C&D Lightning Lap 4 out

[Raza]

Jeez, can we get back to the topic at hand?  The Ferrari and the GT-R are both too tech-laden.

Canadian Nick, can we hear more about the Karmann?  Do you have pics?

[MX793]

They just posted the article online.  I have to ask:  Why was the Mustang still in LL1?  You can't get a Track Pack Mustang for under $30K (package is only available on the GT Premium, which starts at $32K), it should have been bumped to LL2 (or they should have tested a non-track pack model).

[Payman]

Jeez, can we get back to the topic at hand?  The Ferrari and the GT-R are both too tech-laden.

Canadian Nick, can we hear more about the Karmann?  Do you have pics?

Sadly, no. I had it 1987-1988. It was a yellow 1973 coupe.

[omicron]

1. ZR1: 2:51.8
2. KTM X-Bow: 2:52.3
3. LP670-4SV: 2:53.9
4. Ariel Atom 3: 2:57.6
5. Corvette GS: 2:58.8
6. R8 5.2 FSI: 2:59.5
7. Exige S 260: 3:05.0
8. M3: 3:05.4
9. Cayman S: 3:05.8
10. 911 Carrera S: 3:05.8
11. Jaguar XKR: 3:06.4
12. GT500: 3:07.4
13. Audi TTS: 3:08.4
14. Camaro SS: 3:09.5
15. Audi S4: 3:10.8
16. NISMO 370Z: 3:12.0
17. Mustang GT TP: 3:13.3
18. Genesis Coupe 3.8: 3:14.8
19. Mazdaspeed 3: 3:16.2
20. Impreza WRX: 3:16.6
21. Mini Cooper JCW: 3:17.1
22. GTI: 3:19.3

A Corvette GS faster than a V10 R8, and only a second behind an Ariel Atom? That's very impressive.

[Raza]

Sadly, no. I had it 1987-1988. It was a yellow 1973 coupe.

and 

[sportyaccordy]

They just posted the article online.  I have to ask:  Why was the Mustang still in LL1?  You can't get a Track Pack Mustang for under $30K (package is only available on the GT Premium, which starts at $32K), it should have been bumped to LL2 (or they should have tested a non-track pack model).

Maybe they got a rebate?

And this article is bad news for anyone who thought the Corvette wasn't a world class sports car.  R8 V10 beating performance for half the price.... Ariel Atom beating performance with a full interior + roof.... I think the Corvette is back

What did the GT-R do, a 2:55?

[the Teuton]

VIR is a weird track. It favors flat-out speed in some parts, more often than not probably.



That's still no excuse for the GT-R, which has plenty of power and torque.

[Gotta-Qik-C7]

And this article is bad news for anyone who thought the Corvette wasn't a world class sports car.  R8 V10 beating performance for half the price.... Ariel Atom beating performance with a full interior + roof.... I think the Corvette is back

+1

[Raza]

Yes, it definitely looks like the Corvette is rocking the shit.  Ancient technology and all!

[hotrodalex]

What did the GT-R do, a 2:55?

2:55.6 -- 2:59 with all seasons

[MX793]

Maybe they got a rebate?

There are no rebates large enough to bring it below $30K.

[Nethead]

They just posted the article online.  I have to ask:  Why was the Mustang still in LL1?  You can't get a Track Pack Mustang for under $30K (package is only available on the GT Premium, which starts at $32K), it should have been bumped to LL2 (or they should have tested a non-track pack model).

MX793: Car and Driver DID conduct the Lightning Lap test using a non-track-pack base Mustang GT.  C&D tested a base Mustang GT with the optional "Axle Package" that includes 3.31:1 differential gears and the Pirellis that come on the Mustang GT Premium, but not the suspension pieces that come on the Mustang GT Premium--track pack springs, track pack shocks, track pack swaybars, track pack brake pads, track pack bushings, and maybe some other odd-&-end track pack parts.  The $28,845 base Mustang GT is still under $30,000 with this optional "Axle Package", and posted the quickest lap of the "LL1" vehicles by a second-and-a-half over the second-place "LL1" vehicle.
 
Admittedly, the article is not very clear on this point.  

The "full" track pack is an option available only on the Mustang GT Premium, which starts at over $30,000 and would have been in the "LL2" category if it had been included in this comparo.  

OTOH, track pack Mustang GT Premiums get tested all the time--the only other place I've ever seen a "non-Premium" base Mustang GT equipped with the "Axle Package" tested in a comparo was conducted a few months ago by Consumer Reports.  

[MX793]

MX793: Car and Driver DID conduct the Lightning Lap test using a non-track-pack base Mustang GT.  C&D tested a base Mustang GT with the optional "Axle Package" that includes 3.31:1 differential gears and the Pirellis that come on the Mustang GT Premium, but not the suspension pieces that come on the Mustang GT Premium--track pack springs, track pack shocks, track pack swaybars, track pack brake pads, track pack bushings, and maybe some other odd-&-end track pack parts.  The $28,845 base Mustang GT is still under $30,000 with this optional "Axle Package", and posted the quickest lap of the "LL1" vehicles by a second-and-a-half over the second-place "LL1" vehicle.
 
Admittedly, the article is not very clear on this point.

The "full" track pack is an option available only on the Mustang GT Premium, which starts at over $30,000 and would have been in the "LL2" category if it had been included in this comparo.  

OTOH, track pack Mustang GT Premiums get tested all the time--the only other place I've ever seen a "non-Premium" base Mustang GT equipped with the "Axle Package" tested in a comparo was conducted a few months ago by Consumer Reports.  

The Mustang tested was indeed a track pack model.  The price as tested was over $34K.  You can't option a base, $28.8K GT with enough stuff to bring it to that price (they don't offer enough options on the base car to bring it that high).

"Our Mustang GT showed up wearing the wrong tires, so while we waited for a set of Pirelli P Zeros (part of the $1530 Track pack[/u]) to arrive, we turned a couple of educational practice laps."

Those super tacky Pirellis (that shaved something like 6 seconds off the Mustang's time once equipped) are exclusive to the Track Pack.  The GT Premium otherwise gets the same all-season tires as the base GT.

[Nethead]

The Mustang tested was indeed a track pack model.  The price as tested was over $34K.  You can't option a base, $28.8K GT with enough stuff to bring it to that price (they don't offer enough options on the base car to bring it that high).

"Our Mustang GT showed up wearing the wrong tires, so while we waited for a set of Pirelli P Zeros (part of the $1530 Track pack[/u]) to arrive, we turned a couple of educational practice laps."

Those super tacky Pirellis (that shaved something like 6 seconds off the Mustang's time once equipped) are exclusive to the Track Pack.  The GT Premium otherwise gets the same all-season tires as the base GT.

MX793:  'Looked up the Consumer Reports article (October '09, pages 52 ff).  The Axle Package has 3.73:1 gears, not 3.31:1 gears as I stated in the posting you quoted.  Also, CR says the Axle Package has "performance brakes" (I'm gonna guess that these might be the same pads used in the track pack, but that's a guess) and an ESC recalibration.

Categorization into the price ranges (except for the "LLU" vehicles, categorized by what they are rather than what they cost) was based upon the base prices of the models tested, and not what their window stickers added up to with whatever options may have been on the models as delivered--IIRC, all the "LL1" vehicles exceeded $30,000 as equipped.  There is a lot that's unclear here.  My mistake if it was a GT Premium, but that's not what the evidence indicates.  Nevertheless, nowhere could I find in the article any statement that the Mustang in the Lightning Lap was anything other than a base Mustang GT with options--I figure even auto mag editors read their own articles, and in one of the sidebars is this quote which I copy/pasted here:
 $31845    Mustang 2dr Cpe GT Premium
The base Mustang GT coupe is $28,845 bare.  What that means is that the base Mustang GT coupe, with options, participated in the Lightning Lap--properly in "LL1" since the  base model starts at under $30,000.  A Mustang GT Premium, with or without the optional track pack, did not participate in the Lightning Lap because that model starts at $31,845.  Besides, there was a GT500 already in "LL2"--which woulda put three Mustangs in the Lightning Lap if there had also been a Mustang GT Premium in "LL2".

And C&D essentially declares this to be a base Mustang GT in this quote from page seven:
"Indeed, despite the Shelby?s 225-hp advantage, the off-the-rack Mustang GT  unceremoniously laid the smackdown on the supercharged snake, turning quicker times through sectors one, two, and four."

Subject to your verified rebuttal, the online article (the hardcopy article may have info I have no access to) says this is a base Mustang GT with options, and AFAIK the full track pack is not an option on the base Mustang GT.  Sure, the track pack includes Pirelli P Zero Nero tires.  But that's part of a package, and does not preclude gettin' the Pirellis as a stand-alone option on the base Mustang GT--evidently Car & Driver was able to get 'em on a base Mustang GT.  Optional equipment may change without the manufacturer feeling obligated to make public pronouncements of the change(s) beforehand, and this would be an easy option to offer since the Pirellis are already available on another model of Mustang.  I suppose the track pack is only available on the Mustang GT Premium in order to nudge you into upgrading from the base Mustang GT to the Mustang GT Premium--all manufacturers do stuff like this, and have done so since long before I sold Chevies for a living in the 'Sixties...

Is there stuff in the hardcopy mag that's not in the online article??

[S204STi]

VIR is a weird track. It favors flat-out speed in some parts, more often than not probably.

Do you think the kids on NABISCO will quit whining about the MS3 now that the WRX runs neck and neck with one?

[Rich]

one of the sidebars is this quote which I copy/pasted here:
  $31845    Mustang 2dr Cpe GT Premium

Where did you see that?

[Nethead]

Where did you see that?

Hot Rod Pilot:  Go to page seven in that twenty-odd page Lightning Lap article--the base Mustang GT article--and scroll down a ways.  In smaller print on the right are several items you can click on to bring up further information in a sidebar entitled "Visit Our Buyer's Guide", such as "Overview", "Specifications", "Price with Options", and "Get a Free Quote".  Clicking on the "Price with Options" choice brings up another screen that gives the prices of the base Mustang V6, the Mustang V6 Premium, the base Mustang GT, and the Mustang GT Premium, which is where I got the $28,845 and the $31,845 prices.  It was from there that I copied/pasted the line in blue in my posting upstream.

[the Teuton]

Do you think the kids on NABISCO will quit whining about the MS3 now that the WRX runs neck and neck with one?

No, because NABISCO tends to attract possibly the whiniest Subaru owners in North America.

[Rich]

Hot Rod Pilot:  Go to page seven in that twenty-odd page Lightning Lap article--the base Mustang GT article--and scroll down a ways.  In smaller print on the right are several items you can click on to bring up further information in a sidebar entitled "Visit Our Buyer's Guide", such as "Overview", "Specifications", "Price with Options", and "Get a Free Quote".  Clicking on the "Price with Options" choice brings up another screen that gives the prices of the base Mustang V6, the Mustang V6 Premium, the base Mustang GT, and the Mustang GT Premium, which is where I got the $28,845 and the $31,845 prices.  It was from there that I copied/pasted the line in blue in my posting upstream.

LOL

[S204STi]

No, because NABISCO tends to attract possibly the whiniest Subaru owners in North America.

True!

[MX793]

Hot Rod Pilot:  Go to page seven in that twenty-odd page Lightning Lap article--the base Mustang GT article--and scroll down a ways.  In smaller print on the right are several items you can click on to bring up further information in a sidebar entitled "Visit Our Buyer's Guide", such as "Overview", "Specifications", "Price with Options", and "Get a Free Quote".  Clicking on the "Price with Options" choice brings up another screen that gives the prices of the base Mustang V6, the Mustang V6 Premium, the base Mustang GT, and the Mustang GT Premium, which is where I got the $28,845 and the $31,845 prices.  It was from there that I copied/pasted the line in blue in my posting upstream.

That information is not part of the article.  That's an advertisement with a link to C&D's "Buyer's Guide" (which I think is provided via some other source).

[MX793]

MX793:  'Looked up the Consumer Reports article (October '09, pages 52 ff).  The Axle Package has 3.73:1 gears, not 3.31:1 gears as I stated in the posting you quoted.  Also, CR says the Axle Package has "performance brakes" (I'm gonna guess that these might be the same pads used in the track pack, but that's a guess) and an ESC recalibration.

Categorization into the price ranges (except for the "LLU" vehicles, categorized by what they are rather than what they cost) was based upon the base prices of the models tested, and not what their window stickers added up to with whatever options may have been on the models as delivered--IIRC, all the "LL1" vehicles exceeded $30,000 as equipped.  There is a lot that's unclear here.  My mistake if it was a GT Premium, but that's not what the evidence indicates.  Nevertheless, nowhere could I find in the article any statement that the Mustang in the Lightning Lap was anything other than a base Mustang GT with options--I figure even auto mag editors read their own articles, and in one of the sidebars is this quote which I copy/pasted here:
  $31845    Mustang 2dr Cpe GT Premium
The base Mustang GT coupe is $28,845 bare.  What that means is that the base Mustang GT coupe, with options, participated in the Lightning Lap--properly in "LL1" since the  base model starts at under $30,000.  A Mustang GT Premium, with or without the optional track pack, did not participate in the Lightning Lap because that model starts at $31,845.  Besides, there was a GT500 already in "LL2"--which woulda put three Mustangs in the Lightning Lap if there had also been a Mustang GT Premium in "LL2".

And C&D essentially declares this to be a base Mustang GT in this quote from page seven:
"Indeed, despite the Shelby?s 225-hp advantage, the off-the-rack Mustang GT  unceremoniously laid the smackdown on the supercharged snake, turning quicker times through sectors one, two, and four."

Subject to your verified rebuttal, the online article (the hardcopy article may have info I have no access to) says this is a base Mustang GT with options, and AFAIK the full track pack is not an option on the base Mustang GT.  Sure, the track pack includes Pirelli P Zero Nero tires.  But that's part of a package, and does not preclude gettin' the Pirellis as a stand-alone option on the base Mustang GT--evidently Car & Driver was able to get 'em on a base Mustang GT.  Optional equipment may change without the manufacturer feeling obligated to make public pronouncements of the change(s) beforehand, and this would be an easy option to offer since the Pirellis are already available on another model of Mustang.  I suppose the track pack is only available on the Mustang GT Premium in order to nudge you into upgrading from the base Mustang GT to the Mustang GT Premium--all manufacturers do stuff like this, and have done so since long before I sold Chevies for a living in the 'Sixties...

Is there stuff in the hardcopy mag that's not in the online article??

"Off the rack" does not mean "base".  It simply means it was the "ordinary" model versus a tuner model (yes, the Shelby is considered a "tuner" model even though it comes from Ford).  The car tested was absolutely Track Pack equipped.  It otherwise would not have come with the Pirelli P-Zero Nero tires that C&D had to wait for.  The Axle Package does not come with these tires, it comes with the same all-seasons that any Mustang GT, sans Track Pack, gets.

The information from that online "side bar" is not a part of the article.  Those links are for other C&D services such as the online buyer's guide or links to "related articles" and will show up on any article pertaining to the Mustang.  Per the "vehicle" chart for that article (a page that C&D scanned from the magazine), the car tested cost $34K and change.  A base GT with options cannot reach that price point.  A base GT with every option (literally every option available, including automatic gearbox and every wing, scoop and louver that Ford offers) comes out to $33.8K.

And yes, they can't always get a car with the bare minimum equipment to keep it in the price range, but the base price of the car with the pertinent performance equipment should be below the cap.  The Genesis 3.8 Track they tested ultimately exceeded 30K as equipped, but a 3.8 Track can be had at a starting price of under $30K if you don't get some of the extra stuff (like the automatic gearbox or navigation system) that doesn't really affect performance.  A Track Pack Mustang GT cannot be had for under $30K.  The base price is $32.8K for such a car.  Same can be said of the NISMO 370Z.  The base Z can be had for 29K and change, but once you add the NISMO go-fast kit, the price exceeds 30K and C&D, rightly, moved the car up to the LL2 class.  They should have done the same with the Mustang.

Had they tested a GT Premium without Track Pack, I'd be more apt to let the price exceeding 30K on the test car slide because the performance hardware between a base GT and GT Premium is the same, the differentiation is in the luxury goodies (better stereo, leather seats, etc...).  But performance enhancing packages should be factored into the base price.

[Gotta-Qik-C7]

The Mustang GT teasted was a TP! I have the magazine and it says so in the article. 

[the Teuton]

Here's the question I have: Why has no one mentioned the fact that the 370Z Nismo -- a car that should have been tailored for the track -- got its ass handed to it by a retaining wall because its brakes were mush?

Nissan miffed this one big time.

[MX793]

Here's the question I have: Why has no one mentioned the fact that the 370Z Nismo -- a car that should have been tailored for the track -- got its ass handed to it by a retaining wall because its brakes were mush?

Nissan miffed this one big time.

Nissan only did what their customers were asking for:  Fitted the car with low-dust, low noise, long wearing brakes.

[hotrodalex]

So who all thinks we should write a bunch of letters to C/D saying they are idiots and the Mustang should be in LL2?

[Xer0]

"Off the rack" does not mean "base".  It simply means it was the "ordinary" model versus a tuner model (yes, the Shelby is considered a "tuner" model even though it comes from Ford).  The car tested was absolutely Track Pack equipped.  It otherwise would not have come with the Pirelli P-Zero Nero tires that C&D had to wait for.  The Axle Package does not come with these tires, it comes with the same all-seasons that any Mustang GT, sans Track Pack, gets.

The information from that online "side bar" is not a part of the article.  Those links are for other C&D services such as the online buyer's guide or links to "related articles" and will show up on any article pertaining to the Mustang.  Per the "vehicle" chart for that article (a page that C&D scanned from the magazine), the car tested cost $34K and change.  A base GT with options cannot reach that price point.  A base GT with every option (literally every option available, including automatic gearbox and every wing, scoop and louver that Ford offers) comes out to $33.8K.

And yes, they can't always get a car with the bare minimum equipment to keep it in the price range, but the base price of the car with the pertinent performance equipment should be below the cap.  The Genesis 3.8 Track they tested ultimately exceeded 30K as equipped, but a 3.8 Track can be had at a starting price of under $30K if you don't get some of the extra stuff (like the automatic gearbox or navigation system) that doesn't really affect performance.  A Track Pack Mustang GT cannot be had for under $30K.  The base price is $32.8K for such a car.  Same can be said of the NISMO 370Z.  The base Z can be had for 29K and change, but once you add the NISMO go-fast kit, the price exceeds 30K and C&D, rightly, moved the car up to the LL2 class.  They should have done the same with the Mustang.

Had they tested a GT Premium without Track Pack, I'd be more apt to let the price exceeding 30K on the test car slide because the performance hardware between a base GT and GT Premium is the same, the differentiation is in the luxury goodies (better stereo, leather seats, etc...).  But performance enhancing packages should be factored into the base price.

I dont even know  why you bother with Nethead anyway

[Rich]

Here's the question I have: Why has no one mentioned the fact that the 370Z Nismo -- a car that should have been tailored for the track -- got its ass handed to it by a retaining wall because its brakes were mush?

It sounds great too


About the Nissan (I visit the 370 forums a lot) - Apparently those brakes aren't an isolated case.  The 350 had a lot of brake dust and owners complained, so they stuck the 370 (NISMO and regular) with pads that burn up (ie. don't lose pad material to shed heat).  Some guys that HPDE their 370 had the same thing happen to them on track.

A lot of guys on the 370 forum were pissed that track pads weren't installed on the car prior to the test (since only an idiot would track their car without track pads), but some couldn't get through their thick heads that all of the other cars went out on stock pads and made their laps too.


I do give the 370 guys a lot of credit though, they are the only model specific forum I visit that has a good understanding of vehicles.  As much as I like Camaros, Mustangs, MINIs, and Solstices, the general forum just doesn't have a clue

[MexicoCityM3]

Things that I found surprising/noteworthy:

1. GT-R. This has been talked to death but tech or no tech it is a huge achievement.
2. New Vette GS. Another cost/benefit wonder. It is not offered in Mexico. I would seriously consider one.
3. CTS-V. GM hit a home-run here. Faster than my beloved M3. I wouldn't take it over my car but hat's off still.
4. Same times on the 911 Carrera S (2010), Cayman S (2010) and 911 Turbo (2007). It seems that for a moderately skilled driver there is no reason to go for the more expensive P-Cars (GT3 maybe).
6. The slowness of the M6. Too much of a GT for an M car.
7. Cobalt SS. Another cost/benefit marvel from GM.
8. WRX STi. Sucks being slower than a cheaper brother.

Noticeable: 3 GM home runs on the list (and the Camaro isn't bad either). Seems that they are putting to good use your taxpayer money :)

[r0tor]

Noticeable: 3 GM home runs on the list (and the Camaro isn't bad either). Seems that they are putting to good use your taxpayer money :)

Some of those times were from previous years.  The Cobalt SS for instance doesn't exist anymore.  The Corvette GS is also nothing more then a mismash of parts from the Z51 package corvette and the Z06.