View Single Post
Old 08-14-2010, 10:26 AM   #19
JusticePete
CamaroCross Founder
 
JusticePete's Avatar
 
Drives: Camaro Justice
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Texas
Posts: 15,694
Quote:
Originally Posted by armysig View Post
Well, I'm am so glad you pointed out that each car got the same treatment when it came to performance upgrades. I'm always in a huge debate with someone at work (Mustang owner) that if you go part for part, both cars are going to do extremely well. Being a Camaro owner I always put the Camaro ahead. I might be wrong, but this car seems to have so much to offer with what you get. Add mods to it and I feel the Camaro can run with the best of them.

Thanks for the fantastic work! It's you guys that make it fun to modify a car and know it's going to perform extremely well.
There are big differences in the two cars that go well beyond the Mustang have a fixed rear axle. The Mustang also has a floating rear caliper mounted in rubber that is more at home in a 1968 Mustang than a 2010 Mustang. The front sub-frame on the Mustang does not extend as far forward and mounts with two less bolts. From the factory the Mustang has two chassis braces that are important to the function of the vehicle.

On a Camaro we would start to improve stability through the lowest hanging fruit -- Pedders EP1200 sub-frame inserts. On the Mustang, it is the FIRST car we ever specified a triangulated chassis brace as the single most important foundational upgrade.

The mustang front sub-frame ends at the leading edge of the front wheel axles in the hubs. The front sway bar ends connect to the front struts. The main length of the bar connects to formed sheet metal well forward of the sub-frame with D bushes and metal straps. We designed a light weight chassis brace to more directly tie the sub-frame to the formed sheet metal where the D bushes bolt.



The immediate result is that the function of the OE bar is improved. You will notice the difference the first time you turn the front wheels and over the first bump. There are a lot of companies that make suspension parts for the Mustang. It is a crowded market. To my knowledge, this is the only triangulated front chassis brace. We look at things differently than other. We think the OEM guys are smart. They know what they are doing. They work under different budget constraints than a company like Pedders.

We do not look at the cost of a part first. We look for foundational weaknesses in the chassis. We ask why the OEM engineers did it this way. We rely on 60 years of experiences to guide us. Then we ask the magic question, why not do this. We build a prototype part and test it on the car. If it works, we assemble a detailed build of materials. Then we create the retail price. If the part is important enough in terms of function, people will buy it because it offers value. If our part is half as much or twice as much as brand x we don't care as long as the function justifies the price.

The equivalent part on the Camaro would be the EP1200 sub-frame bush inserts. You can add RWHP, you can add coilovers, you can add wheels and tires, but until you have at least sub-frame inserts you can't have a GREAT Camaro. If you want more than inserts we have the EP1201 and EP1201HD bushes. They makes the Camaro IRS function as designed -- STABLE.



Why didn't the OE engineers do this. Why didn't they know how important this was to the function so a great IRS? They did know. They had to meet a cabin noise level requirement that is a national standard to be certified as a library Most people equate quiet with quality. Our inserts add so little cabin noise you cannot tell it is there. If you used GM's audio testing equipment it would document the difference. Pedders is not restricted by that benchmark requirement so we are free to offer three levels of sub-frame bush solutions giving the Camaro owner complete control over how to setup their Camaro.

If we had an unlimited amount of resources and time I am sure we could squeeze another 1.5 to 2.5 seconds out of the cars. We would do this with improved engine cooling, front and rear brake ducts, upgrade the engine internals to increase TQ and HP and finally a couple of weeks at the track adjusting and tweaking in tiny increments looking for gains in a corner entry as small as .025 seconds. The end result would be cars that are incrementally faster and priced another $15,000 higher.

Our test day was typical for Pedders. It rained morning after morning washing all the rubber out of the track so we had virgin asphalt. One of these days we'll get a nice season track full of race rubber. When car run a track the tires wear leaving behind a 'filler'. The race rubber fills the spaces between the stones that form the track surface. A seasoned track is not slick. It is sticky and fast. I would complain of a black cloud and rain following me, but we had the shy pouring down rain when we arrived and 90 minutes later we had a dry track. How can I complain?

Our weather always seems to be so cold we are shaking or so hot we are melting. It was hot. It was humid. We know our TQ and HP were down. The cars are faster than they tested. They are only as fast as they tested on 8.11.2010 because that is what the data logging shows. We do know both car improved from our last test session even though they were making less HP and TQ dues to the exceptionally hot and humid weather so the chassis tweaks we made were spot on.

This is a very long answer to your very good question. Both cars are AWESOME. Off the showroom floor, I'll pick the Camaro over the Mustang. My partner Ron Pedder from AU drove the Mustang bone stock. He LOVED the look. He loved the interior. His evaluation was to the point -- They have that great 1968 look updated. The look is spot on. They got the drive all wrong. I feel like I am driving a 1968 Mustang. We knew we had a long way t go to get new Mustang to perform like our Camaro Supercar. In the end, that is exactly what we were able to accomplish. Cale Yarborough could have dominated NASCAR with the 2010 Saleen in 1968 You can see from the chart we have used a wide range of cars for our track time comparisons -- Thank you John O'Donnell for pulling that data together --- and the Mustang is going to slot very well.

The Pro Touring cars are fast. They are GREAT CARS!!! The suspension on most if either custom built or tubular component up grades. Some are built bu suspension companies. Most are built by guys that LOVE cars and motorsports. Some have put their life and life savings into them. They are fully functioning works of automotive art created by people who have a deep passion driving them. A number of these enthusiasts were at Gingerman for the Motor State Pro Touring Challenge.

Check out the ProTouring Cars at Gingerman or the Motor State ProTouring G-Machine Video Gallery

The driving, the cars and the feel of the event are everything an enthusiast could as for. They ran very very well. The Mustang and Camaro are faster around Gingerman than any of them and my best educated guess is both the Mustang and Camaro are heavier than any of the Pro Touring cars.

When we do publish the winner it will do little to settle the Mustang Camaro debate. Going into this project I was not all that confident I could get the Ford to be street civil and track animal. With a GREAT TEAM EFFORT we did exactly that. If the 60s and 70s formed the Golden Age of American Muscle then we are in the Platinum age right now. AMERICA MUSCLE has never had it this good!When I walk into my garage I have a hard time deciding which car to drive. Most of the time it will be based on which one is spotless. That is another poll. When you have two nice cars, do you take the one that is freshly detailed and spotless or the one that is just a little dirty?

One last thought. If you own a 5th Gen Camaro you own a GREAT CAR and so do the people that bought a Mustang over at the Blue Oval. If the Camaro is Pedderised or the Mustang has the new Saleen Suspension you own a SUPERCAR and we have the track data to prove it.
__________________
JusticePete is offline   Reply With Quote