Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums - Camaro5.com
 
Gen5DIY
Go Back   Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums - Camaro5.com > General Camaro Forums > 5th Gen Camaro SS LS LT General Discussions


View Poll Results: What is your opinion of the Mustang?
Hate it. Plain and simple. 11 7.19%
Improvement... but not my cup of Tea 27 17.65%
Love it, its my next car. 25 16.34%
Its cool, but its not a Camaro. 90 58.82%
Voters: 153. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old 05-19-2009, 03:39 PM   #799
THE EVIL TW1N
Banned
 
Drives: 2003 Cobra Convertible
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: CA
Posts: 2,925
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zeus View Post
According to 'my sources' the 5.0L will accompany a 6.2 BOSS engine into the Ford lineup in the next year or so. The 6.2's numbers are not confirmed, though a racing version of the engine makes 500hp...

The 5.0L has been confirmed to make ''at least'' 400hp and 375lb/ft, and that combined with a 6-speed is what is expected for production.
We'll have to see. I wouldn't be surprised if that hp number dropped down to ~360, but I know 400 is possible as well.
THE EVIL TW1N is offline  
Old 05-19-2009, 03:53 PM   #800
Zeus
BOOOOOM MF'R!!
 
Zeus's Avatar
 
Drives: to Chipotle daily
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Flo-Rida
Posts: 3,614
Quote:
Originally Posted by THE EVIL TW1N View Post
We'll have to see. I wouldn't be surprised if that hp number dropped down to ~360, but I know 400 is possible as well.
The Engine has the potential, no reason not to use it after the Camaro came out with 426hp and Challenger's 425hp.
Zeus is offline  
Old 05-19-2009, 03:57 PM   #801
Sleestack
 
Sleestack's Avatar
 
Drives: '07 SRT8 SuperBee, '09 GT500
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Austin, Tx
Posts: 684
Quote:
Originally Posted by Georgie View Post
i don't think there's going to be a z28, heck there may not be a GT500 after 2012
You are probably more right than wrong on this.....
Sleestack is offline  
Old 05-19-2009, 04:41 PM   #802
MustangMnky
 
Drives: 2004 Mustang GT
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Texarkana
Posts: 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by gtahvit View Post
Play nice...

I only mean by first-hand experience. Ford kind of "cheap-plastics" everything, chevy atleast attempts to make the plastic, non-cheap.

MustangMnky is offline  
Old 05-19-2009, 05:25 PM   #803
Tantalizer43

 
Tantalizer43's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 Camaro SS/RS
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Cincinnati OH
Posts: 1,359
Quote:
Originally Posted by comiskeybum View Post
we finally have a good competition on our hands muscle car fans!!!
Can we get AMEN!

Well, until 2016. See the new CAFE standards The President released today?
__________________
Tantalizer43 is offline  
Old 05-19-2009, 05:55 PM   #804
Zeus
BOOOOOM MF'R!!
 
Zeus's Avatar
 
Drives: to Chipotle daily
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Flo-Rida
Posts: 3,614
Quote:
Originally Posted by MustangMnky View Post
I only mean by first-hand experience. Ford kind of "cheap-plastics" everything, chevy atleast attempts to make the plastic, non-cheap.

Id say the 'plastics' are of equal 'cheapness' in both the camaro and mustang.
Zeus is offline  
Old 05-19-2009, 05:55 PM   #805
syr74
Account Suspended
 
Drives: Thunderbird
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 951
My understanding thus far, in many cases in response to earlier comments.

1: 400hp for the 5.0L is apparently a mild tune compared to what could be. In other words, mod potential is very good, even in n/a trim

2: 5.0L has three stage VVT on intake and exhaust valves and purportedly has a great torque curve, supposedly notably better than the 3-valve 4.6L.

3: There remains absolutely no evidence whatsoever outside of sporatic rumor that the 3.5L EB V6 is slated for Mustang production. This doesn't mean it wont happen, but the similarities in cost and performance make this seem unlikely unless the 5.0L is to draw a relatively large premium over the same, which likewise seems equally unlikely given the new 5.0L V8 engines alterior role as a mainstream pickup mover. Ecoboost is apparently a near certainty for the Mustang, but that doesn't mean that it will be a 3.5L V6 Ecoboost fitment.

4: Coyote's 6.2L Boss cousin has been reported at 500hp, in fact I started the thread here at C5 which points this out. However, even though this is technically what that article stated I do wonder if something wasn't lost in translation and am a bit skeptical that this is the case, even in the Raptor's no doubt tweaked SVT-ified version, for various reasons. I'm thinking mid 400's.
syr74 is offline  
Old 05-19-2009, 06:06 PM   #806
comiskeybum
Banned
 
Drives: 2010 Chevy Equinox LS
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: South Bend, Indiana
Posts: 799
Quote:
Originally Posted by THE EVIL TW1N View Post
We'll have to see. I wouldn't be surprised if that hp number dropped down to ~360, but I know 400 is possible as well.
no way no how.

it will be around 420hp i guarantee it. Ford isnt stupid. as much as some of you wish it were.
comiskeybum is offline  
Old 05-19-2009, 06:07 PM   #807
comiskeybum
Banned
 
Drives: 2010 Chevy Equinox LS
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: South Bend, Indiana
Posts: 799
Quote:
Originally Posted by MustangMnky View Post
I have a pro to add to the Camaro.

It's a Chevy.

I have a con to add to the Mustang.

It's made by Ford.

and yet you drive one? uhhhh
comiskeybum is offline  
Old 05-19-2009, 09:53 PM   #808
MerF
Go Rays!
 
MerF's Avatar
 
Drives: 03 Trailblazer
Join Date: May 2007
Location: St Pete, Florida
Posts: 2,533
Quote:
Originally Posted by MerF View Post
I need sources for common sense?

Ok.

A and B) It's a N/A 5.0L, which means it's going to have to be considerably high c/r to achieve those numbers...or high revving...both of which will mean it's going to be heavily tuned (expensive to engineer) and probably require high octane. It also means unless it is direct injection (is it?) it's not going to handle very much boost without lowering the c/r (decreasing the factory numbers back down to normal in the first place).

C) If you actually belive a new car cna come out without weighing more and being more expensive then you are in the same pipedream that Camaro owners were before the numbers were released on our car.

Better than LLN. I'll concede for now, but I'm still not 100% convinced yet. I reserve that right as a Camaro fanboy.
Just pointing out that noone answered after I was called out and responded.

Convenient.

And stop comparing the heaviest version of the Camaro's handling with the "track pack" of the Mustang. 1SS versus base GT. Camaro wins every time, I would be willing to bet.
MerF is offline  
Old 05-19-2009, 10:07 PM   #809
DeathChill

 
Drives: 2010 Hyundai Genesis Coupe 2.0T
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Mission, BC
Posts: 863
Quote:
Originally Posted by MerF View Post
And stop comparing the heaviest version of the Camaro's handling with the "track pack" of the Mustang. 1SS versus base GT. Camaro wins every time, I would be willing to bet.
I'm curious about the GT handling better than the Camaro. I haven't heard it anywhere, the only thing I heard was from MotorTrend that the GT handled great and that neither car was kicking the other's ass in the handling department. It was then pointed out that the GT wouldn't be handling as well on rough surfaces.

I'm just really curious. I know that both cars handle great but it sounds like the GT outhandles the Camaro and I was curious where this information was from.
DeathChill is offline  
Old 05-19-2009, 10:12 PM   #810
MerF
Go Rays!
 
MerF's Avatar
 
Drives: 03 Trailblazer
Join Date: May 2007
Location: St Pete, Florida
Posts: 2,533
From Mustang owners.
MerF is offline  
Old 05-19-2009, 10:36 PM   #811
Sleestack
 
Sleestack's Avatar
 
Drives: '07 SRT8 SuperBee, '09 GT500
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Austin, Tx
Posts: 684
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeathChill View Post
I'm curious about the GT handling better than the Camaro. I haven't heard it anywhere, the only thing I heard was from MotorTrend that the GT handled great and that neither car was kicking the other's ass in the handling department. It was then pointed out that the GT wouldn't be handling as well on rough surfaces.

I'm just really curious. I know that both cars handle great but it sounds like the GT outhandles the Camaro and I was curious where this information was from.
The Motortrend head-to-head had the GT outpacing the SS in the figure-8 at 25.5 sec vs. 25.8, and pushing .95g on the skidpad vs. .90 for the SS. FWIW

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...test_data.html
Sleestack is offline  
Old 05-19-2009, 10:44 PM   #812
MerF
Go Rays!
 
MerF's Avatar
 
Drives: 03 Trailblazer
Join Date: May 2007
Location: St Pete, Florida
Posts: 2,533
Again...the TRACK-PACK versus the fully loaded 2SS. And the differences were minimal.
MerF is offline  
 
Closed Thread

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Mustangs mike25 Off-topic Discussions 15 11-01-2009 12:20 PM
Mustangs................(if you like mustangs this thread is not the place for you) 1320junkie Off-topic Discussions 246 09-06-2009 01:27 AM
Shouldn't we be comparing this to the new Mustangs? StoutFiles 5th Gen Camaro SS LS LT General Discussions 176 07-23-2009 05:26 PM
Who says Mustangs are for little girls? DGthe3 General Automotive + Other Cars Discussion 46 04-22-2009 06:10 PM
The Bullitt and The Boss: Two more new Ford Mustangs for 2007 KILLER74Z28 General Automotive + Other Cars Discussion 9 12-13-2006 09:14 AM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:28 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.