Is it me or is this car tail happy when making fast turns

[Junkyard Dog]

In all seriousness, stickier tires will help a lot. I am running Michelin Pilot Sport 4S tires (315/30 on 19 x 11 inch wheels on the rear), and they stick pretty well on the street.

And there is a big difference in a 480, 486, 500 horsepower engine and a 350 horsepower 90s Corvette engine or the horsepower of a vintage Alfa Romeo or a 315 horsepower 455 in a Buick Riviera. Folks like to think back to the "good, old days" of muscle car engines, but no big block factory engine back then could have held a candle to the Gen 4 Coyote engine that Ford installs in the 7th generation Mustang. If this engine was around back in the late 60s/early 70s, it would have been legendary still today, and 50 year old cars with it installed would be selling at Jackson Barrett for $5 million plus. We live in a time with great automotive technology and high horsepower engines. I mean, really, run in the 11s in the quarter mile off the showroom floor? Nobody was doing that in any car in the 1970s. Tons of modifications and slicks and running in the 13s gave you status, and running in the 12s with modifications made you a street legend.

So, yeah, if you get to happy on the throttle in a turn with a 500 horsepower engine, well, no big surprise, you are going to get the rear end to kick out. The solution is to be gentler on the throttle. Take it to your local HPDE day. That is what your instructor will say more than anything else, the word "gentle" as you exit turns, especially if you are naturally aggressive on the race track.

Sponsored

 

[AZ_Ryan]

Here is the extent of my normal driving,

Take the car on Monday night to go get pizza, maybe use it to run an errand during the week when I can get out of the house without the dog following me out the door into the garage.

Now that I have had 3 instances of spirited driving where the rear end has either broken loose and slid, or I felt what I thought was the car starting to slide while turning at a speed faster than I should have been going, I will adjust my driving and expectations accordingly.

I just thought it was unusual for what should be a current technology car to allow that to happen in normal mode.

As I said before my 94 Vette with a lowly 350HP engine would stop the slide if the traction control was on. With the traction control off it was fun, reminding me of my 71 Buick Riv 455 4bbl TH400 and 12 bolt posi... that car would slide left coming out of a light with some throttle applied to it. My Chevelle's were more straight line tire smoke cars.



I have done driving schools, I have track time at NHIS, Lime Rock and other tracks in the Northeast in my vintage Alfa over the last 40 years of ownership.

The Standard GT wheels and tires are too skinny. I think they are only 8" wide with 245/40 rubber. Its just not adequate for the power of these cars. Coupled with the factory all season Contis that and you aren't going to get much traction with a 500hp when gooseing the throttle on a hard turn. Those tires belong on a Cadillac not a mustang. So regardless of all the nannies, you can and will break the read end loose. Its a powerful car.

I put the wider PP wheels with summer tires on my GT Premium and it made a considerable difference. Those still aren't wide tires by any means (I had 315s in my Mach 1). But a similar upgrade would greatly help your problem. Be careful out there sir.

 

[Ken H.]

engines, but no big block factory engine back then could have held a candle to the Gen 4 Coyote engine that Ford installs in the 7th generation Mustang

I beg to differ.
1. Ford 427 FE solid lifters, 2-4 barrel carbs, 500+ HP - according to Holman & Moody
2. Chevy 427 L88 - 500+ HP
3. Mopar 426 Hemi -500+ (I think)
Modern engines are awesome, but old school stuff kicked some ass too. Old school skinny bias ply tires were not conducive to good ETs. My buddies Stock Eliminator 1970 Hemi Challenger with 10” drag slicks turns 10’s.

 

[Ken H.]

The Standard GT wheels and tires are too skinny. I think they are only 8" wide with 245/40 rubber. Its just not adequate for the power of these cars. Coupled with the factory all season Contis that and you aren't going to get much traction with a 500hp when gooseing the throttle on a hard turn. Those tires belong on a Cadillac not a mustang. So regardless of all the nannies, you can and will break the read end loose. Its a powerful car.

I put the wider PP wheels with summer tires on my GT Premium and it made a considerable difference. Those still aren't wide tires by any means (I had 315s in my Mach 1). But a similar upgrade would greatly help your problem. Be careful out there sir.

I agree. The Ford Performance School uses wider Michelin Pilot Sport 4s & I had zero spinning or rear end sliding. My DH Pirelli Trofeo R’s & Michelin PS 4 All Seasons stick well. No rear end looseness so far.

 

[Junkyard Dog]

I beg to differ.
1. Ford 427 FE solid lifters, 2-4 barrel carbs, 500+ HP - according to Holman & Moody
2. Chevy 427 L88 - 500+ HP
3. Mopar 426 Hemi -500+ (I think)
Modern engines are awesome, but old school stuff kicked some ass too. Old school skinny bias ply tires were not conducive to good ETs. My buddies Stock Eliminator 1970 Hemi Challenger with 10” drag slicks turns 10’s.

Nostalgia and sentimentality, but not real world. Everybody has to listen to the guy talk about his new car bought at the dealer that would pop a wheelie on launch and run 10s . . . it's BS. Cars have come a long way.

426 Hemi was 425 horsepower, and that was gross, not net, on a dyno with no accessories. When net horsepower ratings were introduced, the legendary Hemi's rating instantly dropped to 350 horsepower, and that rating is the better one to compare to today's method of rating engine power, which is also net.

The 1970 Plymouth 'Cuda with a Hemi engine did a 5.8 second 0-60 and a quarter mile at 13.1 at 107 miles per hour. In other words, it would barely beat an Ecoboost Mustang.

And we are talking about an absolute legend here that is now worth a lot of money (priced any Hemi powered Cudas lately?). Take your average "muscle car" as it came from the factory, and an Ecoboost Mustang will stomp it in a drag race. Put a stock 1966 GTO with tripower and an automatic up against an A10 Dark Horse and the result would be laughable for the GTO (and I love GTOs - the last muscle car I owned was a 66 GTO, but I am just talking about reality here).

Look, I like to reminisce about old muscle cars, too. I have owned them. I still think they are cool. If I was rich I would have a whole warehouse full of them, stock and modified. But they were fast only by the standards of the time, when a standard car had a 150 hp 6 cylinder in a 3500 pound car, or a small v-8 with 250 horsepower (gross rating, lol) and a two speed automatic transmission, with a 3.08 or 2.73 rear gear - yeah, hard to get that one rolling when you stomped on the gas pedal. Compared to that, a 425 horsepower engine with a four speed and a 4.11 rear gear was very fast! Lots of fun to rev up that Hemi and dump the clutch when lined up next to a small block Camaro. But it was nothing like modern cars.

 

[smurfslayer]

Agreed

https://www.corvetteforum.com/forums/c3-tech-performance/376961-finally-dyno-d-my-l88.html

https://fastestlaps.com/models/ford-fairlane-thunderbolt

Notice a trend? 7 liters +

426 Hemi was 425 horsepower, and that was gross, not net, on a dyno with no accessories. When net horsepower ratings were introduced, the legendary Hemi's rating instantly dropped to 350 horsepower, and that rating is the better one to compare to today's method of rating engine power, which is also net.

The 1970 Plymouth 'Cuda with a Hemi engine did a 5.8 second 0-60 and a quarter mile at 13.1 at 107 miles per hour. In other words, it would barely beat an Ecoboost Mustang.

see the above links. The l88 is hard to get chassis dyno numbers on, but 470+ for a stock l88 to the wheels is not 425hp. Some of them were underrated. See the '64 t-bolt link. Drag racing was a prestige 'thing' in the '60s.

Now, your typical 7.5 liter wasn't pushing that. They were getting about 350-ish to the wheel, stock. Still quite impressive for the era, and good for a solid 13s 1/4 mile.

You're not wrong, two things can be true at the same time. Most of the cars / engines of yesteryear built to stock specs wouldn't put out what we expected today. But some of them would exceed their ratings.

This takes nothing away from the current Coyote at all.

OP's point about losing traction in a turn, everyone is probably right on - need more & better tires and good maintenance throttle in the turns.

 

[AZ_Ryan]

Nostalgia and sentimentality, but not real world. Everybody has to listen to the guy talk about his new car bought at the dealer that would pop a wheelie on launch and run 10s . . . it's BS. Cars have come a long way.

426 Hemi was 425 horsepower, and that was gross, not net, on a dyno with no accessories. When net horsepower ratings were introduced, the legendary Hemi's rating instantly dropped to 350 horsepower, and that rating is the better one to compare to today's method of rating engine power, which is also net.

The 1970 Plymouth 'Cuda with a Hemi engine did a 5.8 second 0-60 and a quarter mile at 13.1 at 107 miles per hour. In other words, it would barely beat an Ecoboost Mustang.

And we are talking about an absolute legend here that is now worth a lot of money (priced any Hemi powered Cudas lately?). Take your average "muscle car" as it came from the factory, and an Ecoboost Mustang will stomp it in a drag race. Put a stock 1966 GTO with tripower and an automatic up against an A10 Dark Horse and the result would be laughable for the GTO (and I love GTOs - the last muscle car I owned was a 66 GTO, but I am just talking about reality here).

Look, I like to reminisce about old muscle cars, too. I have owned them. I still think they are cool. If I was rich I would have a whole warehouse full of them, stock and modified. But they were fast only by the standards of the time, when a standard car had a 150 hp 6 cylinder in a 3500 pound car, or a small v-8 with 250 horsepower (gross rating, lol) and a two speed automatic transmission, with a 3.08 or 2.73 rear gear - yeah, hard to get that one rolling when you stomped on the gas pedal. Compared to that, a 425 horsepower engine with a four speed and a 4.11 rear gear was very fast! Lots of fun to rev up that Hemi and dump the clutch when lined up next to a small block Camaro. But it was nothing like modern cars.

Not to mention all those old school big blocks were heavy AF and put in cars that mostly just went straight really fast.

 

[Ken H.]

I’m not in total disagreement with J Dog. I love the modern engines, cars, brakes, suspensions. My only point was that he said no old school big block engines (not performance specs) could match up with the Gen 4 Coyote. J. Dog quotes published hp numbers but it is common knowledge that the engines I listed were rated at less than their full power because of insurance reasons. The insurance companies were starting to charge excessive premiums based on hp so the car companies rated their engines at a lower rpm on the power curve.
True, they did rate at the flywheel (gross) instead of at the rear wheels (net), but I contend that 550-600 hp at flywheel will still be 500+ at the rear wheels.
The performance info J. Dog quotes, again, involves skinny bias ply tires. Apples & oranges.
I saw my buddies stock 426 Hemi Challenger’s timeslip after the run. 10.35. Only mod was 10” slicks.
The Ford 427 FE was their primary race engine from 1963 to 1967-68 until replaced by the 429 385 series. Holman & Moody built many of them for NASCAR & other racing venues. They knew them better than anyone. They tuned my Dad’s car told him that it had over 500 hp. I believe them. Plus, it beat all the Tri-Power GTOs, 455 GTO Judges, 428 Cobra Jet Mustangs (rated 335 hp), Roadrunners, Chevelles in the county. Yee haw.
Just talking about the engines J. Dog.

 

[Ken H.]

Not to mention all those old school big blocks were heavy AF and put in cars that mostly just went straight really fast.

True dat. Another reason why these modern rides are so much better

 

[Junkyard Dog]

Agreed

https://www.corvetteforum.com/forums/c3-tech-performance/376961-finally-dyno-d-my-l88.html

https://fastestlaps.com/models/ford-fairlane-thunderbolt

Notice a trend? 7 liters +


see the above links. The l88 is hard to get chassis dyno numbers on, but 470+ for a stock l88 to the wheels is not 425hp. Some of them were underrated. See the '64 t-bolt link. Drag racing was a prestige 'thing' in the '60s.

Now, your typical 7.5 liter wasn't pushing that. They were getting about 350-ish to the wheel, stock. Still quite impressive for the era, and good for a solid 13s 1/4 mile.

You're not wrong, two things can be true at the same time. Most of the cars / engines of yesteryear built to stock specs wouldn't put out what we expected today. But some of them would exceed their ratings.

This takes nothing away from the current Coyote at all.

OP's point about losing traction in a turn, everyone is probably right on - need more & better tires and good maintenance throttle in the turns.

So I read the link to the L88 dyno session. We have to take him at his word about "stock," but I did read (A) a dynapak 3000 generous dyno, (B) open headers and (C) carb replacement. Oh, he mentioned that he had the original Chevrolet numbers matching carb, but did he install it on the engine for the dyno test? LOL, no! Chevrolet delivered the L88 with log manifolds. Ran it with open headers, too, so not just headers but no exhaust. Who knows how many other tweaks have been done to that engine over the years. It is admittedly not as Chevrolet delivered it, and we don't know what else has been done that the author did not already let slip out. So, yeah, on a high reading dyno with some modifications he got a higher reading than the original rating of 430 horsepower. No surprise.

Let's talk reality.

Chevrolet delivered the L88 with log manifolds and 2 inch exhaust.

When Pure Stock Muscle Car drag racing started, they allowed 2.5" exhaust, which really helps the L88. With all the tweaks in the rule book, the original L88 in that class ran 11.99.

A great run, but a factory engined Corvette would have been slower (excepting ringers shuttled out to unsuspecting car reporters, like Pontiac sticking in a 421 overnight to deliver to Car and Driver instead of a 389, I mean, great job by Jim Wangers. He was doing his job. But the e.t. and performance figures from Car and Driver are not even close to what the GTO you purchased with your hard earned cash was going to deliver once you drove off the lot).

So, yeah, this ultra rare Corvette was going to at best run in the 12s, on a good day, if you could get close to the traction that competitors in Pure Stock Muscle Car could get with all of their modern tricks and carefully blueprinted engine which pushes the class rules to the max. It would for sure beat the Ecoboost Mustang if it could hook up, but it would get stomped by a stock GT or Dark Horse.

But we all love to sit around and trade urban legends about the good old days. I get it. It's fun.

 

[Junkyard Dog]

And another point here is that the GT or Dark Horse is coming in with just a little over 300 cubic inches.

500 horsepower from a little over 300 inches would have been unimaginable 50 years ago, 40 years ago, 30 . . . 20, heck 10. The GT was putting out 435 from this little engine ten years ago, not 500. And let's face it, we were all impressed Ford could do that even back then.

 

[Junkyard Dog]

About that ringer by Jim Wangers: Great bit of history, here, though. I love the story.

https://www.streetmusclemag.com/news/restored-ringer-gto-to-roll-out-at-gm-carlisle/

Read it. Great stuff!

And he got a 13.1 et. Much better than the 15s the car normally ran ("a dog" said Hot Rod magazine).

 

[LouG]

I think probably the absolute best example of this is the World Superbike series from about '08 - '20

2008	Troy Bayliss​	Ducati 1098 F08​	P	13	6	5	Ducati Xerox Team
2009	Ben Spies​	Yamaha YZF-R1​	P	14	2	1	Yamaha World Superbike Team
2010	Max Biaggi​	Aprilia RSV4 1000​	P	10	2	2	Aprilia Alitalia Racing
2011	Carlos Checa​	Ducati 1098R​	P	15	0	6	Althea Racing
2012	Max Biaggi​	Aprilia RSV4 1000​	P	5	2	4	Aprilia Racing Team
2013	Tom Sykes​	Kawasaki ZX-10R​	P	9	4	5	Kawasaki Racing Team
2014	Sylvain Guintoli​	Aprilia RSV4 1000​	P	5	8	3	Aprilia Racing Team
2015	Jonathan Rea​	Kawasaki ZX-10R​	P	14	7	2	Kawasaki Racing Team
2016	Jonathan Rea​	Kawasaki ZX-10R​	P	9	9	5	Kawasaki Racing Team
2017	Jonathan Rea​	Kawasaki ZX-10RR​	P	16	7	1	Kawasaki Racing Team
2018	Jonathan Rea​	Kawasaki ZX-10RR​	P	17	4	1	Kawasaki Racing Team
2019	Jonathan Rea​	Kawasaki ZX-10RR​	P	17	16	1	Kawasaki Racing Team WorldSBK
2020	Jonathan Rea​	Kawasaki ZX-10RR​	P	11	5	1	Kawasaki Racing Team WorldSBK

in '08 - '11, Kawasaki couldn't get the tires to survive a full race, the Ducati 1098r / 1198 was at the height of its success. In 2012, though Biaggi won, Tom Sykes was runner up and a close 2nd; actually tied on points, but not as many race wins. Biaggi retired and Sykes won in '13. in '14 he was also runner up.

Sykes was a late braking, square the corner rider, making him very difficult to pass, but, it did not play well with the Kawasaki's power delivery and tire life. He was also famous for getting Pole position throughout this era. Johnny Rea joined Kawasaki in '15 as I recall.

Johnny is a 'smooth, flowing, carry speed through the corner rider - the polar opposite of Tom Sykes. Johnny went on to 6 --consecutive-- World Superbike championships, an unparalleled feat. Just to point out that you are able to carry corner speed on a bike - Or in the Mustang with practice. What Johnny illustrated was not squaring off the corner as severely, and carrying more corner speed, set the bike up for an easier transition to upright and full power delivery with traction. What's interesting is that while Johnny was winning more races and championships, Sykes was able to keep winning pole position more often until he left Kawasaki. So the sharp corner squaring rider was making more impressive single lap times, but not able to sustain race pace like that.

True, but that was a quirk of the bike.
PS I can't stand Rea. He was a filthy rider in BSB, constantly overriding his Honda and taking out the faster guys regularly

 

[LouG]

I sure miss watching Rossi riding Yamaha’s!

You can watch him in the Bathurst 12 hour driving a Beemer.

 

[LouG]

Here is the extent of my normal driving,

Take the car on Monday night to go get pizza, maybe use it to run an errand during the week when I can get out of the house without the dog following me out the door into the garage.

Now that I have had 3 instances of spirited driving where the rear end has either broken loose and slid, or I felt what I thought was the car starting to slide while turning at a speed faster than I should have been going, I will adjust my driving and expectations accordingly.

I just thought it was unusual for what should be a current technology car to allow that to happen in normal mode.

As I said before my 94 Vette with a lowly 350HP engine would stop the slide if the traction control was on. With the traction control off it was fun, reminding me of my 71 Buick Riv 455 4bbl TH400 and 12 bolt posi... that car would slide left coming out of a light with some throttle applied to it. My Chevelle's were more straight line tire smoke cars.



I have done driving schools, I have track time at NHIS, Lime Rock and other tracks in the Northeast in my vintage Alfa over the last 40 years of ownership.

Electronics can't beat physics, or humans ability to crash despite them.

Sponsored