2008 ZO6 vs 2008 GT500KR

[o0Dan0o]

Most people/reviewers don't realize how good of a track car the mustang can be with a few simple changes. Give the car good properly sized tires (235 P Zeros, bah), change out the shocks/struts with springs and sway bars to match and the car handles very well (though worse at drag racing in most cases). Change out the rear control arms and PHB to proper aluminum units with rod ends and tune everything properly and you'll hand a lot of cars their asses.
Dan

 

[GreyDiesel]

The one that really surprized me though was that it was also the same as a Tesla Roadster

yup, the Tesla really is a historical car. An electric car has 100% of its torque at 0rpm. i.e. amazing low end torque. Low end torque is what makes cars fun, and why a Mustang with a V8, is much more enjoyable than a 300hp STi. Which makes me think, that a Tesla is probably a total blast to drive. The only thing holding back an electric car revolution is the batteries. Waiting two hours for a recharge, even just two hours, is a pain compared to a 5 minute fill up. Plus, I dont know that the technology has been refined to the point that the Li-Ion batteries wont blow up. It is just a question of refining the technology though, no major roadblocks* are keeping electric cars off the road.

I think electric cars will replace the ICE in the near future --not because of global warming, and not even because of gas prices, but because of the low end torque, quieter operation, and easier maintenance. There will be holdouts, most of whom are probably on this forum, who will never give up the sound of the V8, and I think we will see cheaper gas once everyone is using E-cars.

*Except that the Earth may not hold enough Lithium for all the cars to use Li-Ion batteries. In which case another type of battery may need to be invented, like a Hydrogen Fuel cell, but they have other major drawbacks right now.

 

[o0Dan0o]

The car of the future, or at least near future, is the diesel electric (like the volt). An electric car, but instead of a battery a diesel generator(still has a battery but not on the order of todays electric cars, probably smaller than the hybrids). Generators can be made to be extremely efficient because they are designed to run at one specific RPM, camshafts, intake runners, heads, exhausts, all designed for peak efficiency at that one specific RPM.

If we employ some of the coming technology with this idea (direct injection and such) I think we could see 200 MPG highway cars in the not too distant future.
Dan

 

[ThePumpkin]

Well im glad that other people are saying their wrong... I was beginning to wonder when they started saying the numbers.
But I would rather the ZO6... Just because I'm a big fan of a mixing a little auto-cross with straight line racing.

 

[walter]

I have driven both the Corvette and the Mustang. The Corvette is a superior car.... out of the box but the excitement of driving one doesn't compare with the feeling you get when you learn, build and drive a Mustang at higher limits then the average Corvette and Corvette driver can manage.

Speaking for experience my best memory at the Auto-X circuit was when in my N/A 240SX I smoked a couple of fast cars including a new Lancer Evo by a matter of seconds. That was a satisfying feeling.

 

[BULLITT 2008]

Absolutely, I agree. Its an apples to oranges match up. The corvette is a 2 seat, composite body, IRS purpose built sports car with much wider rear tires. Changing the tires alone would do leaps & bounds to even up the odds.

I just get sick of these Mustang vs XXX comparisons that are obviously skewed. Just like the comparison between the Challenger SRT8 vs a Mustang Bullitt. 425 HP vs 315 hp...DUH!!!! If they are going to do comparisons then they should match the vehicles up as closely as possible to make it a fair race. BUT obviously, that isn't the point. Like you said, Its all about making up something to write about..........

One thing that I do tend to side with alot of these writers about though is the fact that with all of the technology available, Mustangs are still a ~300HP car, and in order to get past that barrier, you need to add boost or nitrous. There are so many new offerings with 400+ naturally aspirated horsepower out there, and there are so many boosted 4 and 6 cylinder cars that the mustang has become easy prey for these writers. NOW is the time to bring back the BOSS and show the competition a thing or two, but unfortunately, in these hard economic times, and with the ever strictening emission laws, that not likely. I always have been and always will be a Mustang guy, but its somewhat disheartening to see Ford announce that they are "cranking up the rated horsepower of the 2010 Mustang to 315HP" and the Challenger RT (rough equivelent of a Mustang GT) cranks out 376HP wheras the SRT8 (rough equivelant of a Shelby makes 425 HP on all motor.

the bullitt vs the challenger is not fair at all poor big car 425 hp and i have still smoked three srt8s with my stock bullitt and you can get 500 n/a power out of our motor stl on my other forums was puttin 420 to the rears with heads cams long tubes and a few other bolt ons so thats around 475 at the crank and he was only at stage 2 setup livernois was hittin 451 to the rears and mmr got 502rwhp all out of n/a 4.6 liters im gonna try it

 

[NastyStang113]

the bullitt vs the challenger is not fair at all poor big car 425 hp and i have still smoked three srt8s with my stock bullitt and you can get 500 n/a power out of our motor stl on my other forums was puttin 420 to the rears with heads cams long tubes and a few other bolt ons so thats around 475 at the crank and he was only at stage 2 setup livernois was hittin 451 to the rears and mmr got 502rwhp all out of n/a 4.6 liters im gonna try it

Let's see a link to these 281 ci N/A motors hitting 450+ rwhp.

 

[GreyDiesel]

The Ferrari California gets 460 horses out of an n/a 4.3 Liter engine... but ah... I have not seen a 4.6L Ford getting above the 100 hp/liter. With agressive cams, 32 valves, and getting it to rev to 8k rpms, maybe...

The interesting thing about the california engine is that it produces 350 lb/feet of torque, very similar to the 4.6 --so all the extra horses are due to the higher rev limit. Essentially, they are just building an engine that can keep together at higher rpms, and thus produce more horses. You might be able to do the same thing with a 4.6. I dont know enough about why engines come apart at high rpms to really comment on it. I am not sure what would break first if your goal is to make it rev to 8k. Might need to convert it to DOHC. I would love it if someone who knows about building engines could educate me on why the ferrari V8 can rev so high.

2009 Ferrari California Price, Specs & More | RSportsCars.com

 

[walter]

Let's not get too hung up on the DOHC vs SOHC argument. Nascar engines are neither and they spin to 8K all day long on only two valves. Surface area of the valves will determine the ultimate CFM that they will flow which of course will enable power as long as the engine is capable of spinning faster. The valvetrain should be relatively easy to get to withstand high RPM uses. It's the bottom end that is the problem. The long stroke and the crank design don't really encourage high rev setups. Forced induction will always remain the more efficient way of getting these motors to make power.

 

[o0Dan0o]

I think we could see some 281 ci 3V mustangs making ~450 RWHP, though I don't know if anyone really wants to go that rout.

Start with fully ported heads, oversized valves, portmatch an intake to it (C&L or other high flowing), full exhaust (stepped long tubes, merge collector, no cats), good CAI, cams that let it rev to about 7k, and most importantly 12/1 compression or better (probably need 13/1 compression and race fuel would help).

The interesting thing about the california engine is that it produces 350 lb/feet

It's a bit nick-picky, but lb/feet is technically incorrect. It's lb-ft or ft-lb, nothing in that equation is divided, it's force times length.
Dan

 

[bradleyem]

Well, my argument wasn't that it's not possible to make a mod motor put out ~500HP, my point is that on stock internals, it probably won't hold up to it for long. Plus, you'll probably start breaking other stuff on down the driveline.

I'm looking pretty hard into the new TVS superchargers for my car. Most of these are advertizing ~500HP out of the box with no other mods done to the car. If you've already done, or plan to do other mods (such as long tube headers, cams, heads, etc) then you could easily surpass the limits of the stock bottom end. In fact, most are recommending that even in a stock application, that you tune down to around 450-475HP in order to preserve the reliability of the bottom end. Now, that says a whole lot for the efficency of the new forced induction systems available. Unfortunately, after spending $6000 on a new supercharger, who is going to want to have it "tuned down"? I'd wager that most will wring it for all its worth, and worry about the bottom end when a rod goes through the block

As far as high revving NA motors go, its all about balance. I agree, that it shouldn't be too hard to get the valvetrain to handle higher revving, but again, the weak link is the internals. The entire rotating assembly would have to be totally balanced. I'm not sure how difficult a task that would be on a mod motor bottom end though.

 

[Sparty92]

A KR for example, does not do so well in the solemn. That would be important if you were buying a KR as a track car, but no one does. People buy the KR to keep as a collectable, or, to do burnouts around town. That is why it has 500+ hp attached to skinnier tires. It is a burnout machine, pure and simple. Look good and smoke the tires. Solemn runs are irrelevant.

I think you mean, "Slalom." Any winding or zigzag course marked by obstacles or barriers, as one in which automobiles are tested for maneuverability or drivers for reaction time.

"Solemn." Gravely or somberly impressive; causing serious thoughts or a grave mood: solemn music.

I agree with the comments here, the two cars are totally different in every way, aside from power. But since the KR has the power, some suspension work could make it into a Corvette Killer if you so desire.

A Lotus Exige has a few hundred less horsepower than either car, but can smoke both of them on a race track.

 

[gashog]

I'd also like to throw in the fact that the vast majority of the people that own these (like the KR) cars do not buy them to take them on a race track. And those that do buy them for the track?

They buy them for the track without twisties.

 

[GreyDiesel]

Let's not get too hung up on the DOHC vs SOHC argument. Nascar engines are neither and they spin to 8K all day long on only two valves. Surface area of the valves will determine the ultimate CFM that they will flow which of course will enable power as long as the engine is capable of spinning faster. The valvetrain should be relatively easy to get to withstand high RPM uses. It's the bottom end that is the problem. The long stroke and the crank design don't really encourage high rev setups. Forced induction will always remain the more efficient way of getting these motors to make power.

Thanks for the info Walter, that is good to know-- probably would have taken me years to figure that out on my own. I had just assumed the valvetrain was always the weak link in an engine, because I hear so much about throwing a rod. I had no idea Nascar engines rev'd so high, though I suppose it does stand to reason. I knew they were basic old school V8s in the design...

Dan, your right, ft-lbs, my bad. I have always disliked that unit and so use it with a certain amount of contempt. Just like the Nm, Force*Distance is energy, and should be called Joules, unless its rotating. That was one of the concepts I am still struggling with from Phys 101.

Sparty, no, I meant solemn, as no one would use their KR in a solemn way, it is only possible for a KR to bring thrills, so if you use it to bring solemnity, of course your numbers are going to be bad.

Thanks for the responses all, this is a good thread.

 

[NastyStang113]

Still waiting for some dyno graphs of this badass N/A cars !!!

 

[bradleyem]

So, has anyone actually installed one of the new TVS supercharhgers? I'm very curious to see if they actually put down the numbers as advertized. I won't be able to afford one for another year or two, so that should be plenty of time to see if they perform like the manufacturers say they will. Another consideration is durability. Some of the designs that I've seen look like they use a long shaft that travells the length of the supercharger plus the length of the snout (it looks as if the drive gears are at the rear of the supercharger). If this is the case I would be curious about the longevity of the shaft and bearings under high RPM's.

A twin turbo setup is still in the back of my mind too.....but the twin turbo setups that I've seen place the turbos under the car between the headers & the H pipe, where water will be splashing on them in rainy & snowy conditions. I don't know how cold water splashing on a red hot turbo would affect it long term.......

 

[walter]

Thanks for the info Walter, that is good to know-- probably would have taken me years to figure that out on my own. I had just assumed the valvetrain was always the weak link in an engine, because I hear so much about throwing a rod. I had no idea Nascar engines rev'd so high, though I suppose it does stand to reason. I knew they were basic old school V8s in the design...

Dan, your right, ft-lbs, my bad. I have always disliked that unit and so use it with a certain amount of contempt. Just like the Nm, Force*Distance is energy, and should be called Joules, unless its rotating. That was one of the concepts I am still struggling with from Phys 101.

Sparty, no, I meant solemn, as no one would use their KR in a solemn way, it is only possible for a KR to bring thrills, so if you use it to bring solemnity, of course your numbers are going to be bad.

Thanks for the responses all, this is a good thread.

No problem man. If you think about it it's a heck of a lot easier (and cheaper) to replace a set of cams, springs and valve retainers then having to remove the engine and redoing the whole bottom end. One can be done at a shop in a few hours with an experienced mechanic on hand the other will take a lot longer and considerably more effort.

also IIRC Nascar engines are pushrod OHV V8's regulated to 9500 which means they feasibly can spin faster. I'm not a fan of the sport and oval racing in general but I wished that an experienced Nascar tech worked on my car's engine.

 

[JBVobra]

both my vettes were 2v motors and pushrods - lol

seriously, the ls7 car was amazing. that car revving to 7100 was insane. and it revved very fast. physically the motors were very small looking under the hood in comparison to the this dohc 4.6.....the ls7 weighed like 450lbs.

 

[o0Dan0o]

Dan, your right, ft-lbs, my bad. I have always disliked that unit and so use it with a certain amount of contempt. Just like the Nm, Force*Distance is energy, and should be called Joules, unless its rotating. That was one of the concepts I am still struggling with from Phys 101.

Any time you take a linear concept and then try to apply it into a rotational system everything kinda goes to hell, this is the same reason why centripetal acceleration is such a confusing topic. In linear motion the force is parallel to the motion, in a rotational system the force is perpendicular, thus Nm and not Joules. You get energy by the angle through which you apply the force (to get the total distance traveled over the circumference of the circle, that distance times the force gives you the work done), but translates into angular momentum, which has it's own complexities. I could go on, but I'll restrain myself, heh.

Walter,
NASCAR engine also blow up on the track fairly regularly, and are rebuilt for every race (they at least redo the top end). IIRC they even rebuild the top end after qualifying. They can spin, but I believe it has a highly negative effect on reliability, of course, they also sit at 9k RPM for 4-5 hours, who could blame them for breaking...
Dan