2001 Cobra Over Rated AGAIN!!!?!?!!! Wassup Ford?

[KillaZ350]

WARNING! BEFORE YOU READ, REMEMBER NOT TO SHOOT THE MESSANGER!!(Me) I only carry the message .... And i got this from GMHTP..


Bangin' Gears
Unsolved Mysteries
By Johnny Hunkins


Some facts just defy reasonable explanation. Why do we park in the driveway and drive on the parkway? In a drag race, how can a 305-horsepower Camaro beat a 320-hp Mustang Cobra by a Kentucky mile? Why does the Mustang consistently outsell the Camaro and Firebird combined? The last two really hit home a few days ago when I had the opportunity to spend the weekend driving a 2001 Mustang Cobra.

Yep. That Cobra. The one that's supposed to save Ford's reputation from the fiasco it suffered from the underpowered, grossly overrated 1999 Cobra. You'll recall that Ford had its hands full with lawsuits from irate customers who were promised a full sack of oats--most of which had already been munched. The post mortem revealed that supplier deviation from the specified exhaust and induction was the culprit.

Bottom line, no LS1-powered Firebird or Camaro owner need fear the new '01 Cobra. This probably doesn't come as a surprise to you, but just how far off is our Blue Oval nemesis? Quite a bit, once its $29,235 price is factored in. You'll recall we went 12.8 at 108 with a base 1999 Camaro Z28--that was with the old LS1 with only 305 hp. (Current models are uprated to 310 hp thanks to a freer breathing LS6 manifold.) This new 2001 Cobra turned a 13.3 at 104 mph and its mill is rated at a lofty 320 hp.

Since when is a 13.3 ET considered bad? Ever since Ford started charging $3,000 more than the price of a nicely optioned Z28--which is a half second quicker! We'll do the Ford guys a favor and not even mention the standard GT here.

Central to the quarter-mile disparity is the lack of engine torque, or more specifically, cubic inches. The fundamentals of physics dictate that to make more power you need more air and fuel. Ford accomplishes this by using fewer cubes, more valves and a higher rpm. GM goes the other route by using more cubes, fewer valves and less rpm. Not only does GM's LS1 produce more total power "under the curve," but LS1 is cheaper to produce and more reliable to boot. But getting back to torque, and low-rpm torque in particular: When cost is an issue, cubic inches are the most fundamental requirement for moving a car from a dead stop. This is a classic example of how the total area under the power curve is more important than how high the power "peak" is.

Okay, so the Cobra isn't great shakes on the drag strip, but it's a terror on the road course and autocross, right? Not so fast, blue oval breath. After spending lots of time in this 2001 Cobra, a 1999 Cobra, a 1998 Cobra and numerous LS1-powered F-bodies (all of them in extreme handling situations), I've come to the conclusion that the Camaro and Firebird are vastly superior. Less inherent body roll, less brake dive, a lower center of gravity, a greater feeling of connectedness with the road, better pedal placement, a wider track, more forward gears, wider tire contact patches, and a gearshift lever in the same zip code as the driver are my reasons. Only on two criteria--steering wheel design and seat support--would I rate the Cobra higher. (I would also count color availability--zinc yellow now being a Cobra option--but it's not performance related.) But aren't the Cobra's IRS and Brembo brakes better? Ironically, they're wasted on a suspension as cushy as the Cobra's.

People argue that the Mustang is more comfortable--or more to the point--that the Camaro/Firebird is uncomfortable (the raked windshield and the catalytic converter hump being the biggest F-body complaints). But the Mustang has some real annoying traits, like every time you move your calf it brushes the electric seat adjuster and pushes the seat forward. Not exactly what you want when you're cruising the highway at 85 mph. Or how about the fact that there's no room for your knees? And if you road race, you quickly find that it's physically impossible to heel-and-toe downshift. Spongy pedals, a long shifter throw with pillowy detents, and a trans that won't go into 1st gear without crunching the cogs are also demerits for the Cobra. And what's up with the wheel hop in the burn box?

Durability is also a big concern with Cobras. When sister magazine Muscle Mustangs & Fast Fords tested the 2001, it only made it two full passes before second gear grenaded. And that wasn't the first time it happened either. Test driver Evan Smith breaks Ford press fleet cars with such alarming regularity, you'd think their drivetrains were made of Waterford crystal. However, we've yet to suffer our first breakage with Mr. Smith behind the wheel of a GM press car. Either he's hangin' back, or they're just tougher to break.

Lest you think I'm down on Ford, let me remove that notion. The most poisonous thing for our hobby is a gross mismatch in performance. Parity is one of the most powerful stimulants for competition, and I'm a big proponent of it. Besides, beating up on helpless women and children isn't fun, it's pathetic. I'd much rather Ford's Mustang have a bigger head of steam, at least that would justify the sales difference.

Obviously, a lack of advertising on GM's part is part of the unsolved sales mystery, but I'll also wager that a big reason Mustang outsells the F-body is because Mustang buyers just don't test drive them. If they did, the outcome might be different. Having spent the previous week driving an SS Camaro at the Bragg-Smith Advanced Driving School in Pahrump, Nevada, I can say the switch to driving a Cobra was a shock and a let down. If you're planning on purchasing either an F-body or a 4.6 Mustang, I recommend driving both of them before you decide, even if you're dead set on a Z28. It will make you feel that much better about your decision!



------------------
Arctic White 1998 Camaro Z28
See my Can of Whoop Azz here
Flowmaster 3in American Thunder Catback - MTI Air Lid/K&N filter,!MAF, FRA