Ford GT dyno numbers
- Thread starter Avenger
- Start date
-
Sponsors (?)
holler said:
if you go reread that "comparo", you'll notice it's an advertisement for the Viper. it is a very biased article, obviously, because it was paid for by Dodge. it's the newest type of "deceptive advertising".
JonJon
Founding Member
where does it say it was paid for by Dodge?DBMSTNG said:
btw here's the MotorTrend article for people who haven't seen it
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/coupe/112_0401_vipandgt/index.html
DeadLurker
Daily Driven
bdcardinal said:
You are correct sir!!
Also, there isn't a Viper on the planet that comes anywhere close to performing like a Ford GT. This is twice the car you'll find anywhere at that price.
The drivetrain loss cannot be figured using the standard 15%. The Ricardo drive train only loses like 10%, possibly 8%, putting it at 620 or so at the flywheel. Still very impressive!!
I think Ford has underrated the hp for a number of reasons lately on all of their sport models...not the least of which is the '99 Cobra fiasco.
JonJon said:where does it say it was paid for by Dodge?
btw here's the MotorTrend article for people who haven't seen it
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/coupe/112_0401_vipandgt/index.html
note that it says "advertisement" every few paragraphs. this is a new form of advertising where they try to make it as inconspicuous as possible. you can tell it's a Viper ad becuase Ford would not place such an advertisement that would insinuate the Viper is a better performance/$ value. the actual ad in the magazine should have a "paid for by Dodge" somewhere in fine print.
on page 2
"Although we attempt to keep things as equal as possible, our Viper was tested on what might've been a slightly grippier section of test-track pavement. Dodge also equips the car with bigger-rubber contact patches. Stopping the Viper was even more like hitting a wall, taking a staggeringly short 97 feet to haul down from 60 to 0. And, like the GT, it could repeat the deed over and over, with no heat-related fade. That's how far braking and tire technology have come. In the stopping department, the Viper is record-setting, the GT merely outstanding."
no one in their right mind would conduct comparison like this and have the 2 cars test stopping distance on 2 seperate surfaces.
there are also ads like this im Popular Mechanics. one is for the Toyota Prius. it's the same basic style (although not a comparo) as this supposed "article". in the Prius "article" they mention how it was faster than nearly every other car on the road the day of testing, then go on to state how it goes 0-60 in 10 seconds.
it's deceptive advertising made to look like an unbiased article from a reputable magazine. they are trying to fool the public with propaganda.
ScrewDrvr said:
January 2004 Car & Driver - Ford GT - 11.6@128mph
and we all know they drive like 80yr old women. i'm sure a professional driver could pull a few more mph. remember, these are the same drivers that could only manage a 15.1 from a automatic Mustang GT.
the car wieghs ~3300lbs, add a 150-200lb driver. lets call it 3450lbs race wieght. it trapped 124mph, it doesnt matter if they spun and got a 10 second 60' time, trap speeds tell the cars HP. The car that was tested DID NOT make 565rwhp.
maybe Ford upped the hp recently, but the car MT tested DID not make the same hp. And o yeah, the Viper competes pretty damn well with the Ford GT in every category. Except that 60-70k price differnce......
maybe Ford upped the hp recently, but the car MT tested DID not make the same hp. And o yeah, the Viper competes pretty damn well with the Ford GT in every category. Except that 60-70k price differnce......
[QUOTE='01 Steed]And since when can you calculate the flywheel hp for an unknown entity based on 1/4 mile trap speeds? This car is so drastically different from our Mustangs that you cannot use the same equations.[/QUOTE]
three pieces of data...
hp
weight
mph in the 1/4
if you have any 2 out of those 3 pieces of data, you can figure out a close estimate of the third.
three pieces of data...
hp
weight
mph in the 1/4
if you have any 2 out of those 3 pieces of data, you can figure out a close estimate of the third.
Yeah, yeah...energy needed to do a given amount of work. This is a given. But how close? 10%, 20%? It has a world to do with traction and gearing also. Like I said, the GT simply can't be estimated.
I'm really surprised at the willingness of some people---who have absolutely ZERO clue about this vehicle---to cast doubt on it's performance. I would think that our Ford brethren would join together in applauding Ford's effort in bringing this fine automobile to market! Let's face it, some of the tech from this car will make it into the next car you may but, or the next car. That may not be a Mustang, but then again, maybe it will.
I'm really surprised at the willingness of some people---who have absolutely ZERO clue about this vehicle---to cast doubt on it's performance. I would think that our Ford brethren would join together in applauding Ford's effort in bringing this fine automobile to market! Let's face it, some of the tech from this car will make it into the next car you may but, or the next car. That may not be a Mustang, but then again, maybe it will.
JonJon
Founding Member
so the viper is a better braking vehicleAvenger said:I've heard many people saying how the Viper brakes better than the GT. Guess what, the Viper comes with 275 front tires and the GT with 235.
what's your point
