Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums - Camaro5.com
 
Jason 98 TA
Go Back   Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums - Camaro5.com > Members Area > General Automotive + Other Cars Discussion


Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 07-18-2014, 02:01 PM   #197
PoorMansCamaro



 
PoorMansCamaro's Avatar
 
Drives: Really Slow
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 55,667
Finally 6G Mustang HP/TQ!

Premium fuel and 30mpg is still cheaper than premium and 20mph
__________________
PoorMansCamaro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2014, 02:14 PM   #198
thxultra
 
thxultra's Avatar
 
Drives: Mean ass V6
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Chicago
Posts: 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by crysalis_01 View Post
I'm guessing the 3.7 still makes 305 but Ford will advertise it at 300 to make the EB even more appealing. This is would make much more sense than reengineering an engine just to lose 5hp. Also, while in Overboost the 2.3, like all the other EB4's, should make another 8-9% hp and tq.





Has the ATS wheel base been confirmed? I know there are pics of the camo clad gen6, and it's sitting next to an Impala. So, knowing that Impala sits on a 111.7" wlb, it shouldn't be all too difficult accurately estimating gen6 Camaro's wlb.
I don't think any specs on the 2016 Camaro have been confirmed all speculation for now. Another guess but think we will get to see the 2016 Camaro around December so no reason not to wait on getting a new Mustang until at least then unless you have your heart set on one. 2015 Mustang is looking very nice. New Golf R is looking pretty crazy also they are saying sub 5 sec 0 to 60 on that car and all wheel drive. New Audi S3 has the same engine as the golf r and will be quick also but starts at $42k also och... 2015 wrx is looking pretty sweet also. Know I will get some flames for this but point is lots of great cars to look at in 2015/ 2016 model year.
thxultra is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2014, 02:19 PM   #199
BaylorCamaro
Track > 1/4 Mile
 
BaylorCamaro's Avatar
 
Drives: 2016 C7 Z51
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: League City, TX
Posts: 6,080
Quote:
Originally Posted by archtaan View Post
Is that it? I was really hoping to see 450/425 for this model. It will probably run about the same on the strip.
Quote:
Originally Posted by trademaster View Post
I think Ford is sandbagging on the tune until gen 6 Camaro. I bet we see GT350 hit and power increases across the board right before or after chevy launches gen 6.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheReaper View Post
The 2017 Mustang will have a big HP boost to deal with the Gen 6 Camaro. Both cars will hit the dealer lots at the same time.
My thoughts exactly.
BaylorCamaro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2014, 03:11 PM   #200
scrming
Red Brick of Vengeance!
 
scrming's Avatar
 
Drives: 12 Second Brick
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: at my pulpit
Posts: 7,745
Quote:
Originally Posted by ssrs2lt View Post
if im forced into premium fuel, v8 or 5.0 is only way to go.. im not dd a v6 t4 on premium .. I hope Chevy doesn't do the same..
so far none of the EB vehicles have required premium... but if you want the maximum HP, the car will automatically adapt of the higher octane... doubt the EB Mustang require premium...
scrming is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2014, 03:38 PM   #201
Dwarfey
 
Dwarfey's Avatar
 
Drives: 2011 1LT A/T Black w/ Red Stripes
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: La Verne, CA (So Cal)
Posts: 279
So my 2011 V6 has more power... Muhahahaha
__________________
2011 1LT Camaro A/T
-MRT v2.0 Exhaust -Painted Red Racing Stripes -Volant Cold Air Intake -Painted Red Interior Accents -Anzo Projector Headlights w/ Oracle White/Red Halos -Black Bowties -Rockford Fosgate 10" Sub w/ 1000W Kenwood Amp
-ZL1 Spoiler - Gloss Black Powder-coated 20" SS Wheels
Dwarfey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2014, 03:43 PM   #202
GretchenGotGrowl


 
GretchenGotGrowl's Avatar
 
Drives: 11 F150 EB/13 Sonic RS/15 Z06
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Little Rock, AR
Posts: 7,133
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dwarfey View Post
So my 2011 V6 has more power... Muhahahaha
It also weighs more!
__________________
New Ride -- 2015 Z06 2LZ (stock) -- Journal
Old Ride -- 2012 Camaro 2LT/RS (647 RWHP & 726 RWTQ) -- Build Thread
GretchenGotGrowl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2014, 04:01 PM   #203
scrming
Red Brick of Vengeance!
 
scrming's Avatar
 
Drives: 12 Second Brick
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: at my pulpit
Posts: 7,745
Quote:
Originally Posted by GretchenGotGrowl View Post
It also weighs more!
and has less area under the curve...
scrming is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2014, 04:39 PM   #204
shine2013
 
shine2013's Avatar
 
Drives: 2008 Mustang GT
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Memphis
Posts: 378
Not bad. I think GM is going to do better than that, especially if the SS gets a engine upgrade. I'm drooling at the idea of Ford or GM introducing twin turbos, which is probably a ways off.
shine2013 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2014, 05:05 PM   #205
PoorMansCamaro



 
PoorMansCamaro's Avatar
 
Drives: Really Slow
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 55,667
Quote:
Originally Posted by scrming View Post
and has less area under the curve...

And not as much torque!
__________________
PoorMansCamaro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-18-2014, 07:15 PM   #206
crysalis_01
Iron fist, lead foot
 
crysalis_01's Avatar
 
Drives: 2003 Mustang Cobra
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 853
Everyone seems to be confusing the 93 octane "rating" used on the certification. If I read it correctly myself the 93oct is the RON measure. Fuel at the pump is (RON+MON)/2. MON typically ends up about 8 or 9 pts below RON. So, the fuel used to certify the numbers for the 2015 Mustang is most likely 88 or 89 and not 93.
__________________
'03 SVT Cobra-SC4.6L V8 || modded with mods'n'stuff
crysalis_01 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-19-2014, 11:30 PM   #207
VADER SS L99


 
VADER SS L99's Avatar
 
Drives: 2013 A6 GT 5.0
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Edmond, OK
Posts: 2,909
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unreal View Post
Ok? What is BS? I got 35rwhp from a tune on my 5.0 that is a 2012. He said LT1s get 30hp from a tune, well so do 5.0s. Like I said, once cars are modded it is nothing more than who has more money. Both can make whatever you want.
It is BS if you got 35RWHP on a bone stock Coyote with a TUNE ONLY with 91-93 octane. I'm talking bone stock with the ONLY mod being a tune on PUMP GAS 93 octane. Baseline fuel 93 octane as well. Please do show me a same day same dyno of a bone stock 2011+ Mustang GT with the ONLY mod being a tune with 91-93 octane in the tank. Here is arguably the best 2011+ Mustang tuner in the country(AED) results of a PUMP GAS TUNE ONLY on a otherwise bone stock car.



Here is what the new LT1 is doing BONE STOCK with the only mod being a tune on PUMP GAS.
http://forums.corvetteforum.com/c7-t...yno-tuned.html

And just so show that its not a fluke.
http://forums.corvetteforum.com/c7-t...ome-gains.html

Anyway, you COMPLETELY missed my point. I was not trying to show what a modded car could do. I was trying to show that GM could EASILY up the power on the LT1 from 460HP to about 480HP if they wanted to. GM usually ups the power on their Vette engines after around 3 model years.

Ford Fans are hoping and praying that a DI Coyote comes to compete with the LT1 but what they should realize is that the LT1 can gain more power also. It would not make sense to do all that R&D, testing, and mfging on the current 5.0 to just lose a ton of money on it and make a DI 5.0 for 2016. I wouldn't expect a DI Coyote until at least the 2017 model year and even then you would think that they would lose money on the old engine.

The Ford Fan boi predictions on the new 5.0 engine are laughable. I saw many 450-480HP predictions. I kept telling them it would not make any more power than a BOSS engine since that was pretty much what it was with a more restrictive intake manifold. Ford probably could have made 450 peak HP and 385 peak torque with this new engine with a different intake manifold but that would have made for a lazy car since the car is gaining more rotational weight and weight in general.
__________________
BLK/BLK 1SS/RS Ordered 11-01-2009 Took delivery 12-22-2009. Heads/cam/converter/bolt ons. SOLD Feb 2015 to fund 6th gen LT1 SS with 8L90E.
VADER SS L99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2014, 01:34 PM   #208
TheReaper
 
TheReaper's Avatar
 
Drives: 2014 Mustang GT
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Mobile Al
Posts: 711
AED is not the Best Mustang tuner. My money would be on Jon Lund. Most people get the most out of a tune by going from 87 to 93 octane.
__________________
2014 GT BBP 6R80
TheReaper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2014, 02:30 PM   #209
wakespeak

 
wakespeak's Avatar
 
Drives: 2013 2SS LS3/NPP
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 1,041
Based on this power to weight, I still see the new Mustang as just catching up to the Gen5 Camaro for ride and handling, then adding an updated engine. The Gen6 should have no problem unless GM gets silly with not controlling weight. GM could just release a Gen5 with the LT1 and a standard 3.91 rear end.
__________________
NPP, 1LE track pack, ZL1/1LE shifter, Apex catch can, 1LE oil separator, Goodridge stainless steel brake lines,1LE strut tower brace. Wheels: 19x10 front and 19x11 rear w/1LE offsets.
wakespeak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2014, 03:24 PM   #210
87GNX

 
87GNX's Avatar
 
Drives: Alot
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Norcalifas
Posts: 1,337
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheReaper View Post
AED is not the Best Mustang tuner. My money would be on Jon Lund. Most people get the most out of a tune by going from 87 to 93 octane.
Ever hear about VMP?
87GNX is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:45 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.