Camaro VS Mustang Mega Thread

[drakedgar]

Just Race him

Also Off Topic:

Why people keep saying that the manual V6 camaros are faster than autos camaros, if in the drag times thread almost every car is auto and even Edmonds Inside line said that Autos were faster?

http://www.camaro5.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5313

[Stew]

Originally Posted by ULTRAZLS1

You have a good chance against the auto if you can drive.

If he has a stick and can drive you lose for sure.

Unless the chip helped his trans tune etc.

To the stang guys...arent the autos in the 2000 GT's (99-04) really holding them back in stock form? From what I have seen they are high 14 second cars auto and stock. Havent checked into them since my old ls1 days...but this is what I remember...could be wrong. Just remembering the autos being decently slower compared to a well driven stick.

You are correct sir, autos are much slower. Had a friend who had an 01 Manual GT with just a cold air that hit 13.9. Autos were much slower though.

[ULTRAZLS1]

Originally Posted by Stew

You are correct sir, autos are much slower. Had a friend who had an 01 Manual GT with just a cold air that hit 13.9. Autos were much slower though.

Cool...thats what I thought.

I work with a guy that has a 2002 auto GT who wants to race me.

Needless to say I havent taken him up on the offer...its not even worth the risk. Now if he had a new 5.0 I couldnt resist!

A friend of mine had a 2001 GT manual that wasnt too bad. It was quicker than I expected. It could keep up with (within 2 cars) my other friends 94 LT-1 Z-28 M6.

[KungFuHamster]

Originally Posted by Stew

You are correct sir, autos are much slower. Had a friend who had an 01 Manual GT with just a cold air that hit 13.9. Autos were much slower though.

not that much...i went 14.2 in a bone stock 00 GT auto.

[bmorecam]

it does not matter if u got a hooptie. its all about who is behind the wheel. I remember back in 2001 when the subaru wrx first came out as a 2002 model, i was the first one to get the 227hp turbo charged boxer rally blue and back than i was young and did alot of immature things like street racing.
i once had a guy with a 115hp vw and when we raced i lost in my mighty turbo rally car, but back than i didnt really know how to drive a stick either and was just learning.
in a real world scenario it does not matter if you have a v6, a v8, a mustang or a camaro because you are going to lose and win, but if you think you are going to win because you have couple more cylinder or you have a turbo on your v6..guess what??? you already lost.

[DGthe3]

Originally Posted by KungFuHamster

and yes, more wear and tear=faster...as things loosen up friction is reduced. less friction for pistons=faster

No, more wear and tear means less compression and less power. Anyone who owns a high mileage car can attest to this, as would any half decent mechanic.

I've never heard of an engine 'loosening up' over time until now, but I've got a feeling I know what is going on. During the first few thousand miles an engine will wear a bit more than usual and they also seem to make a bit more power. But the power isn't really because of reduced friction. The main reason is that the engine seals up better after its been used a bit, primarily the piston rings. As a result, it can maintain compression better and makes more power. This is a fairly fast process. By the second oil change its about as good as its ever going to get. After that, its all downhill.

[DarkneSS]

Originally Posted by DGthe3

No, more wear and tear means less compression and less power. Anyone who owns a high mileage car can attest to this, as would any half decent mechanic.

I've never heard of an engine 'loosening up' over time until now, but I've got a feeling I know what is going on. During the first few thousand miles an engine will wear a bit more than usual and they also seem to make a bit more power. But the power isn't really because of reduced friction. The main reason is that the engine seals up better after its been used a bit, primarily the piston rings. As a result, it can maintain compression better and makes more power. This is a fairly fast process. By the second oil change its about as good as its ever going to get. After that, its all downhill.

Phew, I was beginning to think I was going crazy. I think that hampster guy is just trolling though, no way he actually believes that.

[camaroguy795]

pretty simple. cars are like people in this matter. when you're young, the older you get the stronger and faster you get until you hit your peak and then start to get older, slower, etc.

[ViperTomcat]

If he's tuned for that intake and exhaust..you wont stand a chance.

And folks..the V6 Camaro really cannot hang with a V8 Mustang, especially with a good driver. Dont look at the HP, look at the weight and torque.

[Stew]

Originally Posted by camaroguy795

pretty simple. cars are like people in this matter. when you're young, the older you get the stronger and faster you get until you hit your peak and then start to get older, slower, etc.

Bingo! A car will loosen up but for what, the first 10,000 miles max? Then after it gets into high mileage it will lose power (engine rebuild, refresh, or replacement notwithstanding).

[Stew]

Originally Posted by ViperTomcat

If he's tuned for that intake and exhaust..you wont stand a chance.

And folks..the V6 Camaro really cannot hang with a V8 Mustang, especially with a good driver. Dont look at the HP, look at the weight and torque.

Exactly.

[REEFBLUE93]

Originally Posted by DarkneSS

And i have heard "looser is faster", mostly in terms of chicks hehe

Now that's funny As for the rest of this thread....

[1bad65]

Originally Posted by ViperTomcat

Dont look at the HP, look at the weight and torque.

Yup. And don't forget gearing too.

[E.T.]

Originally Posted by ViperTomcat

And folks..the V6 Camaro really cannot hang with a V8 Mustang, especially with a good driver. Dont look at the HP, look at the weight and torque.

4.6L SOHC EFI V-8 260hp
° Displacement (cc): 4605
° Bore and stroke (mm): 91.4 x 91.4
° Compression ratio: 9.4:1
° Max. Torque: 302 lb/ft at 4,000 rpm


Mustang Performance
2002 Ford Mustang GT
0-60 mph: 6.0 sec
0-100 mph: --- sec
Quarter Mile: 14.7 sec @ 98 mph
Top Speed: 139 mph
Fuel Economy (city/highway): 18/26


Dimensions
Curbweight (lbs.)
° V6: 3,115
° GT: 3,280
Weight distribution (%f/r): 55/45

Yes, it has slightly more torque and it does weigh a good deal less...but look at the performance stats. A V6 Camaro can hang with that. With mods, all bets are off. BUT, stock for stock, I think it would be a good race.

A requirement for starting these threads should be that the OP and his competition must go to the track (at some point) and post a vid of the results