So...they gained 100whp.
FAIL.
1 second quicker, 10mph faster = 100whp.

Stock Z's dyno around 270. This one seems to be around 370.

432bhp...or roughly 70bhp less than advertised. Mazda did something similar once (RX8) and had to offer to buy back every one of the cars at the price the customer paid, if the customer chose to take the option.

whelp, I guess its time for the TT boys to man up and put down some times so we can do an accurate FI comparo yeah?

lets put this into perspective a bit, the 2010 GT500 makes 540bhp and 480ft/lbs, the 1/4 mile avg amongst all mags places it at a 12.5 second 1/4 mile, yes, its heavier, got it, but 3 tenths off, yall arent giving this car any credit whatsoever.

My concern as well. I'll probably FI after my factory warranty wears off.

I;ve seen 0-60 numbers fron 4.6 to 5.3. I just wouldn't put too much stock in one mag's numbrs especially since R&T already posted very slow (compared to average) numbers for the Z.

My 7 AT with bolt on's is quicker than the stillen Z and i ran those times on the stock 19 inch tires. It makes 320 RWHP. It almost went 12.7's and now i trap at just under 113 mph. (12.8009 ).
I would like to see the time slip.

Of course not, because the 2011 GT500 with 480rwhp and 3750# curb-weight (not counting driver) does the 1/4 in 12.1@119 or so. The 12.5@115 or whatever was the old 500bhp 3900# GT500. This "500bhp" Z with it's lighter weight and wider tires couldn't even match THAT.

Why are you always so negative and pessimistic on everything you post? The largest variable in the testing equation is the driver, not to mention whatever the quality of the road surface they test on is. That is not saying that is the reason for the numbers, but comparing a Mustang with a completely different rear suspension setup (tailored more towards straight line acceleration as well) to the Z is not the most direct comparison.

I call it like I see it. A 500bhp 3300# car should trap higher than 113mph. The fact that it even made it into the 12's tells me it had enough traction for better than a 113 trap if it's truly making 500bhp. The car is not making 500bhp. If you think it is, provide evidence. However, the magazine knocked around 1 second off and added 10mph trap speed--same driver/conditions. That is 100whp. That is 432bhp. May be off by 20, 30, 40bhp, but even so---it's not 500bhp.

need to see before and after dyno on the same car, on the same dyno..I really doubt that car is making 500 SAE HP..the numbers do not add up

Exactly, if I saw a something like a 120mph trap and a 13.5 second ET, I would give mad props to the CAR. It would be making around 500bhp or so. However, it's not the case. The ET and the trap work out exactly to around the low/mid 400's bhp. The new mustang GT turns almost identical times with a bit more weight and around 370whp. About what this car is producing when you also consider it turns the same time as the GT, and they gained 10mph over their OEM trap speed (OEM Z's dyno around 270, give/take 10)

EVERYTHING points to a 100bhp gain.

I don't know. I may not be the best drag racer, but my supercharged LS2 C6 ran the qtr in the same time with 114 trap speeds on street tires, and it had 515 to the wheels. It didn't have any traction, but it definitely had power.

Same here, I think If I optimized my car for drag racing I could run 11's. As it sits now id be somewhere in the mid 12's.

You can purchase and have the dealer install a stillen s/c for 8k?....

Yeah I highly doubt that Stillen is making 500hp. I never trusted their numbers...even with the Z33. IMO their 350Z supercharger was a joke. I wouldn't be surprised if this one dynojets at around 360whp - 370whp....on their own dyno its probably putting out more than 400 at the wheels causing all this '500hp' fiasco.