More info on the 6R series: It is a Ford Motor Company design and is produced at Ford's Livonia Transmission plant in Livonia, Michigan. I do care about its history and I'm glad to know it (6R80) has a good and heavy duty track record. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_6R_transmission

 

Busted! On a 8.34 @ 87.8 that 115.4 should have resulted in a a low 12.6 pass.
12.76 equates to roughly a low 111 mph pass.

 

Yeah, looking at the timeslip, he must have lied. He probably was actually driving a different car, babied it for the first half, then put it on in the last stretch for a high trap speed and then told everyone it was in an auto 2011 GT. Yup...

Wait that is insane.

Anyway, I don't have as much experience with the 1/4 but I will add that this is an auto, which most of the 1/4 guys on here might not have much experience with, and I am not sure everyone is looking deeply into the gear ratios (not that I am proclaiming to). I didn't read if anyone knew what gear he finished in, but with the 3.15 rear and different trans gearing he may have been able to get a better shift sequence. I read that the 3.73 manual was finishing right on the edge of 4th and 5th or something. So it was riding the top of 4th for the final stretch but it wasn't worth shifting. Maybe if it wasn't for that, it could pull a higher trap speed? Maybe the auto can shift faster than 97% of humans and that shaves a little time or keeps more momentum towards that trap speed?

Anyway, I am stoked that the auto is so capable, especially considering he just put his foot down at the green light with traction on. If he gave it a few rpms and then released the brakes with TC off and a little shifty right foot adjustments times could likely go even lower. A little bit of consistency would be lost, but it would likely yield better times. I love how fast this thing can be EVERY time down the track though. And, correct me if I am wrong, but isn't this auto more durable than the new manual? I heard it can take something crazy like 800lb/ft without destroying itself? This is a great car, I need to win the lottery or something - yesterday, haha. 2011 autos - just like 2011 V6s - deserve respect. Love it.

 

and you know exaclty what happend on that run because you were there?
calculations and real life are much different.

 

The point is in my opinion its very unlikely to be going 87.8 mph at the 1/8 and accelerate to 115.4 (with anything close to the rwhp these cars make) and take as long as 4.42 for the split. It would most likely be a lot closer to a 4.27 split. In the first place it likely doesnt make enough power to pick up 28 mph in that distance from a near 88 mph start speed and in the second if it did make enough power it would likely have to be stopped down for about 150' after the 1/8 mile to make that split with those traps. It only takes me 4.55 going from 85.1 to 107.7 mph.

I could dig up traps and splits that look like that but only on higher hp, stopped down, bracket cars. At least from the tracks I run.

IMHO either the ET is wrong (That was roughly a 12.61 pass) or the MPH was wrong and that was roughly a 111 mph pass. Or the 1/8 mile figures are wrong. The simplest explanation is the 1/4 mile trap speed is off.

Im not saying their was anything "crooked" about the run just that the 1/4 mile trap speed is highly suspect.
All the other figures look pretty close if you just knock 4 mph off the 1/4 mile trap.

In the end it simply comes down to what you chose to accept. I personally just put the 1/4 mile trap speed in the "suspect" category and am happy to let the rest of the run stand on its on merit.

 

Then don't write "busted" because that was exactly what you're implying, that something shady was going on. The trap speed is a bit high but it's no biggie. The real story was the auto putting down consistent 12's. If it can hold up to some mods and abuse Ford might have a winner here.

 

How about we just wait and see when a few people on here with automatic cars are able to get out and make a few passes.

 

You're making sense bro, but how about motorweeks 116mph pass in a 2011 auto GT? same deal?

 

My car often traps in the 111 range while going 12.20's or 12.30's (my best pass was an 11.85 @ 113.5).

I'll say this about what I've determined after studying thousands of timeslips. Take the 1/4 mile ET and multiply it by the trap speed. With great traction, launch, and shifting the resulting answer should be about 1360. Lose traction, shift or launch poorly, and that number will rise to 1400, 1450, or worse. A decent car with decent traction and driving will average 1375. So, take 1375 and divide by that 115 and you get 11.95. I don't believe for a minute that a stock ''11 GT automatic would be capable of high 11's. Flip that formula around (1375 / 12.76) and you get a more realistic trap speed of about 108 mph. That's where I think these cars will really trap. Maybe 109 -110 in ideal weather, but no way it'll go 115, IMHO.

 

Thats pretty handy man, I'll have to file that away.

 

Nice times for sure. The Auto's these days are miles ahead of anything in the past. Hell the CTS-V auto is faster than the manual and I'd be willing to bet money that an LS3 equipped auto Camaro would beat the Manual SS as well. They might "rob" hp on a dyno, but the real world advantages of torque multiplication, faster and more consistant shifting, and programmed shifting at optimal inputs as per the designers of the engine all on top of the gearing advantage all eat away at the advantages the manuals once enjoyed.

 

The 5.0 auto that ran the 12.7 @ 115 is my car this car is 100% stock i have had people think otherwise, but until you have ridden in a new 5.0 auto you wouldn't understand the top end these cars have its incredible. I launched off idle with the traction control on which is why the 2.0 60s. The videos will be posted shortly on you tube

 

Falcon

1st (6-Speed automatic) 4.17
2nd (6-Speed automatic) 2.34
3rd (6-Speed automatic) 1.52
4th (6-Speed automatic) 1.14
5th (6-Speed automatic) 0.87
6th (6-Speed automatic) 0.69
Reverse (6-Speed automatic) 3.40
Final drive ratio (6-Speed automatic) 2.73

http://www.ford.com.au/servlet/Conte...YPage&site=FOA

Mustang

1st 4.17
2nd 2.34
3rd 1.52
4th 1.14
5th 0.87
6th 0.69
Final drive 3.15:1

http://media.ford.com/images/10031/2...g_GT_Specs.pdf

They're identical in that respect, as well.

The Mustang's shorter 3.15 is VERY short considering 1st gear's 4.17:1 ratio, but combined with it's 7000rpm cutout it's very usable. This et doesn't surprise me one bit.






Yep, it's tough box.

The ZF has been used in Land & Range Rovers, 2.5 ton limos, 7 series BMWs, Rolls and Bentleys, Aston Martins, etc, but thankfully for us here, it's in the Falcon.

Ford's version is fractionally heavier than ZF's, but still within passenger vehicle for size and mass. Miles ahead of GM's product for performance and reliability.

Cheers.

 

Nice to see the results of the 2011 GT with Automatics

I guess this is the video of the subject run:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4_GkNeD_uIM

A quote of the video poter (Camaro owner):

 

the Motorweek test car was a manual
from their writeup

"So, we couldn't wait to track test the amped-up Mustang GT convertible we drew for our home stay. This manual 5.0 rippled the pavement from 0 to 60 in 4.7 seconds – that's three-tenths faster than the Camaro SS Coupe we tested last year. The GT then shot through the quarter mile in a quick 13 seconds flat at 116 miles per hour."

we would all like the car to trap 115 or 116mph
but the power just isn't there unless some of these cars are at 450 hp (motor)
maybe a "Boss" motor snuck into the assembly line
maybe a timing trap not calibrated correctly

the autos will be just as quick, look at the Porsches, Ferraris and even Corvettes
congrats to the owner Vendicated because you have one hell of a timeslip there for a stock car and that can't be taken away

just have to wait for more auto trans runs
imo....same ETs as manual cars, 109-110 mph trap speeds

 

Some M6 cars have already gone 112. The 3.73-geared examples are showing less MPH, because they are either hitting the limiter in the traps, or having to shift into 5th.

 

While I agree with the 1375 formula i think that might be a little low looking at his 60' and 1/8 mile stats. I have run 108 mph on 85 less bhp with a 85 mph 1/8 mile speed. While an automatic cost a little mph its not that much. Im thinking the car would have to pick up at least 22 mph... 20 mph spread just seems low given the lackluster 1/8 mile ET and 60'.

 

Vendicated Im not questioning whether the car was stock. Just whether the trap speeds that track gives are accurate. I have no problem with the ET or the 1/8 mile trap. Just a 4.42 / 27.6 mph split doesnt make sense in my experience if the car was run all out for the last 1/8 mile..
A 4.27 / 27.6 or a 4.42 / 23.3 mph just makes lots more sense to me.

 

I still havnt been able to find that car. Could someone point me to the 5.0 Auto Test?

They ran 13.0 @ 116 mph in a Convertible with a Manual 6-Speed and 3.31 Gears but knowone has ever confirmed if it was on an actual drag strip or instrumented and if instrumented did they allow for a 60' Trap Speed or was that the actual finish speed. If its actual finish speed you would have to subtract 2 mph for trap speed. Thats without getting into the whole instrumented vs actual track controversy,

 

To the best of my knowledge, the only test was of the manual - I don't believe there is a test of the A6 going 116 in Motorweek.

Any clutch news?