Gen IV ACR vr Gen V TA

**09 ACR** · 12-19-2014

as i have seen a few post regarding the Gen IV ACR vr Gen V TA i thought I would share my experiences;
I have owned a 02 ACR, 09 ACR and now a 14 TA. for me with each gen the car is faster. there was a large jump to the Gen IV ACR but the TA is Faster then my Gen IV ACR.
I call VIR my home track but travel all over. at VIR I could average 1:58 with a best time of 1:57 (full course) with the Gen IV ACR running R6 tires. I was only able to bring the TA to the Track once. I took it there the way it came from the show room (NO Changes at all). I was not able to get clean laps there were 190 cars at the event with ~ 50 cars on the track at one time. I log all my times with a AiM solo DL. I am able to look at each section. if i use the TBL's i was running faster times in the TA with street tires than the ACR with R6's. My min through every corner was faster and I was 5 MPH faster on the longer straights.

I will be running the R7 next at sebring next month (first time to sebring) we will see how the TA likes the R7's.

**Nine Ball** · 12-19-2014

Looking forward to seeing your results. Please get some video footage to share!

Tony

**SSGNRDZ_28** · 12-19-2014

Thanks for the information! Being your home track I'm sure you're aware VIR has undergone some changes and repaving and is a faster track now than it was, can you comment on when the times were run between cars and your thoughts on the changes to the track?

**VENOM V** · 12-19-2014

That's impressive, it's a shame you weren't able to get a clean lap without traffic to see what the delta between the cars is. I'm surprised that a TA on Corsas would be faster than a Gen IV ACR with Hoosiers.

This is a subject that is of great interest as I decide which Viper to add to my stable. It's between a Gen IV ACR, a Gen V Track Pack car upgraded with suspenion and aero, a TA 2.0, and lastly a Gen V ACR. How's that for a laundry list? LOL. Plenty of time to sort this out, but fun to do the research.

Keep us posted as you learn more.

**09 ACR** · 12-19-2014

WIth the new paving and little changes made to VIR lap times have dropped 2-3 seconds.
I ran the TA in November temps were 50-60. I had ran the Gen 4 ~ 3 weeks prior to the TA.

The Corsas ran really well. what i noticed most was the breaking. I had to brake 20-30 yards prior to when I would like. the Corsas just did not like braking

I have read a few times people referring to the Gen V when under hard braking that the back like to wiggle. That is a running joke with all of my track bodies. we were all taught a long time ago most of the time if a car is wiggling under hard braking it is the driver. if you put video in the Car every time you will see the drivers hands working the wheel. they will always tell you they are controlling the car. Like many of the professions will tell you hold the wheel and the car will stop doing that.

Venom V i would tell don't waste your money on the Gen IV ACR. I am not at all saying this is a bad car. I loved my car. Buy the TA 2.0. As you know you already have a car that is great. there is a big difference in the TA then your car. everyone keeps talking about the aero. of course aero is great but very few ever drive being able to use it. the sway bars shocks and springs will get you 90% or better of what you are looking for.

Bruce H. · 12-20-2014

Hey Gary

Thanks for posting your feedback, and glad you like the car. How did you decide to sell the ACR for the TA when you were already so quick with the ACR? I was running with a fully track modded GT-R when we met in high 90 degree heat and he was doing 2:13's, with a claimed best 2:09 in cooler temps, his home track as well.

It was great meeting you at VIR and hope to again. Have you driven the iconic Watkin's Glen before? Could be epic with Chin Motorsports in May!

Good luck at Sebring, and I'll be curious to hear if you think an adjustable suspension upgrade would be worthwhile as you put on the track miles.

**09 ACR** · 12-20-2014

Hi Bruce I did not start out that quick when I started doing this. I had to learn if you want to be fast on a road course you can not use two wheels to turn the car you have to use all four once I understood that now I can run most tracks at a good pace.
I have been to the glen it is my second favorite track. Each time I have been there in May it has been raining. My top three tracks that I have been to 1) VIR 2) Watkins Glen. 3) Sonoma For facilities COTA and Barber are the best. Just not as fun of tracks to drive.

**05Commemorative** · 12-20-2014

Can you explain more on why you believe this? I think you missed a key item which is a much more aggressive alignment. So, you are suggesting that a GTS with the Aero and same track alignment would be way different than the TA? Yet, tests have shown a GTS without the aero and alignment is super close to the TA on track times.

I know I have asked this before, but do we have anyone that has done the comparison above? I love the TA brakes, I get the springs/swaybars are ~20% stiffer, but yet to see any data that suggests that is were the bulk of improvement comes from for the small difference we are talking about vs the Aero and alignment.

Originally Posted by 09 ACR

Buy the TA 2.0. As you know you already have a car that is great. there is a big difference in the TA then your car. everyone keeps talking about the aero. of course aero is great but very few ever drive being able to use it. the sway bars shocks and springs will get you 90% or better of what you are looking for.

**VENOM V** · 12-20-2014

Originally Posted by 09 ACR

WIth the new paving and little changes made to VIR lap times have dropped 2-3 seconds.
I ran the TA in November temps were 50-60. I had ran the Gen 4 ~ 3 weeks prior to the TA.

The Corsas ran really well. what i noticed most was the breaking. I had to brake 20-30 yards prior to when I would like. the Corsas just did not like braking

I have read a few times people referring to the Gen V when under hard braking that the back like to wiggle. That is a running joke with all of my track bodies. we were all taught a long time ago most of the time if a car is wiggling under hard braking it is the driver. if you put video in the Car every time you will see the drivers hands working the wheel. they will always tell you they are controlling the car. Like many of the professions will tell you hold the wheel and the car will stop doing that.

Venom V i would tell don't waste your money on the Gen IV ACR. I am not at all saying this is a bad car. I loved my car. Buy the TA 2.0. As you know you already have a car that is great. there is a big difference in the TA then your car. everyone keeps talking about the aero. of course aero is great but very few ever drive being able to use it. the sway bars shocks and springs will get you 90% or better of what you are looking for.

.

Good to know. What surprised me is how fast the GTS is at Buttonwillow, a track that top drivers will confirm that a wing and splitter will shave a solid 3+ seconds off. Yet the GTS even with it's small carbon aero package can run with the best of them. I bet the TA 2.0 could shave 2+ seconds and the Gen V ACR another 2.

Erich Heuschle is bringing a TA to track with us there in mid January. I'll see if he will swap rides with me.

**VENOM V** · 12-20-2014

Originally Posted by 05Commemorative

Can you explain more on why you believe this? I think you missed a key item which is a much more aggressive alignment. So, you are suggesting that a GTS with the Aero and same track alignment would be way different than the TA? Yet, tests have shown a GTS without the aero and alignment is super close to the TA on track times.

I know I have asked this before, but do we have anyone that has done the comparison above? I love the TA brakes, I get the springs/swaybars are ~20% stiffer, but yet to see any data that suggests that is were the bulk of improvement comes from for the small difference we are talking about vs the Aero and alignment.

Excellent questions,I aim to answer them with an instrumented test

**09 ACR** · 12-20-2014

05Commemorativ,
you are correct and I forgot to mention the alignment this is a big deal. I dont want to give the impression that aero does not mean anything. when you are driving at 10/10 everything counts.
When you are looking at the Gen V and looking at lap times I think you are correct that any of the models with equal drivers will run very close times. They are for the most part the same car with very little differences. I was only giving my impression from when i raced and now mostly HPDE. WHen ever i am around race teams. the shock and springs are one of the keys to the fast guys. there will always be tracks that will favor a type of car.

Bruce H. · 12-20-2014

I'm not aware of the SRT/GTS ever being run same day as the TA, nor whether the SRT/GTS actually had the same track alignment as the TA when it did, and suspect it very well might have. I'm sure it had Track Pack with the mid-level brakes, and same wheels and tires as the TA. The stock Z06 tests at Road Atlanta didn't actually have stock Z06 alignment either. Consider that a professional driver can lap only 1 second faster with nannies turned of vs full on. Does this mean the typical owner can do that? I think not, and that there would be a significant difference in lap times as the typical track rat would rely more heavily on the ESC to keep the car on track at 10/10th, but the pro driver does not, and in fact ESC slows him down slightly. I think the same applies to a car's set-up, where a Randy Pobst would be able to get a lot more out of even a lesser set-up than the typical track rat, and you're not apt to see much of a penalty in his lap times.

A typical track rat is also going to be a lot harder on brakes than Randy Pobst because he would have to slow more for corner entry than Randy. So the track rat is more likely to fade the SRT/GTS brakes than the heavier TA's. So while Randy Pobst can get the most, and similar performance out of all three models over the course of a single hot lap, I doubt he could over many laps typical of a lapping day session, and he'd need more frequent brake pad and rotor replacements for sure.

So I just don't think we should read so much into Randy running similar times for one lap on different days, or to assume that means that even an advanced track rat could do the same for one lap, or for an entire session...I think there's too many reasons to know that just wouldn't be the case. I don't need to see a documented comparison of a TA with stock suspension compared to one with an upgraded fully adjustable suspension to know which is going to be faster around a race track any more than I need to see a comparison done between one with Corsa tires vs Hoosiers, and I would expect it to be multiple seconds, not a fraction of a second. Improvements in driver confidence, car control and lap times are going to be noticeable.

I think it's just common track sense to know that 15% stiffer springs and 35% sway bar, rotors with 15% greater swept area and greater thermal capacity, track brake pads, and 5 mode ESC vs just ON or OFF is going to amount to greater exploitable control for most track rats...even with the same alignment.

**05Commemorative** · 12-20-2014

I think you have over thought this a bit. GTS and TA are only 50lbs diff in weight. The GTS has the former ACR's brakes, so not going to have the problems you suggest as they did not before in years of track days. They tested with the oem track alignment on the GTS and the oem track alignment on the TA, so a big difference and you should know that from all your track experience this past year. The aero definitely makes a difference. So, I suspect it more the other way in that the less experienced guy probably will not be able to tell the difference between a TA and a GTS with aero, track alignment and same tires/wheels. So, I am shocked how you could say you don't think you need a comparison to know and suggesting similar to the difference between corsa's to hoosiers is ridiculous. A bit like those that bought into the C7 Z06 hype before, I think the TA is great, but hyped much more on the difference that it likely deserves. The question was simply has someone done the comparison in the way suggested to know as it would quickly highlight how much impact the brakes, springs and sway bars make, then we can base out opinions upon real experience and data.

Originally Posted by Bruce H.

I'm not aware of the SRT/GTS ever being run same day as the TA, nor whether the SRT/GTS actually had the same track alignment as the TA when it did, and suspect it very well might have. I'm sure it had Track Pack with the mid-level brakes, and same wheels and tires as the TA. The stock Z06 tests at Road Atlanta didn't actually have stock Z06 alignment either. Consider that a professional driver can lap only 1 second faster with nannies turned of vs full on. Does this mean the typical owner can do that? I think not, and that there would be a significant difference in lap times as the typical track rat would rely more heavily on the ESC to keep the car on track at 10/10th, but the pro driver does not, and in fact ESC slows him down slightly. I think the same applies to a car's set-up, where a Randy Pobst would be able to get a lot more out of even a lesser set-up than the typical track rat, and you're not apt to see much of a penalty in his lap times.

A typical track rat is also going to be a lot harder on brakes than Randy Pobst because he would have to slow more for corner entry than Randy. So the track rat is more likely to fade the SRT/GTS brakes than the heavier TA's. So while Randy Pobst can get the most, and similar performance out of all three models over the course of a single hot lap, I doubt he could over many laps typical of a lapping day session, and he'd need more frequent brake pad and rotor replacements for sure.

So I just don't think we should read so much into Randy running similar times for one lap on different days, or to assume that means that even an advanced track rat could do the same for one lap, or for an entire session...I think there's too many reasons to know that just wouldn't be the case. I don't need to see a documented comparison of a TA with stock suspension compared to one with an upgraded fully adjustable suspension to know which is going to be faster around a race track any more than I need to see a comparison done between one with Corsa tires vs Hoosiers, and I would expect it to be multiple seconds, not a fraction of a second. Improvements in driver confidence, car control and lap times are going to be noticeable.

I think it's just common track sense to know that 15% stiffer springs and 35% sway bar, rotors with 15% greater swept area and greater thermal capacity, track brake pads, and 5 mode ESC vs just ON or OFF is going to amount to greater exploitable control for most track rats...even with the same alignment.

Bruce H. · 12-21-2014

Originally Posted by 05Commemorative

I think the TA is great, but hyped much more on the difference that it likely deserves. The question was simply has someone done the comparison in the way suggested to know as it would quickly highlight how much impact the brakes, springs and sway bars make, then we can base out opinions upon real experience and data.

That's always been your opinion...even before it was hyped

Venom V's experience with brakes has lead him to want to upgrade to the TA's.

How ever are you going to find someone who could exploit each suspension system equally under controlled test conditions to ensure resulting data is meaningful? That would be somewhere between unlikely and impossible, so you'd have to have numerous drivers repeat the test to see a pattern and to have credibility.

The TA provides incremental improvements in a variety of areas, and many bona-fide track rats have chosen it for those reasons. Not really sure of the value of trying to quantify the performance improvement of individual features. All models can certainly be bought and modded for performance improvements, and I'd readily concede that anyone of them could surpass the TA's performance. I'd consider subjective feedback to be as important as objective owner feedback from both driving impressions of different models and modifications they make to their cars. I just don't think what you'd like to see to change your opinion is possible. But we're all entitled to our opinions, and I respect yours.

**05Commemorative** · 12-21-2014

Yes, that it has. Also greatly respect your opinion on this as well. Unfortunately, no data has been supplied to prove or disprove our opinions so hopefully when more Gen5's get on the track, we will find out in the real world.

Originally Posted by Bruce H.

That's always been your opinion...even before it was hyped

Venom V's experience with brakes has lead him to want to upgrade to the TA's.

How ever are you going to find someone who could exploit each suspension system equally under controlled test conditions to ensure resulting data is meaningful? That would be somewhere between unlikely and impossible, so you'd have to have numerous drivers repeat the test to see a pattern and to have credibility.

The TA provides incremental improvements in a variety of areas, and many bona-fide track rats have chosen it for those reasons. Not really sure of the value of trying to quantify the performance improvement of individual features. All models can certainly be bought and modded for performance improvements, and I'd readily concede that anyone of them could surpass the TA's performance. I'd consider subjective feedback to be as important as objective owner feedback from both driving impressions of different models and modifications they make to their cars. I just don't think what you'd like to see to change your opinion is possible. But we're all entitled to our opinions, and I respect yours.

**ViperGeorge** · 12-22-2014

I own an 09 ACR with headers, Mopar controller, ported intake, and ported heads. I also own a 2014 GTS with aero kit. The gearing in the 14 does make the car feel faster than my 09 but I suspect it isn't but I'm not sure. If the TA 2.0 was really faster than my ACR I could consider using my coupon on one and trading my ACR in. I would imagine SRT engineers would know. Maybe I'll ask them.

PAVenomRT/10 · 12-23-2014

According to Road&Track, the GEN IV ACR posted one of the fastest times (1:48) at VIR for a production car with the new TA a couple seconds slower. They don't say who the drivers were. In fact the only "production" car faster than the ACR was the Porsche 918 which costs the equivalent of about 9 ACRs.
PAVenomRT/10
09 ACR
2000 RT/10

**Snakebit10** · 12-23-2014

I also had read that the final year ZR1 with the newer compound MPSC went 1:45 at VIR bone stock with Mero driving if memory serves. Not too many cars faster than the outgoing ACR. I'd love to see what a 2010 ACR with the latest MPSC would do at VIR.

**ViperGeorge** · 12-23-2014

After some discussions with some people who understand the engineering behind the aero and based on my experience I would say that the Gen 4 ACR would be faster than the Gen 5 TA 1.0 or TA 2.0 at most tracks, even if only marginally. Aero is King at most tracks. Anyone that has watched professional racing knows that the teams spend a lot of time on figuring out the aero setup. The Gen 4 ACR generates hundreds of pounds more downforce than the aero on either version of the TA. Remember after the first Ring record run in the 08 Gen 4 ACR, SRT changed the wing on the ACR for 10 to generate even better aero. The 10 ACR went faster with the aero (ok and with the gear change) than the 08 ACR. Now the TA does have different gearing and different tires but I do believe the Cups on the Gen 4 ACR would hold their own against the Pirellis on the Gen 5. I don't believe that the gearing would offset the superior aero on the Gen 4 ACR. I wonder why they went half way with the TA 2.0 though. It would seem that putting better aero on it to match the Gen 4 ACR would have been straight forward since they already had the design of the Gen 4. Maybe body shape on the Gen 5 has too big an impact to make the Gen 4 aero practical for the Gen 5.

It would be great to have a true side by side comparison with the same driver on the same day at the same track with bone stock cars. That coupon is burning a hole in my pocket and I love the Competition Blue TA 2.0.

**ViperJon** · 12-23-2014

Originally Posted by 09viperacr

The 10 ACR went faster with the aero (ok and with the gear change) than the 08 ACR. .

Better driver far more familiar with the track is the number one reason.
The wing and gear change as well, but Dominik has driven that track many times.

**VENOM V** · 12-23-2014

I agree that aero is king at many tracks. My Camaro is now only 1 second slower than my Viper at Buttonwillow, despite weighing 500 Lbs more and having 40 less HP. But the Camaro has a big wing with a lot more downforce than the Viper. Depends on the track, I think a TA 2.0 Vs. Gen IV ACR would be a close race at most tracks.

**09 ACR** · 12-23-2014

Last year track record at imsa GTLM race was 1:43.7 average lap during race was high 1:44 low 1:45 there is no way a zr1 came close to 1:45 there is also no way the acr did 1:48 one of the factory drivers running in a unlimited comp coup ran a 1:49 with 750 hp.
I will only tell you I have been with very few at VIR that will run a acr faster then 1:57 stock and I can tell you my TA will out run my ACR.

**V10LEE** · 12-23-2014

I agree with what most said regarding the ACR's aero. 09 ACR how many track days, and mileage was on your ACR?

**09 ACR** · 12-23-2014

I am not sure the number of track days I would guess 100 to 125. Did about 4500 track miles. My car is what mike skeen was driving at Cota. We were running 1:23 at Cota last year. I loved my acr very few track car like it.
For me any Viper at the track is great. They were built to run at tracks