsche. My 35 year old 911 with 175,000 miles is ready for the fall tour next weekend. I will drive it to California again next year. I have driven it to California three times before.

Exactly

When was the last time you saw a 1980s Ferrari or McLaren out actually being driven anywhere but maybe a Cars and Coffee?

I'd say yes on the Ferrari, but maybe not on the McLaren. I've read some articles about folks putting miles on the McLaren F1. Apparently, it's not as big a deal because the value is appreciating so rapidly, that adding miles doesn't hurt the value. And they are, apparently, very reliable (as they should be considering the level that they are supposed to be built and maintained to). Granted, the maintenance on them is pretty in$ane x10000.

Maybe a better comparison would have been "Ferrari and Lamborghini" or Detomaso or Maserati or who ever was making exotics back then.

[Superman]

Jeff mentions tires, and I think some of the most important recent advances in motoring relate to tires. The tires on my '78 SC are a far cry from the ones it came with in '78.

[Jeff Higgins]

Originally Posted by Superman

Jeff mentions tires, and I think some of the most important recent advances in motoring relate to tires. The tires on my '78 SC are a far cry from the ones it came with in '78.

Apparently today's base model Boxster laps the 'Ring faster than a 997 GT3, which lapped the 'Ring faster than the much vaunted Carrera GT. Simply amazing advancements over the last 15 years or so.

That is, until we put the Carrera GT onto today's rubber. Doing so sees it once again running away from the new Boxster. Tires have improved that much. The only really fair comparison would be putting all of these cars on today's rubber and re-running their times. Doing so pretty much changes everything with regards to these trans-era comparisons.

[MMARSH]

Originally Posted by legion

My friend has a Model S. He can beat my Mustang in a drag race. The key difference, is after the drag race, I can drive 150 miles to Chicago whereas he has to go back to the charger.

That's strange, because in my Model S I'd still have over 200 miles of range. Assuming I started at my normal 80% charge for the day. Point is, a single drag race isnt gonna drain your range that much.

[GH85Carrera]

Originally Posted by Superman

Jeff mentions tires, and I think some of the most important recent advances in motoring relate to tires. The tires on my '78 SC are a far cry from the ones it came with in '78.

Absolutely. My 911 came with 15 inch Fuchs. I loved the wheels when decent rubber was available. Now the 15 inch tire size is either a mini van all season tire, or a autocross track tire that is super scary in the rain or below 32 degrees.

I drive my 911 on long road trips, and we are going on a fall foliage trip soon. Last year one morning it was 16 degrees.

I have 17 inch Euromeisters now and Michelin PS2 tires. They have a grip level that is orders of magnitude higher than anything I even had in 15 inch tires. The are great in the rain, and do just fine at 16 degrees. They cost a lot more than the 15 inch tires ever did, but man they stick me to the road.

Of course going from 185s front and 215 rear to 225 front and 255 in the rear is a big part of it.

[masraum]

Originally Posted by GH85Carrera

Absolutely. My 911 came with 15 inch Fuchs. I loved the wheels when decent rubber was available. Now the 15 inch tire size is either a mini van all season tire, or a autocross track tire that is super scary in the rain or below 32 degrees.

I drive my 911 on long road trips, and we are going on a fall foliage trip soon. Last year one morning it was 16 degrees.

I have 17 inch Euromeisters now and Michelin PS2 tires. They have a grip level that is orders of magnitude higher than anything I even had in 15 inch tires. The are great in the rain, and do just fine at 16 degrees. They cost a lot more than the 15 inch tires ever did, but man they stick me to the road.

Of course going from 185s front and 215 rear to 225 front and 255 in the rear is a big part of it.

Yep, the width helps, but the main factor is the modern UHP tire compounds and construction. Assuming similar tire pressures, you should have the same size contact patch as you did, only a different shape now.

[pwd72s]

Originally Posted by MMARSH

That's strange, because in my Model S I'd still have over 200 miles of range. Assuming I started at my normal 80% charge for the day. Point is, a single drag race isnt gonna drain your range that much.

After a ride in my honorary nephew's new Chevy Bolt, I can see the usefulness of electrics for some people. Those whose usual driving habits allow access to fast charging systems...he said a 200 plus miles range. Not bad...and it's enough for his lifestyle. I was impressed with the instant torque of an electric.

Of course, I promptly challenged him to a race...from my home to Burns Oregon and back. He'd have to stop to charge for hours while I could gas up the Mustang in minutes.

[GH85Carrera]

Originally Posted by pwd72s

After a ride in my honorary nephew's new Chevy Bolt, I can see the usefulness of electrics for some people. Those whose usual driving habits allow access to fast charging systems...he said a 200 plus miles range. Not bad...and it's enough for his lifestyle. I was impressed with the instant torque of an electric.

Of course, I promptly challenged him to a race...from my home to Burns Oregon and back. He'd have to stop to charge for hours while I could gas up the Mustang in minutes.

One of my friends has a Honda that is runs on Natural Gas. It drives just like a gasoline version of the same Honda. If came from the factory as Nat Gas only. He drives all over in Oklahoma and knows the places with CNG to fill up, and there are many. When he has to go to Houston to visit his kids, he rents a car, and he and his wife load up and go.

My neighbor had a SUV that he bought new that ran on CNG or gasoline. CNG back then was 50 cents a gallon and has the basic energy as gasoline. GNC right now today it is $1.54 per gallon, so still lots cheaper than the $2.15 for gasohol or $2.40 for 100% pure gas.