Photography By Drew Phillips
There ain’t nothing Shakespearean about it. The ponycar wars are no longer a Tempest in a teapot. Gone are the days when Camaros and Mustangs were straight-line beasts (at least in the eyes of their owners) and lacked any sort of handling or finesse.
But what is past is prologue. These days, even the entry-level iterations offer up actual sporty good times. And the midgrade versions—Camaro SS and Mustang GT—can bloody the lip of Europe’s finest. For not a ton of coin, either. Then you have the even more potent and more track-focused stuff, the battle that has raged for 50 years. You need your biggest guns; you want to go into battle with your heaviest weapons. For team Camaro, that’s the ZL1. For the Ford Performance folks, it’s none other than the Shelby GT350R. These are extreme machines, in both monstrous function and opulent excrescence.
Is this the perfect comparison test? No. The naturally aspirated Shelby makes a healthy 526 horsepower from its lovably cacophonous 5.2-liter flat-plane crank V-8. Whereas the Camaro’s relatively subdued 6.2-liter supercharged V-8 produces a mighty 650 horsepower and 650 lb-ft of torque—which is over 200 more lb-ft of twisting force than the naturally aspirated Voodoo motor can manage (429 lb-ft). Comparing forced induction to natural aspiration is always a sticky wicket. Not quite apples to oranges—more like apples to pears. You can make cider from both, but there is a difference. At least both feature six-speed manual transmissions—the ZL1 is also available with a 10-speed automatic. Further complicating this test is that Chevy has announced the 1LE version of the ZL1—the nearly palindromic ZL1 1LE. One could argue that the Shelby GT350 is to the ZL1 as the GT350R is to the ZL1 1LE. But as Donald Rumsfeld so sagely said, “You go to war with the army you have, not the army you might want.”
Also, I’d counter that this is a pretty damn good comparison test. At this moment in time, the GT350R is the highest-performing ponycar Ford makes, and the same is true in regard to the Chevy. They are the beasts atop the food chain, so to speak. Also, in terms of price, they’re right on top of each other. The white ZL1 pictured here stickers for $65,230. The much more limited-production blue and black striped Shelby R: $68,020.
I’d be remiss if I didn’t point out that you’re going to have a difficult time picking up a GT350R for the sticker price. Two years after it first went on sale, the ultimate Mustang is still selling for $25,000 or thereabouts over sticker. I’ll never forget the first time I drove an R because although I was conscious of the greedy dealer markup, after one corner, “totally worth it” went through my head. Likewise with the mightiest-ever Camaro, I remember watching my colleague Scott Evans detonate a mushroom-cloud burnout and thinking $65K is a bargain.
The Shelby remains a mystery to me, and here’s why: The GT350 is a Mustang with a brilliant engine. The GT350R—which ostensibly only adds a bit of aero, carbon-fiber wheels, and R compound tires, removes the back seat, and slightly reworks the suspension—is as good to drive as a Porsche GT3. It is a pure and totally wonderful driver’s car. In fact, last year at our 2016 Best Driver’s Car, a Shelby R finished in second place behind the winning McLaren 570S. More impressively, we judged the GT350R better to drive than the Porsche 911 Carrera S, Camaro SS 1LE, Dodge Viper ACR, AMG GT S, Audi R8 V10 Plus, and Acura NSX, among others. Those are serious cars, some of which are outright supercars, yet our judges determined the bright yellow Mustang with the loud exhaust superior. It’s that great.
The ZL1 hasn’t run the Best Driver’s Car gantlet yet, but it stacks up to other cars that we’ve lapped on the big track at Willow Springs International Raceway. The supercharged Chevy (with the six-speed manual) beat the Corvette Grand Sport, AMG GT S, 911 Carrera S (991.2), 911 Turbo S, 991 GT3, and McLaren 570S. To be fair, the 570S was a prototype. But still, damn! Not bad for a Camaro.
In the interest of high-quality reportage, we of course relapped the ZL1 (as fate would have it, our white car is the same car in which Randy Pobst set the 1:26.12 mark in last January) and the Shelby. The first takeaway is that despite being way down on power and torque, the Shelby was only 0.39 second slower around Big Willow than the ZL1. That’s impressive but not surprising. Why not? At Mazda Raceway Laguna Seca, the GT350R laid down a quicker lap than cars such as the Ferrari 458 Italia, various Nissan GT-Rs, Acura NSX, and Lexus LFA. I claim magic, though as Randy mentioned this time out, “I think that wing is doing something.”
The second thing you should note is that the Camaro ZL1 was 1.74 seconds slower this time out than it was the last time (1:27.90 versus 1:26.16; the GT350R ran a 1:28.29). Same car, same track, same driver. This bothered us, too. So much so that we had Randy write a sidebar explaining why. Regardless, the point is that the ZL1—at least on paper—should be much quicker than the R. But it wasn’t.
What about on the test track? In a straight line, the ZL1’s power advantage was apparent, though not at first. The Shelby hit 60 mph in 4.0 seconds compared to 3.8 for the ZL1. Now, 0–60 times are as much about launch technique as anything else, and road test editor Chris Walton didn’t have an easy time with either car. “I tried five launch control settings, varying the rpm and slip,” he noted for the ZL1. “In the end, I ended up beating the best of those—surface set to general, launch rpm at 3,800, and a slip target of 12 percent—though not by much. I had to make several attempts, but it was about a 0.06-second advantage with my organic-based launch control.” As for the Shelby, he noted: “This car was a whole lot trickier to launch than I remember. Having worn tires didn’t help, either. Because the torque peaks at 4,750, it’s fairly easy to bog it on the launch. The best technique was a 3,200-rpm, clutch-slipping launch to maintain the rpm. Once the tires hook up at about 20 mph, there is an ever so slight dip in acceleration.”
The quarter mile is where the power of the ZL1 overwhelms the R. The Shelby gets down the strip in 12.2 seconds with a trap speed of 119.0 mph. The Chevy rips down 1,320 feet in 11.8 seconds at 123.9 mph. Half a second and nearly 5 mph is pretty significant in drag racing circles.
When it comes to stopping, the two cars are much more even. From 60 mph, the Camaro stops in 97 feet to the Shelby’s 99. Anything less than 100 feet should be thought of as world class. However, take a look at Walton’s comments. “The ZL1’s brakes are so much more effective than they feel,” he said. “I don’t like the long-travel squishy pedal. I prefer a hard pedal and modulating the brake with pressure rather than the distance the pedal travels, as in the ZL1. This pedal is kind of squishy, but the distances are ridiculously short and consistent.” Four separate stops varied in length by just over a foot.
Walton was a much bigger fan of the GT350R’s brakes. “These are absolutely stupendous brakes,” he said. “Very firm pedal, straight as an arrow, no dive, and the distance kept getting shorter as the brakes and tires grew hotter. There were eight stops total: 107, 104, 103, 102, 102, 105, 99, 101 feet.” That last bit helps explain—in my mind at least—the lap times. The Shelby starts working better the harder you beat on it. Still, the checkered flag goes to the Camaro.
The two ponycars are tied in terms of lateral grip. Both show off a peak force of 1.08 g. Just a few short years ago, grip numbers like those would be headlines. Today, they’re merely excellent. In terms of our figure-eight test, you might think that the more powerful car with better braking ability and an equal amount of grip would be the quicker car. You’d be mistaken. The Shelby actually pipped the ZL1—23.1 versus 23.2. (The 10-speed auto version of the ZL1 ran a 23.1-second lap.) The one thing we haven’t talked about is weight, and the GT350R is nearly 200 pounds lighter than the ZL1—3,713 pounds versus 3,912. That big lump of a supercharged V-8—while potent—puts way too much weight in exactly the wrong spot. For reference, the SS 1LE weighs in at 3,735 pounds. I will also go on record stating that I preferred the way the SS 1LE handled compared to the ZL1—and also to the GT350R.
But Head 2 Head is more than bench-racing the numbers. Surely the owner of either machine isn’t going to hire a professional race car driver to pop off laps or spend time in a vast parking lot with a GPS-enabled data logger to see if they can shave hundredths off a launch. No, what actually matters is how the two cars feel. And although I am not prone to embellishment, I am tempted to evaluate in terms of both sound and feel because the Shelby sounds five quintillion times better. It’s that palpable a difference in its sonorous quality. Give credit to the world’s biggest-lunged flat-plane crank and the bypass valves on the exhaust. Conversely, the normally righteous-sounding LT4 (in Corvette Z06 duty at any rate) is muffled here in the ZL1. If you’re standing behind the Camaro, the exhaust sounds fairly angry, but inside, compared to the Shelby, the Camaro’s on mute.
From the driver’s seat, the ZL1 is almost a luxury car. The ride is excellent, and the experience is fairly subdued. The ZL1 suffers from the same affliction that strikes the Porsche 911 Turbo: When you’re not pounding the bloody edge of the envelope, the car is too docile. There’s not much to remind you that you are driving one hell of a world-class sports car. The Shelby GT350R is the opposite. It’s almost too much. Due to the superlative steering and sticky tires, the front end tramlines mercilessly. The seats are form fitting, as opposed to relaxed fit, and if you have the bypass valve open, the exhaust note is deafening. You might be blissed out mashing the Shelby’s throttle as you wail past the Rock Store, but you’ll be miserable on the ride back on the clogged 405.
The thing is, when you get these two studs on a winding canyon road, the Shelby is the car you want to be driving. That steering simply comes alive. The GT350R sports one of the best-feeling front ends I’ve had the privilege of experiencing. It’s simply excellent. This Shelby’s shifter shifts better, the engine feels better (who wouldn’t take an 8,250-rpm redline over a 6,500-rpm limit?), the brake pedal feels better, and the car is simply sportier in every way. The R’s just more fun to drive. Again, I’m not sure how Ford Performance did it, but I think there’s a layer of pixie dust baked into the GT350R. I might call it a thing divine.
As for the ZL1, save your tears and angry subscription-canceling letters. Look, Chevy knows they left something out on the playing field. That’s why the Camaro team is building the ZL1 1LE. In the future, we might very well pit the Shelby GT350R against the more track-focused, aero-enhanced ZL1 1LE. Or we might just wait and match the ultimate Camaro against the upcoming GT500 and/or possible GT500R. Until such a time, the GT350R remains not only the ultimate Mustang but also the ultimate ponycar. Ford has won this battle, though the war has no end in sight.
Even a cursory glance at the speed trace (above) should leave you wondering, “How the heck does the GT350R wind up only 70 feet behind the ZL1 at the checkered flag?” The Camaro is dramatically faster on the front straight, grips better around the long, lower-speed Turn 2 and slingshots around the very quick Turn 8 faster than the Shelby. But the Ford catches up in nips and bits—a little here, a little there.
The GT350R repeatedly brakes a little better, particularly approaching the Turn 3, ‘Omega’ corner; it momentarily notches a peak-speed win between Turns 6 and 7. Heroically, it claws back part of that gap through the terrifying Turn 9. True, we’ve lapped this very ZL1 here before when it posted an even quicker, 1:26.12 sec lap (largely owed to weather and track conditions, to hear it from Randy), but of course this Mustang was faced the same temperature, barometric pressure, and humidity. On this day, the ZL1 shined but only by a fraction.
Why The Camaro Was Slower This Time
Sharp-eyed readers will notice that the Camaro was significantly slower in its Willow Springs track test this time around. Same car, same track. Why? Motor Trend’s resident hot-shoe Randy Pobst has the answers:
The lap time discrepancy here is alarming but not unusual in the track world. In a situation similar to the Dodge Viper ACR in its Best Driver’s Car testing, ultimate lap times can be greatly affected by a track condition known as a green track.
The event immediately preceding one of our tests largely determines the level of grip we will be blessed with. Sometimes, a full race group will clean the surface and lay down some sticky rubber, increasing grip.
It is my guess that nothing much had run at Willow Springs the day or two before we showed up, or maybe motorcycles, whose tiny contact patches are no help.
Another clue is that the fantastic Shelby-special Michelin Sport Cup 2s on the GT350R felt merely adequate, prompting us to verify that they really were the Ford spec. (They were.)
Either that, or I suddenly forgot how to drive. –Randy Pobst
| 2017 Chevrolet Camaro ZL1 | 2017 Ford Mustang Shelby GT350R | |
| POWERTRAIN/CHASSIS | ||
| DRIVETRAIN LAYOUT | Front-engine, RWD | Front-engine, RWD |
| ENGINE TYPE | Supercharged 90-deg V-8, alum block/heads | 90-deg V-8, alum block/heads |
| VALVETRAIN | OHV, 2 valves/cyl | DOHC, 4 valves/cyl |
| DISPLACEMENT | 376.0 cu in/6,162 cc | 315.1 cu in/5,163 cc |
| COMPRESSION RATIO | 10.0:1 | 12.0:1 |
| POWER (SAE NET) | 650 hp @ 6,400 rpm* | 526 hp @ 7,500 rpm |
| TORQUE (SAE NET) | 650 lb-ft @ 3,600 rpm* | 429 lb-ft @ 4,750 rpm |
| REDLINE | 6,500 rpm | 8,250 rpm |
| WEIGHT TO POWER | 6.0 lb/hp | 7.1 lb/hp |
| TRANSMISSION | 6-speed manual | 6-speed manual |
| AXLE/FINAL-DRIVE RATIO | 3.73:1/2.00:1 | 3.73:1/2.35:1 |
| SUSPENSION, FRONT; REAR | Struts, coil springs, adj shocks, anti-roll bar; multilink, coil springs, adj shocks, anti-roll bar | Struts, coil springs, adj shocks, anti-roll bar; multilink, coil springs, adj shocks, anti-roll bar |
| STEERING RATIO | 11.1:1-15.1:1 | 16.5:1 |
| TURNS LOCK-TO-LOCK | 2.3 | 2.6 |
| BRAKES, F; R | 15.4-in vented, 2-pc disc; 14.4-in vented, 2-pc disc, ABS | 15.5-in vented, drilled, 2-pc disc; 15.0-in vented, drilled, 2-pc disc, ABS |
| WHEELS, F;R | 10.0 x 20-in; 11.0 x 20-in, forged aluminum | 11.0 x 19-in; 11.5 x 19-in, carbon-fiber composite |
| TIRES, F;R | 285/30R20 95Y SL; 305/30R20 99Y SL Goodyear Eagle F1 Supercar 3 | 305/30R19 98Y; 315/30R19 100Y Michelin Pilot Sport Cup 2 |
| DIMENSIONS | ||
| WHEELBASE | 110.7 in | 107.1 in |
| TRACK, F/R | 63.4/62.6 in | 63.3/63.7 in |
| LENGTH x WIDTH x HEIGHT | 188.3 x 74.7 x 52.0 | 189.7 x 75.9 x 53.6 in |
| TURNING CIRCLE | 38.4 ft | 40.4 ft |
| CURB WEIGHT | 3,912 lb | 3,713 lb |
| WEIGHT DIST, F/R | 54/46% | 54/46% |
| SEATING CAPACITY | 5 | 2 |
| HEADROOM, F/R | 38.5/33.5 in | 37.6/ — in |
| LEGROOM, F/R | 43.9/29.9 in | 44.5/ — in |
| SHOULDER ROOM, F/R | 55.0/50.4 in | 56.3/ — in |
| CARGO VOLUME | 9.1 cu ft | 13.5 cu ft |
| TEST DATA | ||
| ACCELERATION TO MPH | ||
| 0-30 | 1.7 sec | 1.8 sec |
| 0-40 | 2.3 | 2.4 |
| 0-50 | 3.0 | 3.1 |
| 0-60 | 3.8 | 4.0 |
| 0-70 | 4.6 | 4.9 |
| 0-80 | 5.5 | 6.1 |
| 0-90 | 6.7 | 7.3 |
| 0-100 | 7.9 | 8.7 |
| 0-100-0 | 11.7 | 12.6 |
| PASSING, 45-65 MPH | 1.5 | 1.7 |
| QUARTER MILE | 11.8 sec @ 123.9 mph | 12.2 sec @ 119.0 mph |
| BRAKING, 60-0 MPH | 97 ft | 99 ft |
| LATERAL ACCELERATION | 1.08 g (avg) | 1.08 g (avg) |
| MT FIGURE EIGHT | 23.2 sec @ 0.89 g (avg) | 23.1 sec @ 0.89 g (avg) |
| 2.4-MI ROAD COURSE LAP | 87.90 sec | 88.29 sec |
| TOP-GEAR REVS @ 60 MPH | 1,500 rpm | 1,800 rpm |
| CONSUMER INFO | ||
| BASE PRICE | $63,435 | $64,545 |
| PRICE AS TESTED | $65,230 | $68,020 |
| STABILITY/TRACTION CONTROL | Yes/Yes | Yes/Yes |
| AIRBAGS | 8: Dual front, front side, f/r curtain, front knee | 8: Dual front, front side, f/r curtain, front knee |
| BASIC WARRANTY | 3 yrs/36,000 miles | 3 yrs/36,000 miles |
| POWERTRAIN WARRANTY | 5 yrs/60,000 miles | 5 yrs/60,000 miles |
| ROADSIDE ASSISTANCE | 5 yrs/100,000 miles | 5 yrs/60,000 miles |
| FUEL CAPACITY | 19.0 gal | 16.0 gal |
| EPA CITY/HWY/COMB ECON | 14/20/16 mpg | 14/21/16 mpg |
| ENERGY CONS, CITY/HWY | 241/169 kW-hrs/100 miles | 241/160 kW-hrs/100 miles |
| CO2 EMISSIONS, COMB | 1.20 lb/mile | 1.18 lb/mile |
| RECOMMENDED FUEL | Unleaded premium | Unleaded premium |
| *SAE Certified | ||
The post 2017 Chevrolet Camaro ZL1 vs. 2017 Ford Mustang Shelby GT350R: The Forever War appeared first on Motor Trend.
from Motor Trend http://ift.tt/2risYRd
No comments:
Post a Comment