EVO Magazine lap BOSS 302 in 1:29 at Bedford!
Discussion
Hi there
Having read the EVO article today I am a little surprised at the BOSS 302's Bedford laptime of 1:29 in the dry.
The other cars did:-
M3 - 1:25.1
RS5 - 1:25.4
C63 AMG - 1:27.7
BOSS 302 - 1:29.0
Look at the following link:-
http://www.fastestlaps.com/tracks/bedford_autodrom...
Ford Mustang GT - 1:30.55 - 300 / 1580 - EVO
BMW M3 - 1:26.60 - 420 / 1619 - EVO (Previous run)
I am just finding it odd how the M3 has got faster, by 1.5s and how the BOSS 302 is hardly any quicker just 1.5s than a regular soft S197 4.6l Mustang GT.
It just smells to me, this new BOSS Mustang has sorted suspension, which is adjustable, did they turn it to softest instead of hardest?
It has far more powerful brakes.
It has 150BHP more.
It probably also weighs less.
It has higher performance rubber.
Yet the BOSS 302 is 1.5s a lap quicker than a basic soft Mustang GT with 300BHP and the M3 has got 1.5s quicker than it previously was?
In all fairness I'd have expected the BOSS 302 to have been circa 1:26 - 1:27 with suspension set to hardest.
Ford claim the BOSS 302 is quicker at Leguna Seca and supposedly is as tested by American press, yet over here tested by UK press its not just slower but substancially slower. No doubting the M3's 1:25 time, but feel the BOSS 302 should have been at least on par with the Merc and quite surprised at the RS5's turn of speed.
So what are your thoughts?
Having read the EVO article today I am a little surprised at the BOSS 302's Bedford laptime of 1:29 in the dry.
The other cars did:-
M3 - 1:25.1
RS5 - 1:25.4
C63 AMG - 1:27.7
BOSS 302 - 1:29.0
Look at the following link:-
http://www.fastestlaps.com/tracks/bedford_autodrom...
Ford Mustang GT - 1:30.55 - 300 / 1580 - EVO
BMW M3 - 1:26.60 - 420 / 1619 - EVO (Previous run)
I am just finding it odd how the M3 has got faster, by 1.5s and how the BOSS 302 is hardly any quicker just 1.5s than a regular soft S197 4.6l Mustang GT.
It just smells to me, this new BOSS Mustang has sorted suspension, which is adjustable, did they turn it to softest instead of hardest?
It has far more powerful brakes.
It has 150BHP more.
It probably also weighs less.
It has higher performance rubber.
Yet the BOSS 302 is 1.5s a lap quicker than a basic soft Mustang GT with 300BHP and the M3 has got 1.5s quicker than it previously was?
In all fairness I'd have expected the BOSS 302 to have been circa 1:26 - 1:27 with suspension set to hardest.
Ford claim the BOSS 302 is quicker at Leguna Seca and supposedly is as tested by American press, yet over here tested by UK press its not just slower but substancially slower. No doubting the M3's 1:25 time, but feel the BOSS 302 should have been at least on par with the Merc and quite surprised at the RS5's turn of speed.
So what are your thoughts?
Hopefully the new series of Top Gear will answer this eventually.
The very nose-heavy GT500 managed 1:30 on the TG track and the 415hp Roush managed a 1:28. However the E90 M3 and Audi RS4 both managed 1:25 so the Mustang still had 3 seconds to find.
Even the Boss Mustang is probably not going to have THAT much better suspension than the Roush (doubless carefully set up) and only has 412hp and the distribution of power and torque may materially affect a car's ability to haul ass at any given point.
People are quick to diss the British drivers but maybe it's the American drivers? I would expect the BOSS to get it down to maybe 1:26 or 1:27 on a very good day but doubt it's going to find 3 seconds, especaiily when the BMW has paddles and the Mustang no more than a reasonable manual box.
The other thing is that the Mustang is LHD so unless the driver was used to it, that may also have impaired the time to a slight extent.
Finally, American tyres are far from being great so that alone could explain it if the Europeans are wearing expensive rubber as standard.
The very nose-heavy GT500 managed 1:30 on the TG track and the 415hp Roush managed a 1:28. However the E90 M3 and Audi RS4 both managed 1:25 so the Mustang still had 3 seconds to find.
Even the Boss Mustang is probably not going to have THAT much better suspension than the Roush (doubless carefully set up) and only has 412hp and the distribution of power and torque may materially affect a car's ability to haul ass at any given point.
People are quick to diss the British drivers but maybe it's the American drivers? I would expect the BOSS to get it down to maybe 1:26 or 1:27 on a very good day but doubt it's going to find 3 seconds, especaiily when the BMW has paddles and the Mustang no more than a reasonable manual box.
The other thing is that the Mustang is LHD so unless the driver was used to it, that may also have impaired the time to a slight extent.
Finally, American tyres are far from being great so that alone could explain it if the Europeans are wearing expensive rubber as standard.
Other than bench racing bragging rights, does it really matter? I'm sure there are multiple factors (drivers/track conditions/tyres etc etc), but these things just don't interest me.
A good track time doesn't always equal a good grin factor!
Oh, and LV51FER, I'm sure that was a typo........the Boss sports 440bhp, not the 412bhp of the GT
A good track time doesn't always equal a good grin factor!
Oh, and LV51FER, I'm sure that was a typo........the Boss sports 440bhp, not the 412bhp of the GT
Twin Turbo said:
Other than bench racing bragging rights, does it really matter? I'm sure there are multiple factors (drivers/track conditions/tyres etc etc), but these things just don't interest me.
A good track time doesn't always equal a good grin factor!
Oh, and LV51FER, I'm sure that was a typo........the Boss sports 440bhp, not the 412bhp of the GT
I just wanted you to have something to correct A good track time doesn't always equal a good grin factor!
Oh, and LV51FER, I'm sure that was a typo........the Boss sports 440bhp, not the 412bhp of the GT
...but the point remains that power alone is not the issue and I suspect the German traction aids are more "productive" than the Mustang's "reticence to intervene" system.However, these cars will always come down to what you're into and what you want to be seen driving and given this is the last solid axle Mustang, it's still a "solid" performance.
Destructo said:
It was just a standard Boss 302 correct? The track-oriented Laguna Seca edition might find a second or two. But you guys raise some interesting points. What in your opinion makes American rubber not that great?
In general , American tyres seem to favour a harder compound than they specify for Europe, more suited to tail-out driving and longer tyre life. Not sure how much they've changed that with the track pack spec but the 2005 Mustang P Neros were fairly poor and a silly high 55 profile. In general, a performance car here will often come with 40 or 35 profile rubber and with premium brands, doubtless specify the best expensive rubber which a Mustang might baulk at given its price point in the US. I suppose it's a question of different priorities for different markets. In the US, the Mustang is almost destined to be modified but here, most cars tend to stay as the manufacturer intended.It's a bit like when Top Gear pitted the Exige S against the Mustang GT to somehow demonstrate a point while omitting to mention that the Exige came with shaved high grip semi-slick tyres as standard.
LuS1fer said:
In general , American tyres seem to favour a harder compound than they specify for Europe, more suited to tail-out driving and longer tyre life. Not sure how much they've changed that with the track pack spec but the 2005 Mustang P Neros were fairly poor and a silly high 55 profile. In general, a performance car here will often come with 40 or 35 profile rubber and with premium brands, doubtless specify the best expensive rubber which a Mustang might baulk at given its price point in the US. I suppose it's a question of different priorities for different markets. In the US, the Mustang is almost destined to be modified but here, most cars tend to stay as the manufacturer intended.
It's a bit like when Top Gear pitted the Exige S against the Mustang GT to somehow demonstrate a point while omitting to mention that the Exige came with shaved high grip semi-slick tyres as standard.
An interesting observation that cars in the States stay closer to manufacturer specs. Whilst I enjoy a well-engineerd vehicle, I have a hard time leaving anything stock for long. How long has the modification bug been going on in the UK? I've never really thought of it as a hotbed of modification. I would have attributed the SEMA show and all the tuner shops around here as a harbinger of a strong after-market and passion for mods.It's a bit like when Top Gear pitted the Exige S against the Mustang GT to somehow demonstrate a point while omitting to mention that the Exige came with shaved high grip semi-slick tyres as standard.
Destructo said:
LuS1fer said:
In general , American tyres seem to favour a harder compound than they specify for Europe, more suited to tail-out driving and longer tyre life. Not sure how much they've changed that with the track pack spec but the 2005 Mustang P Neros were fairly poor and a silly high 55 profile. In general, a performance car here will often come with 40 or 35 profile rubber and with premium brands, doubtless specify the best expensive rubber which a Mustang might baulk at given its price point in the US. I suppose it's a question of different priorities for different markets. In the US, the Mustang is almost destined to be modified but here, most cars tend to stay as the manufacturer intended.
It's a bit like when Top Gear pitted the Exige S against the Mustang GT to somehow demonstrate a point while omitting to mention that the Exige came with shaved high grip semi-slick tyres as standard.
An interesting observation that cars in the States stay closer to manufacturer specs. Whilst I enjoy a well-engineerd vehicle, I have a hard time leaving anything stock for long. How long has the modification bug been going on in the UK? I've never really thought of it as a hotbed of modification. I would have attributed the SEMA show and all the tuner shops around here as a harbinger of a strong after-market and passion for mods.It's a bit like when Top Gear pitted the Exige S against the Mustang GT to somehow demonstrate a point while omitting to mention that the Exige came with shaved high grip semi-slick tyres as standard.
Gassing Station | Mustangs | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff