Why You Should Own A Corvette

All I know is that Mustangs are not at all competitive at autocross. I went to a Mustang club autocross once - every single Mustang finished behind every single Miata. Corvettes, meanwhile, are fantastic at dodging cones, even in stock form.

No, they are definitely not suited for AutoX duty. However, they can be made to be somewhat competitive in SCCA's FS and CP classes.
 
The definition of what does and doesn't constitute performance is an entirely subjective thing and not a new argument I'm trying to have here. By your definitions, a fox-era Mustang cannot compete. Since this entire time I was referring to outright handling I'm sticking to the anecdotes (the slalom test and the hill climb video) I had posted.

You're being a dolt on purpose. Performance is everything a car does - practicality, speed, handling, economy, safety, reliability, everything a car can or should do is part of a car's performance. It's not subjective just because you don't know how to measure these things. It's just physics, it's all numbers. You're just moving the goal posts if you try to narrow it down.


...and I worked for nearly 4 years as a test engineer testing components to failure. The one thing you're missing in regards to Mustang modifications, is that most of the modifications available come from Ford via Ford Racing, which means that those parts were designed by the engineers at Ford themselves under similar standards as the original stuff.

And you're clearly missing how those components interact. Beef up the tires, smoke the brakes. Beef up the brakes, stress the diff, crack the wheels. Install headers, heat soak the transmission. Fit a beefier transmission with a cooler to handle the heat, the custom mount job starts to go. On and on.

I have seen this sort of progression thousands of times. Even professional racing teams can't get around crap like this. And no, just because the part has a blue oval on it doesn't mean it's any better than the other aftermarket stuff. The vast majority of the time it's the interaction between the parts that causes the issues, not individual part failures themselves. For instance, you can do Eibach coilovers and Michelin Pilot Cup tires on BBS rims for your E36 M3, but all that extra stress causes the brakes to boil and the diff to fall out of the rear subframe. The springs, dampers, and wheels will probably last the life of the car, but they will cause all the other shit that wasn't designed to handle that race car stuff to explode.

I've been coaching and racing in and around modified track equipment for longer than you've been a test engineer, I've raced/broke/seen all that shit. I've never seen a build that hasn't had big issues like this. Last weekend I was just coaching a Lotus Cup car that had overheating issues. The engineer had been doing this crap for 30 years. This is just what happens when you modify stuff. Throwing some branded tuner parts on a car is nowhere near the same as a carmaker doing millions of hours of development work.
 
All I know is that Mustangs are not at all competitive at autocross. I went to a Mustang club autocross once - every single Mustang finished behind every single Miata. Corvettes, meanwhile, are fantastic at dodging cones, even in stock form.

This mustang won class championship with the widebody......

13002947503_d29ac15e98_b.jpg
 
I don't think anyone is questioning that Mustangs *can* be made fast. Even a Honda Fit can be a race car. The Mustangs do fairly well in Grand Am and Pirelli Challenge, and they had moderate success in GT3 for a while.

Though, I don't think I need to mention Le Mans and GT1 with certain yellow and black cars.
 
I ask this anytime I see this comparison, but why, oh why, do people try to compare Mustangs and Corvettes? They are two completely different cars.

What I want to know is why do people compare stock vs modified. I've seen videos of 350z's outrunning Lambos on the highway, guess what? Would still buy a Lambo if I could.
 
What I want to know is why do people compare stock vs modified. I've seen videos of 350z's outrunning Lambos on the highway, guess what? Would still buy a Lambo if I could.

we are comparing dollar for dollar. I personally compare how much money I spend. Corvette are expensive.

BTW, I saw a C7 corvette on the road while driving my motorcycle. I saw the front end and was like "Sweet".... then i saw the rear end and had to pull over to vomit.
 
we are comparing dollar for dollar. I personally compare how much money I spend. Corvette are expensive.

BTW, I saw a C7 corvette on the road while driving my motorcycle. I saw the front end and was like "Sweet".... then i saw the rear end and had to pull over to vomit.
No you are comparing Apples and Pineapples, when it comes to a dollar for dollar comparison you need to also compare like things. You are basically saying that an Accord is a better than an S class because it's much cheaper and will still get you where you are trying to go. You are completely ignoring the fact that not only are they different types of cars but that one is stock and the other is modded.
 
You're being a dolt on purpose. Performance is everything a car does - practicality, speed, handling, economy, safety, reliability, everything a car can or should do is part of a car's performance. It's not subjective just because you don't know how to measure these things. It's just physics, it's all numbers. You're just moving the goal posts if you try to narrow it down.

Here's the problem with that kind of encompassing assessment; the Mustang beats the Corvette in all three of those things, does that make it a better performance oriented car? No. So, where do we draw the line? I drew it to cover just speed and handling.

And you're clearly missing how those components interact. Beef up the tires, smoke the brakes. Beef up the brakes, stress the diff, crack the wheels. Install headers, heat soak the transmission. Fit a beefier transmission with a cooler to handle the heat, the custom mount job starts to go. On and on.

Then it must be some kind of miracle that the bigger brakes and tires haven't caused my car to explode and send me careening off a cliff. You realize that a lot of the thought process in upgrading Mustangs comes from what Ford has done to the Cobras/Cobra R/Boss 302, all road going vehicles sold to the public? The other suspension components offered by the aftermarket are either tweaks to achieve a desired setup and geometry or major change in implementation through the utilization of proven designs (Panhard bars and torque arms have been used by OEMs for years).

I have seen this sort of progression thousands of times. Even professional racing teams can't get around crap like this. And no, just because the part has a blue oval on it doesn't mean it's any better than the other aftermarket stuff.

So how come we're not seeing Boss 302s and Cobras breaking down left and right at the track?

The vast majority of the time it's the interaction between the parts that causes the issues, not individual part failures themselves. For instance, you can do Eibach coilovers and Michelin Pilot Cup tires on BBS rims for your E36 M3, but all that extra stress causes the brakes to boil and the diff to fall out of the rear subframe. The springs, dampers, and wheels will probably last the life of the car, but they will cause all the other shit that wasn't designed to handle that race car stuff to explode.

If we were talking about any other platform I would tend to agree with you, however the Mustang is somewhat adverse to these issues because of what Ford has done through its SVO/SVT/Ford Racing programs and it's largely the reason why it's a popular platform to start out with.

I've been coaching and racing in and around modified track equipment for longer than you've been a test engineer, I've raced/broke/seen all that shit. I've never seen a build that hasn't had big issues like this. Last weekend I was just coaching a Lotus Cup car that had overheating issues. The engineer had been doing this crap for 30 years. This is just what happens when you modify stuff. Throwing some branded tuner parts on a car is nowhere near the same as a carmaker doing millions of hours of development work.

I want you to check out this post here from a seasoned racer that races/has raced Mustangs, BMWs, Miatas, Corvettes, etc.:

This crash I had at Road Atlanta was a BRUTAL hit. It broke my back (vertibrae + rib) and the impact cleaned my clock. But the car? Sheeeeit, it took superficial damage. Front wheels were bent, tire blew out, the front tires bottomed into the inner fender structure, the rear axle bottomed HARD into the rear unibody - yet nothing Ford built or designed is even bent, much less broken. We looked over the car with a microscope and... nothing. Straight as an arrow. It rubbed some paint off where the tires slammed into the front frame horns, but its still straight. We slapped on another pair of front wheels, a new bumper cover, splitter mounts, put the same splitter back on (tank-like construction as well), and were racing on track in the car again a week later (well, without my broken ass at the wheel).

http://www.corner-carvers.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1039121&postcount=774

and that is on a car that has seen thousands of miles of track time. These cars can put up with race abuse much better than most other performance oriented cars.
 
I ask this anytime I see this comparison, but why, oh why, do people try to compare Mustangs and Corvettes? They are two completely different cars.

I agree that they are two completely different cars. This argument stemmed from Level's statement that the Corvette provides the best performance to dollar ratio to any other car and I simply disagree.

Somehow my disagreement got translated into "the Mustang is the greatest car EVAR!!!!@#!@#!@#!!! I PEE ON CORVETTES!!!!!1111"
 
Last edited:
2012 Solo Nationals:
D-Stock: Mustang comes in 11th after Minis, Hyundai Genesis, etc.
A Mustang won F-Stock... all 18 entrants were Mustangs.
E Street Prepared: mixed bag between Mustangs, Camaros, and WRXs.
C-Prepared - a 92 Mustang won, narrowly beating out a 73 Camaro.
E-mod - a Mustang came in 7th.



we are comparing dollar for dollar.
/thread then
 
I like pickles.
You ever try fried pickles? Soooo good.

- - - Updated - - -

I agree that they are two completely different cars. This argument stemmed from Level's statement that the Corvette provides the best performance to dollar ratio to any other car and I simply disagree.

Somehow my disagreement got translated into "the Mustang is the greatest car EVAR!!!!@#!@#!@#!!! I PEE ON CORVETTES!!!!!1111"
And his 100% correct when it comes to comparing stock for stock and new.
 
Then it must be some kind of miracle that the bigger brakes and tires haven't caused my car to explode and send me careening off a cliff. You realize that a lot of the thought process in upgrading Mustangs comes from what Ford has done to the Cobras/Cobra R/Boss 302, all road going vehicles sold to the public? The other suspension components offered by the aftermarket are either tweaks to achieve a desired setup and geometry or major change in implementation through the utilization of proven designs (Panhard bars and torque arms have been used by OEMs for years).

You don't drive your car hard. Even a beat to shit, undermaintained Honda Civic from the 70s can handle street driving without exploding. Think it could handle a few laps of the Nurburgring with a professional driver without fault?

So how come we're not seeing Boss 302s and Cobras breaking down left and right at the track?

Neither are aftermarket. They have that aforementioned R&D that all road cars get.

Cobras cost more than the Corvette. The base Boss is much slower than the Corvette. The Laguna is a little slower, but also almost the same price as the Corvette. The fastest version of the Laguna sacrifices the rear seats.

Neither are in line with your original idea of buying a Mustang and throwing on some suspension parts for half the cost of a Corvette.


I want you to check out this post here from a seasoned racer that races/has raced Mustangs, BMWs, Miatas, Corvettes, etc.:

http://www.corner-carvers.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1039121&postcount=774

and that is on a car that has seen thousands of miles of track time. These cars can put up with race abuse much better than most other performance oriented cars.

I'm not interested in your anecdotes. Crashes have all kinds of weird outcomes.

But if anecdotes resonate with you, both the aforementioned Cobra and Boss have shown brake fade problems. We've had outright brake failure at Laguna with a Boss, and it wasn't even that fast of a driver. One guy took his new '13 GT for paddock drifting and blew his diff. They have problems like all mid to low end sports cars.

And let's not talk about the transmission issues from 05-up cars...
 
I think handz is a pickle fucker.
 
You don't drive your car hard. Even a beat to shit, undermaintained Honda Civic from the 70s can handle street driving without exploding. Think it could handle a few laps of the Nurburgring with a professional driver without fault?

Yeah that's it, I don't and have never driven my car "hard"... lol

If a professional driver can drive a Ford Transit around the 'ring, I'm pretty sure they could drive almost anything else around the 'ring.

Neither are aftermarket. They have that aforementioned R&D that all road cars get.

Cobras cost more than the Corvette. The base Boss is much slower than the Corvette. The Laguna is a little slower, but also almost the same price as the Corvette. The fastest version of the Laguna sacrifices the rear seats.

Neither are in line with your original idea of buying a Mustang and throwing on some suspension parts for half the cost of a Corvette.

Except for the part where the Ford Racing parts sold in their catalog are the exact same parts used on the Cobras and Boss Mustangs that have seen all the necessary R&D...

But if anecdotes resonate with you, both the aforementioned Cobra and Boss have shown brake fade problems. We've had outright brake failure at Laguna with a Boss, and it wasn't even that fast of a driver. One guy took his new '13 GT for paddock drifting and blew his diff. They have problems like all mid to low end sports cars.

Corvettes have their brake fade problems as well. As for the dude who blew his diff. that sounds like a manufacturing defect. I've never seen/heard of a Mustang blowing their diff. Wearing out the clutch plates in the diff? Sure. But straight up failure is RARE.

And let's not talk about the transmission issues from 05-up cars...

Those weren't unique to high performance driving, those were just bad transmissions.
 
Last edited:
Top