2010 Camaro Review Compilation

[stovt001]

Originally Posted by dms

One of the things that is perplexing to me is the v6 20 inch Camaro will our corner and out brake the SS Camaro. .93gs on the v6 and .90 on the Camaro, and 106ft V6 braking and 107 feet with the SS

Apparently the extra weight up front overcomes the advantages of the FE3 tunes. Notice when GM announced the 50-50 weight distribution they made sure to specify that was for the V6 and that the V6 would handle great. I'm sure that's mostly trying to encourage V6 sales, but I imagine they knew the SS wouldn't have quite as good balance.

So will the Pedders upgraded suspension help the steering feel any? Apparently it isn't bad, but isn't perfect either. It seems most of the compliments to the Mustang's steering sharpness references the track pack.

[Rock36]

Honestly nothing really surprising here except for a couple things IMHO.


That popular mechanics only got a 0-60 time of 6.4 seconds and a quarter mile time of 14.4 seconds at 97mph for the Challenger R/T. The challenger is my least favorite of the three ponies, but somebody in popular mechanics jacked that run bad. Unless they accidentally tested the 1970 Challenger R/T on bias ply tires.....there is no reason why they couldn't pull a 5.XX 0-60 and a 13.XX @ over 100mph with the new R/T....none what so ever.


The other thing was the track pack Mustang doing so well in handling. Everyone likes to rag on the Mustang for its dinosaur live rear axle, but clearly it doesn't matter that much when put to the test. Properly tuned and balanced sway bars, shocks, springs, etc are still just as important as the over all setup, be it IRS or live axle.

I think it is kinda like people who like to rag on GMs pushrod engines as ancient....the proof is in the pudding and GMs pushrods are beautiful creations.

FWIW, this is all coming from a mustang owner, who will be purchasing a corvette in a year or so


Oh and finally if the new Camaro SS is trapping over 110 in the 1/4....it won't be long before people consistently get this thing in the high 12s.

[PQ]

Originally Posted by Rock36

Honestly nothing really surprising here except for a couple things IMHO.

But you're right, what did they do, have a 12 yr. old do some of there runs? One of them had the Camaro SS at 5.9 0-60. Hell my wifes Lexus will do that. They must have grabbed the secratary on their way out of the office and told her to drive the cars and had a guy with a stop watch and a flag to signal start.

[DGthe3]

Originally Posted by irpq11

But you're right, what did they do, have a 12 yr. old do some of there runs? One of them had the Camaro SS at 5.9 0-60. Hell my wifes Lexus will do that. They must have grabbed the secratary on their way out of the office and told her to drive the cars and had a guy with a stop watch and a flag to signal start.

Maybe they did the consumer reports test: put it in gear and floor it.

[Rock36]

Originally Posted by irpq11

But you're right, what did they do, have a 12 yr. old do some of there runs? One of them had the Camaro SS at 5.9 0-60. Hell my wifes Lexus will do that. They must have grabbed the secratary on their way out of the office and told her to drive the cars and had a guy with a stop watch and a flag to signal start.

I know right? But I also just meant that in general nothing was really surprising.

I figured the Camaro would win the acceleration match hands down, with the real battle taking place between the GT and R/T for the second place slot.

[GatorBlue371]

Originally Posted by john3352

Guys that was great, the comparison turned out exectly the way I thought it would... Camaro on top, its hot, new and powerful. That quarter mile run of 13.0 @110mph is fast as hell, my question is what does it cost... and why are they not comparing it to the Challlenger SRT-8, and GT-500 as they have 400+ bhp... Just a heads up.. the new Camaro is faster that the Challenger SRT-8... not to 60, but throught the 1/4 mile... but not the 08-09 Shelby GT500...500-bhp 4.4 sec to 60 and the 1/4 in 12.7@ 114mph... also, new info on the 2010 GT500.. it will have 540bhp 510 lb/ft torque... but it will cost $46,000... they are already claiming they shaved off over 3/10ths off of the 0-60 time and almost a half sec of the 1/4 at beter than 118mph... I head GM may use the Cadillac motor from the CTS-V (556-bhp) but they are running lean on cash and shelved the idea as money and the financial markets have decimated GM... Im a big Ford fan, but im hoping GM can pull out of this... good luck Camaro guys
its a great day to be a car guy!

Holy crap.






Showing this to a doctor should be good for some Ritalin.

[DGthe3]

Originally Posted by GatorBlue371

Holy crap.






Showing this to a doctor should be good for some Ritalin.

I think what you mean is use more sentences and fewer pauses, it helps with the readability.

[gagliano7]

Originally Posted by DGthe3

because cost makes more sense than hp as a basis for comparison, a GT with the track pack costs about as much as a Camaro SS. And the Mustang GT is closer in power to the Camaro than the GT500 is. Some disagree with my cost argument, and thats fine. But the fact is, there is nothing on the market that is similar to the GT500 right now. So until there is a supercharged or LS7 powered Camaro (or supercharged Challenger/SRT10), Ford has that particular market to themselves.

The new corvette c6(not the Z06) will run with the GT500.I seen one totally stock run a 11.80 at 120mph.

[logan1080]

Why wasn't the SRT8 challenger used instead of R/T?

[DGthe3]

Originally Posted by logan1080

Why wasn't the SRT8 challenger used instead of R/T?

because the price difference is practically non-existent with the R/T

These reviews are not testing the absolute best of each manufacturer against its counterpart. They are testing the sales competitors against each other. Huge difference.

[carfansince73]

I'm sure this is a repost, but Edmunds got a 14.2 1/4 mile for the V6 when it went up against the Hyundai Genesis Coupe V6. They have similar horsepower but the Camaro weighs hundreds more yet almost matches the performance stats of the Hyundai, within .1 seconds anyway. The Camaro was cheaper IIRC and clearly better looking.

Way to go GM!!

[NewCar]

Originally Posted by stovt001

Depends on what your standards for a good interior are. Edmunds narrows their definition down to "soft plastics = good, hard plastics = bad." The problem is, I've seen plenty of interiors with hard plastics that are otherwise very durable, have a good texture, and all the major contact points are padded. On the flip side, I've seen plenty of interiors with soft plastics that felt like cheese left out in the sun too long. At least one other review noted that while the plastic is "hard", it still feels very high quality. So I guess it depends on what your definition is and who you believe. I'm withholding judgment until I feel it myself.

Durability of materials.
In my old 91 Nissan, the soft plastics used in the inside peeled and cracked like athlete's foot. The softer steering wheel melted open at the top under the windshield completely exposing the steel wheel within. That burns your hands fierce on a hot summer day. But my sisters dodge ram, with very very hard plastics cracked and broke the dashboard over and over, and the bezel around the guages and radio pops off every minute. The heat will crack them, but also the forces from how well the pieces fit together. These are two different problems with two different material types. Hard plastics probably weigh less though.

[stanczyk]

yes ,
great idea to compare the cars

Camaro is best car of the three (overall)
Black SS for me !

..but every one is diferent,
RT Chall is the purest muscle (bad interior except Pistol G!)
Gt Mustang is too weak with it's 315 BHP (where's 5.0 or 6,2 L Boss?)
but GT500 is superb muscle ..and it's sounds cool A!

we'are waiting for z28 Camaro...and others
GTO , Impala SS , smaller than "full-size" Challanger Barracuda?

I hope they wont be a wictim of that crisis and Eco-crazyness !

modern muscle debate
ernwopr@wp.pl

[princevj28]

i feel like it'd be more interesting to compare the srt-8 chally to the new camaro, it'd actually be a competition, and from all the numbers the chally srt-8 is almost dead even with the camaro SS......though i suppose they chose the R/T for these reviews b/c its in the same price range.....