Camaro VS Mustang Mega Thread

[thePill]

Originally Posted by wbt

Not sure I would call it millions....

They had already produced an aluminum 5.4 block for the Ford GT. More like they recast the block.

Ford has their gun loaded ready to pull the trigger on the demise of the 5.4. It is old tech and needs to be replaced especially with the competition it will receive.

GT500 days may be numbered but I will venture to guess a "Cobra" variant of some type will replace it and will use the Coyote in a forced induction form. I personally would love to see a turbo but more than likely a S/C similar to the Roush TVS will be the head unit.

If they make a turbo variant, I will get rid of my 2011 GT and put myself on the list. Otherwise I will stick with the GT and work on those 10 sec. N/A runs.

You are correct, the 2011 5.4 is merely a recast of the '10s iron block and did not recieve any other improvements other than the plasma-transferred wire arc cylinder walls and some additional structural webbing. It is a common misconception that Plasma-transferred wire arc (PTWA) is a new engine altogether but PTWA is only an advanced procedure that replaces the old iron cylinder liners. The equipment used during this procedure can be utilized on any of Ford's current and future engine blocks regardless of the blocks bore size. The procedure and equipment were no doubt expensive initially but over time the technology will pay for itself and find its way across the entire fleet. That doesn't mean the 5.4 will be history altogether, I'm sure it will still be offered as a crated option from Ford Performance for racing applications just as the pushrod 5.0 and the 4.6's.

The 5.4's demise began with Ford's Australian division using the upgraded supercharged 5.0 from Ford Performance Vehicles Australia code named "Miami". Currently, there are two different "Miami" variants. The Boss 315 and Boss 335 producing 422hp and 449hp. The horsepower ratings are kept to a minimum due to the strict Euro IV (Their version of our EPA) emission regulations and Co2 measurements. The Miami engines are based directly off the Coyote with obvious changes in compression and the supercharged version is actually 103lbs lighter than the naturally aspirated iron block 5.4. It would be more expensive for Ford to develop TiVCT for the 5.4 than to use the already existing PTWA on the 5.0. Once an engine ceases to be global, it is one step closer to the chopping block and it is impressive that the engine is 103lbs lighter even after forced induction has been added...

Both the Twin Vortices Series (TVS) supercharger and a Twin Turbo are possibilities for the future SVT Cobra(funny how TVS is SVT backwards). Remember, Ford already has a prototype Twin Turbo 5.0 called "Road Runner" and there is a working prototype called EU-01 that creates massive power in Europe. I would much rather see a TT 5.0 in the 2013 Cobra because I feel the TiVCT will complement the twin turbos dramatically over the TVS....

Either way, when Ford announced the "all new" Aluminum-blocked, Supercharged 5.4 V8, most people misinterpreted the "all new" as a ground up redesign instead of what it really was... Just a play of words to attract attention.. and for the most part... It worked very well...

[a_Username]

Originally Posted by thePill

You are correct, the 2011 5.4 is merely a recast of the '10s iron block and did not recieve any other improvements other than the plasma-transferred wire arc cylinder walls and some additional structural webbing. It is a common misconception that Plasma-transferred wire arc (PTWA) is a new engine altogether but PTWA is only an advanced procedure that replaces the old iron cylinder liners. The equipment used during this procedure can be utilized on any of Ford's current and future engine blocks regardless of the blocks bore size. The procedure and equipment were no doubt expensive initially but over time the technology will pay for itself and find its way across the entire fleet. That doesn't mean the 5.4 will be history altogether, I'm sure it will still be offered as a crated option from Ford Performance for racing applications just as the pushrod 5.0 and the 4.6's.

The 5.4's demise began with Ford's Australian division using the upgraded supercharged 5.0 from Ford Performance Vehicles Australia code named "Miami". Currently, there are two different "Miami" variants. The Boss 315 and Boss 335 producing 422hp and 449hp. The horsepower ratings are kept to a minimum due to the strict Euro IV (Their version of our EPA) emission regulations and Co2 measurements. The Miami engines are based directly off the Coyote with obvious changes in compression and the supercharged version is actually 103lbs lighter than the naturally aspirated iron block 5.4. It would be more expensive for Ford to develop TiVCT for the 5.4 than to use the already existing PTWA on the 5.0. Once an engine ceases to be global, it is one step closer to the chopping block and it is impressive that the engine is 103lbs lighter even after forced induction has been added...

Both the Twin Vortices Series (TVS) supercharger and a Twin Turbo are possibilities for the future SVT Cobra(funny how TVS is SVT backwards). Remember, Ford already has a prototype Twin Turbo 5.0 called "Road Runner" and there is a working prototype called EU-01 that creates massive power in Europe. I would much rather see a TT 5.0 in the 2013 Cobra because I feel the TiVCT will complement the twin turbos dramatically over the TVS....

Either way, when Ford announced the "all new" Aluminum-blocked, Supercharged 5.4 V8, most people misinterpreted the "all new" as a ground up redesign instead of what it really was... Just a play of words to attract attention.. and for the most part... It worked very well...

IMO, 5.4L > 5.0L. The 5.4L is one of the few engines I've heard lasting up over 800 rwhp on stock internals!

[LYCAN]

Sounds like an idiot. You probably wasted too much breath on him. What I typically do in those situations is just laugh and say "yeah, I know what ya mean man."

I used to have a 96 Steeda Cobra, and it was a great car for the time. Actually my car used to be the featured car in the Mustang Forum banner. The admin like it that much...it was back around 1996/97. Actually traded my 96 Formula WS6 for it. But drove a 2008 Mustang GT500 the other day and was not impressed. It was serious power, but a bit too much. I was turning the car sideways every time I stepped on the gas. For the strip with the proper tires it would rock. But as a daily driver and fun car it wasn't my first choice. Either way my intent is not to slam the Ford guys, because I love the Stangs as well. But I would not say that one is necessarily better than another. That solid axle killed buying one for me. There was no way that after coming from a ZO6 and my M3 that I was going to go buy a solid axle car with 400 or even 1000 HP under the hood. If I wanted that I would just supercharge the Maro.

Originally Posted by dvargo

So I was at a party over the weekend and got into the discussion with a guy who sells fords. After he found out I had a camaro it all started. I just asked if I could come down and take a 5.0 out. From there on out I was continuously told that the mustang is in its own league and that the camaro has nothing on it. Remember this is coming from someone who has never drove a camaro. So I brought up drivers ability and I then was told that it dosent matter anyone in a new 5.0 will be able to out drive the camaro. So my question is to anyone that has driven both is the 5.0 all that he is making it out to be.

[thePill]

Originally Posted by ULTRAZLS1

Ummm...the 10 SS beat the track pack 2010 mustang in a road course shootout.
It lost to the 5.0 by .1 tenth. (I believe it was road and track or C & D)

A non track pack stock 2005-2009 GT would get RAPED by a camaro on a road course. I would love to see a CONFIRMED TOTALLY STOCK 2009 GT match a 2010 camaro on a road course with the same driver.

Not that this is the end all of arguments. But a head to head comparo is more accurate than who knows who running them and you watching....

and I love how no one ever mentions pedders results. they know more than all of you guys combined on the subject but yet it means nothing.

I know Pedders suspension systems and I think they are great and offer reasonably priced kits. They had a Pony car showdown in Hot Rod in December and used a 2010 Saleen S281 with pedders suspension and a Pedders USA 2010 Camaro SS.

The Camaro ran Gingerman in 1:33:64 and the Mustang ran it in 1:33:90 which is a .26 advantage. Although, the Camaro dyno'd at 556rwhp and 481rwtq while the Mustang only put down 449rwhp and 419rwtq. Again, weight was an issue for the Camaro weighing 4,197lbs with John Buttermore driving and fuel while the Mustang was 3,893 with John driving and fuel as well. Most of the improvement can probably be placed in the size of the tire used, both cars used 305/30-19s... In all four corners (believe that or not).

Gingerman has two separate 1400ft straights divided by a 90 degree turn 11, another two 1000ft straights and two 800 footers that are joined together by a dog legged turn 4. The 100hp Camaro advantage will always produce better lap times on a track with multiple straight-a-ways, So a .26 quicker lap really isn't as impressive as some would have hoped for.

But a 1:33 is very impressive regardless of the weight and horsepower, I was just alittle more intrigued at the Saleen's performance. It is almost a second away from the 7 liter, 505hp Z06 (1:32:75) that Automobile magazine tested when the Z06 came out in '05... They put down almost identical rear wheel numbers and the Z06 weighed 3200lbs...

[ULTRAZLS1]

Originally Posted by thePill

I know Pedders suspension systems and I think they are great and offer reasonably priced kits. They had a Pony car showdown in Hot Rod in December and used a 2010 Saleen S281 with pedders suspension and a Pedders USA 2010 Camaro SS.

The Camaro ran Gingerman in 1:33:64 and the Mustang ran it in 1:33:90 which is a .26 advantage. Although, the Camaro dyno'd at 556rwhp and 481rwtq while the Mustang only put down 449rwhp and 419rwtq. Again, weight was an issue for the Camaro weighing 4,197lbs with John Buttermore driving and fuel while the Mustang was 3,893 with John driving and fuel as well. Most of the improvement can probably be placed in the size of the tire used, both cars used 305/30-19s... In all four corners (believe that or not).

Gingerman has two separate 1400ft straights divided by a 90 degree turn 11, another two 1000ft straights and two 800 footers that are joined together by a dog legged turn 4. The 100hp Camaro advantage will always produce better lap times on a track with multiple straight-a-ways, So a .26 quicker lap really isn't as impressive as some would have hoped for.

But a 1:33 is very impressive regardless of the weight and horsepower, I was just alittle more intrigued at the Saleen's performance. It is almost a second away from the 7 liter, 505hp Z06 (1:32:75) that Automobile magazine tested when the Z06 came out in '05... They put down almost identical rear wheel numbers and the Z06 weighed 3200lbs...

Nice try...but read into it some more.

The camaro was slower accelerating and slower to brake (look at the data logging of the speeds of the cars) Pedders explains this in detail if you look into the thread. (camao wasnt running at optimal levels that day)

The camaro simply out-cornered the mustang. If it were as quick to accelerate it would have been even worse. Then it was still down on braking from the weight. It made up for all of this and more with its cornering ability.

The pedders camaro pulled a 1.4 G on the skid pad. PFADT built one with simple components that pulled a 1.3 on the factory tires.

And im not sure how you compare a factory car to one that is set up for the track. Zo6 Vette to mustang or not....thats a different ball game altogether.

.26 isnt a big advantage I guess. But over 10 laps you would be 100's of feet behind. We have guys saying the camaro handles like trash when it was behind the 11 mustang GT by .1 tenth in another given test.
It was also only a couple tenths behind in the lightning lap tests.

IMO the camaro chassis has more potential.

[thePill]

Originally Posted by a_Username

IMO, 5.4L > 5.0L. The 5.4L is one of the few engines I've heard lasting up over 800 rwhp on stock internals!

Yeah, It was famous for that but then again, it used 6 bolt mains and at the time the 4.6 did not have that kind of beef. The new 5.0 comes from the factory with 6 bolt mains and from what I have seen, the bottom end including the caps are pretty thick as the 5.4 has. Now that Ford offers the 5.0 and the 6.2 in their trucks, the 5.4 just doesn't provide the kind of displacement gap between the 5.0 and 6.2 as an engine option. If Ford still produced the 4.6 instead of the 5.0 then a 4.6/5.4 V8 engine family is a perfect gap if one felt the need to go bigger over the standard option.

Now with the 5.0 being the standard V8, the 6.2 would be the only feasible option for torque and who's to say both the 5.0/6.2 can be stretched out to maintain those kind of figures stock... I would fear the longevity of the stock bottom with that kind of power but who knows...

Also, the 5.4 liter crate engine is listed for $20,999 on Ford Racing where the 5.0 list for only $6,999. Changing out the 5.4 for the 5.0 could bring the MSRP down.... Although PTWA is applied to the 5.4 (probably why the price is high).

[thePill]

Originally Posted by ULTRAZLS1

Nice try...but read into it some more.

The camaro was slower accelerating and slower to brake (look at the data logging of the speeds of the cars) Pedders explains this in detail if you look into the thread. (camao wasnt running at optimal levels that day)

The camaro simply out-cornered the mustang. If it were as quick to accelerate it would have been even worse. Then it was still down on braking from the weight. It made up for all of this and more with its cornering ability.

The pedders camaro pulled a 1.4 G on the skid pad. PFADT built one with simple components that pulled a 1.3 on the factory tires.

And im not sure how you compare a factory car to one that is set up for the track. Zo6 Vette to mustang or not....thats a different ball game altogether.

.26 isnt a big advantage I guess. But over 10 laps you would be 100's of feet behind. We have guys saying the camaro handles like trash when it was behind the 11 mustang GT by .1 tenth in another given test.
It was also only a couple tenths behind in the lightning lap tests.

IMO the camaro chassis has more potential.

It says here that the Camaro was faster where mid corner speeds and turning/braking were important like in turns 5,8 and 9.. the Mustang was faster in all other portions of the track. There are 11 total turns at Ginger.... Braking is just as important as turning and a very important part of handling, if you can't stop then your car is outta hand... You would probably see brake fade quicker and more severely due to weight and early braking.

It also blames heat soak for the Camaros acceleration but there is absolutely no reason a 556hp vehicle should be losing in almost every portion of the track and against a 449hp Mustang.. especially when there are plenty of straight-a-ways...

[thePill]

Lateral Gs are a great yard stick and a standard unit of measurement but, leaving a corner/enter another and negotiating real traffic/passing will mitigate those Gs once lateral weight transfer starts inducing body roll.. It should have been able to exit much faster, there's nothing you can do about the braking and mid-corner speed is important. But if you look at turns 5,8 and 9, the are not sharp at all, they are more like bends that require very little braking... With the exception of the dog leg at turn 4, they are the fastest turns out of all 11...

[thePill]

[ULTRAZLS1]

Originally Posted by thePill

It says here that the Camaro was faster where mid corner speeds and turning/braking were important like in turns 5,8 and 9.. the Mustang was faster in all other portions of the track. There are 11 total turns at Ginger.... Braking is just as important as turning and a very important part of handling, if you can't stop then your car is outta hand... You would probably see brake fade quicker and more severely due to weight and early braking.

It also blames heat soak for the Camaros acceleration but there is absolutely no reason a 556hp vehicle should be losing in almost every portion of the track and against a 449hp Mustang.. especially when there are plenty of straight-a-ways...

In this test the car is 300lbs heavier and having heat soak problems. The power difference is marginal looking at all the variables. The braking disadvantage was due to the extra weight. The stock brakes on the 2010 mustang didnt last a lap when they tested them...so thats another subject I guess.


It is what it is. According to pedders the camaro was slower to brake and also slower accelerating on that day.

[ironpeddler]

The 5.4 has had it's time and it has been a great engine. Of course Ford will eventually move on and put a different engine in. I would expect the engine swap to be in 2014 or 2013, whenever the mustang anniversary is and most likely will also be the next generation of the stang. Might not even have the "Shelby gt500" in a couple years might just be a "Cobra" again. And for sure, I would bet my life, that it will also have an independent suspension. Not that I care about that, but of course it is the future.

As someone esle already said how can you degrade an engine that is capable of making 800rwhp from the factory on stock internals. At an decent price too IMHO. I'm a huge fan of the 5.4! and all Ford engines for that matter.

[thePill]

Originally Posted by ULTRAZLS1

In this test the car is 300lbs heavier and having heat soak problems. The power difference is marginal looking at all the variables. The braking disadvantage was due to the extra weight. Th stock brakes on the 2010 mustang wouldn't last a lap...so thats another subject I guess.


It is what it is.

Yes it is 300lbs heavier, weight is bad in every race application but there is nothing you can do about that unless you have a weight reduction plan.

Heat soak: Superchargers are garbage for Road Racing, every car that has a supercharger will become heat soaked shortly after the engine reaches normal operating temperature. To assume that the Mustang's supercharger did not suffer the same heat soak would be incorrect. Did it do a better job a distributing heat, maybe but to say that the Camaro gave up its 100hp advantage and the Mustang never lost any horsepower would be a stretch.

Stock brakes: Neither the Mustang or the Camaro have a race ready brake set up to prevent brake fade, Brembos or not... The disc are not drilled or vented and the stock pads are government safety standard spec. The calipers themselves are not bad and neither car has stock cooling ducts...

[ULTRAZLS1]

Originally Posted by thePill

Yes it is 300lbs heavier, weight is bad in every race application but there is nothing you can do about that unless you have a weight reduction plan.

Heat soak: Superchargers are garbage for Road Racing, every car that has a supercharger will become heat soaked shortly after the engine reaches normal operating temperature. To assume that the Mustang's supercharger did not suffer the same heat soak would be incorrect. Did it do a better job a distributing heat, maybe but to say that the Camaro gave up its 100hp advantage and the Mustang never lost any horsepower would be a stretch.

Stock brakes: Neither the Mustang or the Camaro have a race ready brake set up to prevent brake fade, Brembos or not... The disc are not drilled or vented and the stock pads are government safety standard spec. The calipers themselves are not bad and neither car has stock cooling ducts...

They actually commented that the camaros brakes were very impressive in stock form and would last several laps. They were scared the mustangs brakes would not take it one lap.

Looking at the data, the 300 lb weight difference, the comments about the camaros lack of performance on that day would lead one to believe the power difference was nowhere near as important as you think. Well...at least according to the people who actually did the test anyway...what do I know

[thePill]

Originally Posted by ironpeddler

The 5.4 has had it's time and it has been a great engine. Of course Ford will eventually move on and put a different engine in. I would expect the engine swap to be in 2014 or 2013, whenever the mustang anniversary is and most likely will also be the next generation of the stang. Might not even have the "Shelby gt500" in a couple years might just be a "Cobra" again. And for sure, I would bet my life, that it will also have an independent suspension. Not that I care about that, but of course it is the future.

As someone esle already said how can you degrade an engine that is capable of making 800rwhp from the factory on stock internals. At an decent price too IMHO. I'm a huge fan of the 5.4! and all Ford engines for that matter.

I'm with you 100%, it will also raise the value of the 5.4 GT500s substantially and they will be sought after for years. SVT might bring the Cobra back for SVTs 20th anniversary in 2013 right before the redesign in 2014. Depending on the HP edition Camaros release date, Ford may not change the engine at all and just let it phase out during the redesign. Or, they might push the TT 5.0 that was being worked for almost 2 years now. The Twin Turbo creates more torque than a supercharger does and doesn't suffer from heat like an S/C.

They will most likely have the IRS ready for 2014, just as long as its the 5 or 6 link IRS. they have a 5 link in the fleet now and it is global... I think it is used on a few Lincolns including an SUV. It looks like a Jaguar 5 link design so it is always possible for them to go with 6 link if they wanted to.. Please Do Not Use a 4 Link IRS FORD, save it for the Mini Vans and 4 doors...