Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums - Camaro5.com
 
dave@hennessey
Go Back   Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums - Camaro5.com > General Camaro Forums > Chevy Camaro vs...

Chevy Camaro vs... Comparison of Chevy Camaro versus its competition. *NO STREET RACING STORIES*

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old 08-18-2009, 11:20 PM   #1
qdz21
 
Drives: Black 02 Z28 Vert Sold
Join Date: May 2009
Location: McDonough, GA
Posts: 32
Automobile Magazine's "Camaro SS vs Mustang GT w/ Track Pack" on Road Course

Pretty intersting write up and great comparisons starting on page 3 with numerical results on page 8. Thought some of you would enjoy.

http://www.automobilemag.com/feature...ies/index.html
qdz21 is offline  
Old 08-19-2009, 07:29 AM   #2
GTengineer
 
GTengineer's Avatar
 
Drives: 2004 Z06
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Yorktown, VA
Posts: 192
Good read but it seemed like a lot of Mustang nut hugging was going on. After reading page 4, I thought for sure the Mustang was gonna run away victorious but then you look at page 8 and the Camaro handily beats almost every category except some cornering g's categories, which even then are still very close. Scary to think what this car would do to a non track pack GT.
__________________
2004 Corvette Z06
1996 Camaro 3.8L (M5)
GTengineer is offline  
Old 08-19-2009, 08:28 AM   #3
syr74
Account Suspended
 
Drives: Thunderbird
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 951
The opposite holds just as true, what is a Track Pack Mustang with 400hpgoing to do to the Camaro SS? Like I said in another thread, .7 seconds is a surprisingly small gap considering the huge gap in power between the two cars, the gap in mid range torque is particularly noteworthy. If handling between these two models was on remotely the same level the Camaro should positively run off and hide from the Mustang, to the tune of several seconds. That this does not occur tells you that the Camaro is not and likely was not intended to be a true GT and indeed does slant more heavily toward the muscle car side of the equation.

The Camaro deserves credit for a very good powerplant and great brakes, but stellar handling was obviously not a developmental hot button for the Chevy. Nothing wrong with that, many a classic muscle car was built on the same principle and to lesser effect. That said, you have to expect people who drive race cars for a living to prefer the car with the bend toward great handling, which is hwt we see here. Different strokes for different folks.
syr74 is offline  
Old 08-19-2009, 09:15 AM   #4
GTengineer
 
GTengineer's Avatar
 
Drives: 2004 Z06
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Yorktown, VA
Posts: 192
Quote:
Originally Posted by syr74 View Post
The opposite holds just as true, what is a Track Pack Mustang with 400hpgoing to do to the Camaro SS? Like I said in another thread, .7 seconds is a surprisingly small gap considering the huge gap in power between the two cars, the gap in mid range torque is particularly noteworthy. If handling between these two models was on remotely the same level the Camaro should positively run off and hide from the Mustang, to the tune of several seconds. That this does not occur tells you that the Camaro is not and likely was not intended to be a true GT and indeed does slant more heavily toward the muscle car side of the equation.

The Camaro deserves credit for a very good powerplant and great brakes, but stellar handling was obviously not a developmental hot button for the Chevy. Nothing wrong with that, many a classic muscle car was built on the same principle and to lesser effect. That said, you have to expect people who drive race cars for a living to prefer the car with the bend toward great handling, which is hwt we see here. Different strokes for different folks.


1. A 400 hp Mustang does NOT exist yet.

2. 0.7 seconds is nothing? Did you look at any other performance category or did you only focus on the ones convenient to you? Are you gonna be driving the two cars in a road track 100% of the time? Look at the numbers that really matter in day to day driving. It is NOT EVEN CLOSE.

3. Why do people keep bringing up the "for a car with so and so less HP it does well". Who the hell cares? It is not all about hp, it is about hp/lb. The Mustang does well because it is lighter, true. We shall see how heavy a new 400 hp Mustang is, until then I don't really care to discuss imaginary cars.
__________________
2004 Corvette Z06
1996 Camaro 3.8L (M5)
GTengineer is offline  
Old 08-19-2009, 09:29 AM   #5
syr74
Account Suspended
 
Drives: Thunderbird
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 951
Quote:
Originally Posted by GTengineer View Post


1. A 400 hp Mustang does NOT exist yet.

2. 0.7 seconds is nothing? Did you look at any other performance category or did you only focus on the ones convenient to you? Are you gonna be driving the two cars in a road track 100% of the time? Look at the numbers that really matter in day to day driving. It is NOT EVEN CLOSE.

3. Why do people keep bringing up the "for a car with so and so less HP it does well". Who the hell cares? It is not all about hp, it is about hp/lb. The Mustang does well because it is lighter, true. We shall see how heavy a new 400 hp Mustang is, until then I don't really care to discuss imaginary cars.
1. No, but it will be here in significantly less than a year. So, if you want a true GT, why would you buy a 4000lb Camaro now when you can wait for a much lighter Mustang with better handling, similar power, and superior power to weight?

2. Who said .7 second was nothing? I did say it is an amazingly small gap between two car which are supposed to be in the same segment with a greater than 100hp disparity between the two, because it is. We already knew the Camaro was notably faster in a straight line, this simply proves that the Chevy is more of a cruiser than a corner carver. But then, we knew that already too. Like I said earlier there is nothing wrong with that, it just is what it is.

3. I find it amazingly easy to tell just how disappointed Chevy enthusiasts actually are in the curb weight of the new Camaro SS by how 'touchy' they become about the weight of the new 400hp Mustang GT. This extreme weight gain you guys keep hoping will hinder the new Mustang GT just isn't going to happen, there simply exists no plausible reason why anything like this would occur.
syr74 is offline  
Old 08-19-2009, 10:39 AM   #6
Speed74SS

 
Speed74SS's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 LPE 650+ CTS-V
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Sioux Falls, SD
Posts: 1,640
Quote:
Originally Posted by syr74 View Post
1. No, but it will be here in significantly less than a year. So, if you want a true GT, why would you buy a 4000lb Camaro now when you can wait for a much lighter Mustang with better handling, similar power, and superior power to weight?

2. Who said .7 second was nothing? I did say it is an amazingly small gap between two car which are supposed to be in the same segment with a greater than 100hp disparity between the two, because it is. We already knew the Camaro was notably faster in a straight line, this simply proves that the Chevy is more of a cruiser than a corner carver. But then, we knew that already too. Like I said earlier there is nothing wrong with that, it just is what it is.

3. I find it amazingly easy to tell just how disappointed Chevy enthusiasts actually are in the curb weight of the new Camaro SS by how 'touchy' they become about the weight of the new 400hp Mustang GT. This extreme weight gain you guys keep hoping will hinder the new Mustang GT just isn't going to happen, there simply exists no plausible reason why anything like this would occur.

You say the Camaro is more of a cruiser than a corner carver but it still runs faster through the course?? If I were looking at it and I saw the Camaro had faster lap times, faster straight line and a shorter stopping distance then my conclusion is that it is a better car all around. Not taking anything away from the Mustang but until the "so-called" 400hp engine comes out, it will not turn out the way the Mustang faithfuls want it too!!
Speed74SS is offline  
Old 08-19-2009, 10:48 AM   #7
Stew


 
Drives: 92 Luminadead/01 Dakota/97 F150 4x4
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Eastern, Ky
Posts: 3,796
Quote:
Originally Posted by GTengineer View Post


1. A 400 hp Mustang does NOT exist yet.

2. 0.7 seconds is nothing? Did you look at any other performance category or did you only focus on the ones convenient to you? Are you gonna be driving the two cars in a road track 100% of the time? Look at the numbers that really matter in day to day driving. It is NOT EVEN CLOSE.

3. Why do people keep bringing up the "for a car with so and so less HP it does well". Who the hell cares? It is not all about hp, it is about hp/lb. The Mustang does well because it is lighter, true. We shall see how heavy a new 400 hp Mustang is, until then I don't really care to discuss imaginary cars.
On point number 2, how the hell does a faster 1/4 mile time make a care better in day to day driving? The mustang is roomier, easier to see out of, has all the electronic nannies, and the most livable interior and available comfort features. Nothing against the Camaro, I love the car and it is still in consideration for my next purchase, but I know of the 3 muscle/pony cars I would be giving up the most with it for a day to day driver.
Stew is offline  
Old 08-19-2009, 10:54 AM   #8
diV6
 
Drives: 94 camaro z28
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: bay area, ca
Posts: 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by syr74 View Post

3. I find it amazingly easy to tell just how disappointed Chevy enthusiasts actually are in the curb weight of the new Camaro SS by how 'touchy' they become about the weight of the new 400hp Mustang GT. This extreme weight gain you guys keep hoping will hinder the new Mustang GT just isn't going to happen, there simply exists no plausible reason why anything like this would occur.
I find it amazingly easy to tell just how disappointed FORDenthusiasts actually are in how fast the 2010 mustang is by how much they talk about the 2011 mustang

Look, if in 2011 the mustang is faster, then great for ford. Lets wait and see instead of racing hypothetical cars. Maybe the ford will gain weight, maybe it wont. I heard rumors the 5.0 liter wont be in the gt, but a higher tier mustang and the gt would have the turbo v6. I also heard rumors the v8 wont have 400 horsepower. We wont know untill 2010 what the 2011 mustang will be like. Maybe the camaro will get a more agressive tuned suspension, as its current setup is kinda conservitive. Who knows what will happen.

Bottom line, right now the camaro is faster than the mustang, stop making excuses. If we do this again in 2011, and the mustang is faster, i will give you the courtesy of admitting it and not constantly making excuses.

The camaro is not the better cruiser, as it outran the mustang on a road course, NOT THE DRAG STRIP. Its the better performance car.
diV6 is offline  
Old 08-19-2009, 10:59 AM   #9
Speed74SS

 
Speed74SS's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 LPE 650+ CTS-V
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Sioux Falls, SD
Posts: 1,640
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stew View Post
On point number 2, how the hell does a faster 1/4 mile time make a care better in day to day driving? The mustang is roomier, easier to see out of, has all the electronic nannies, and the most livable interior and available comfort features. Nothing against the Camaro, I love the car and it is still in consideration for my next purchase, but I know of the 3 muscle/pony cars I would be giving up the most with it for a day to day driver.
Sounds like you should buy a loaded out Mini-Van - not a muscle car!!
Speed74SS is offline  
Old 08-19-2009, 11:06 AM   #10
syr74
Account Suspended
 
Drives: Thunderbird
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 951
Quote:
Originally Posted by diV6 View Post
I find it amazingly easy to tell just how disappointed FORDenthusiasts actually are in how fast the 2010 mustang is by how much they talk about the 2011 mustang
I have made no bones about the fact that I think the 2010 Mustang GT is easily the better performance car right now, I just think 2011 will absolutely put Camaro on the trailer and, as the most interesting topic on any GM forum right now is the long term health of GM, I find that topic particularly interesting. When you take away the power advantage what does Camaro have left? Seriously?

Quote:
Originally Posted by diV6
I heard rumors the 5.0 liter wont be in the gt, but a higher tier mustang and the gt would have the turbo v6.
Well, that would be the difference between rumors and known info. Mustang part numbers exist for the 2011 5.0L V8, not for the 3.5L Ecoboost V6...doesn't get more solid than that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by diV6
I also heard rumors the v8 wont have 400 horsepower.
And Bill Ford said there will be a 400hp Mustang. Of the three that will be produced, 3.7L V6-powered base model, 5.0L V8-powered GT, and 5.4L SC/INT V8 powered GT500, I think we know which one he was referring to.

GM better have something amazing up their sleeve, because the Camaro is going to need nearly Z06 level power to hold it's own against a 400hp/400lb-ft tq Mustang GT.

Quote:
Originally Posted by diV6
We wont know untill 2010 what the 2011 mustang will be like. Maybe the camaro will get a more agressive tuned suspension, as its current setup is kinda conservative. Who knows what will happen.
I guarantee it will still weight 4000lb, until they solve that the straight line advantage the Chevy holds exists at the sufferance of FoMoCo. Do you really think that is a position GM wants to be in?

Quote:
Originally Posted by diV6
Bottom line, right now the camaro is faster than the mustang, stop making excuses. If we do this again in 2011, and the mustang is faster, i will give you the courtesy of admitting it and not constantly making excuses.
In a straight line, yes. On a road course where the Camaro can use it's power advantage, yes. On a road course where they Chevy can't use that big, mid range torque? No doubt about it....Camaro loses.

Quote:
Originally Posted by diV6
The camaro is not the better cruiser, as it outran the mustang on a road course, NOT THE DRAG STRIP. Its the better performance car.
So long as performance lives in a very narrow envelope maybe. In a scenario where the Camaro can use it's extra hp and torque it will beat the Mustang, but nowhere else. Where is the handling brilliance the uber-expensive Zeta chassis was supposed to bring to the table?

In terms of handling the Camaro is a let down, no plainer way to state it.
syr74 is offline  
Old 08-19-2009, 11:16 AM   #11
GTAHVIT
Blessed
 
GTAHVIT's Avatar
 
Drives: 2013 Sonic RS MT
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Saint Augustine FL
Posts: 28,850
Keep it clean gentlemen.

I'm sorry but we have very little patience for conversations that we've hashed out over and over again.

I liked the article also.

I'm glad the Camaro out performed the Mustang but I'm bummed that it wasn't as much fun to drive...

GM really needs to fix that understeer... If they do, the camaro would have walked away from the mustang as they could have maintined higher speeds through the corners.

When the 400hp mustang hits the streets it will be a much different competition... GM will HAVE to fix the understeer or the new mustang might have enough to beat it...

MHO.
GTAHVIT is offline  
Old 08-19-2009, 11:23 AM   #12
syr74
Account Suspended
 
Drives: Thunderbird
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 951
Quote:
Originally Posted by GTAHVIT View Post
I liked the article also.

I'm glad the Camaro out performed the Mustang but I'm bummed that it wasn't as much fun to drive...

GM really needs to fix that understeer... If they do, the camaro would have walked away from the mustang as they could have maintined higher speeds through the corners.

When the 400hp mustang hits the streets it will be a much different competition... GM will HAVE to fix the understeer or the new mustang might have enough to beat it...

MHO.
Now that is a post worth making. He supports the home team, noting that the Camaro managed to stay ahead, and then acknowledges that the corner carver award didn't go GM's way.

The whole 'my car is better at everything even when it isn't' angle just gets tired. Camaro is really good at some things, not so great at others. If GM is discussing any fixes for the issues the car does have I am as interested as anybody else to hear them.

Obvious Camaro problems: Understeer is a mother and you cannot change line at speed once in a corner without losing even more speed, due at least partially to the former.

Obvious Mustang problems: Brake fade comes in fast and hard, 315hp isn't cutting it, a problem which really shows up in the mid range.

If I were calling he shots needed to fix the Camaro I wouldn't even touch the engine. Issues I would look at would be...

1: Can the gearing be fine tuned any further to improve acceleration and or fuel economy even a little? Neither area is bad, but more never hurts and BMW and Porsche have made a literal living by making cars go faster than the power ratings would suggest that they should. How? They tweak the gearing until it is genuinely perfect.

2: Where can we drop some weight. It is possible that meaningful weight loss cannot be had, but it never hurts to try.

3: Obviously, tweak the suspension heavily. Adjust rear spring rates, chage tire size, but solve the understeer issue. Car needs to be more nuetral all the way through the corner.
syr74 is offline  
Old 08-19-2009, 12:02 PM   #13
MrIcky

 
MrIcky's Avatar
 
Drives: Dodge Ram Megacab & Cobalt SS
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Boise
Posts: 1,536
Quote:
Originally Posted by GTAHVIT View Post
I'm glad the Camaro out performed the Mustang but I'm bummed that it wasn't as much fun to drive...

GM really needs to fix that understeer... If they do, the camaro would have walked away from the mustang as they could have maintined higher speeds through the corners.

When the 400hp mustang hits the streets it will be a much different competition... GM will HAVE to fix the understeer or the new mustang might have enough to beat it...

MHO.
I don't think GM really wants to fix the understeer. They probably view it as a 'safety feature' to help keep people from killing themselves. I'd guess that if they do decide to fix it, they'd do it with some sort of z28 or track pack.
MrIcky is offline  
Old 08-19-2009, 01:20 PM   #14
ShnOmac


 
ShnOmac's Avatar
 
Drives: 2006 Silverado SS, 2009 G8 GT
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: PNW
Posts: 13,408
It was a good read thats for sure. Points out the strength and weaknesses of both cars. There is one paragraph that really stuck out to me and gives us Camaro lovers a nice glimpse of hope even though the Mustang "has higher grip".

"The Mustang eats the Camaro alive in midcorner but never threatens to get by. "the only way I could pass him" jones acknowledges "is if he makes a mistake-or I dont mind bruising a door." But vastly superior tourque allows the Camaro to pull clear on acceleration. And on the fast corners in the last segment of the circuit and honking down the front straight, the Camaro runs away and hides"
ShnOmac is offline  
Old 08-19-2009, 01:26 PM   #15
GTAHVIT
Blessed
 
GTAHVIT's Avatar
 
Drives: 2013 Sonic RS MT
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Saint Augustine FL
Posts: 28,850
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrIcky View Post
I don't think GM really wants to fix the understeer. They probably view it as a 'safety feature' to help keep people from killing themselves. I'd guess that if they do decide to fix it, they'd do it with some sort of z28 or track pack.
Maybe so.. But they need to offer something that improves the obvious problem.

I'd love a track pack like option for the SS.


Maybe our Mustang guys can answer this? Is a GT without the track pack significantly worse than with?

GTAHVIT is offline  
Old 08-19-2009, 02:44 PM   #16
2010-1SS-IBM

 
Drives: 1998 Nissan, 2010 Camaro
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Dallas, Tx
Posts: 783
Nice article. Sounded like those guys had fun.

Quote:
Originally Posted by syr74 View Post
Obvious Mustang problems: Brake fade comes in fast and hard, 315hp isn't cutting it, a problem which really shows up in the mid range.
You forgot live rear axle. PJ Jones had the Mustang sideways in that article (first paragraph). If a non-pro driver had done that, the car probably would have been wrecked. Now imagine doing that in a car with 400+ horsepower. Ouch.

Quote:
Originally Posted by syr74 View Post
1: Can the gearing be fine tuned any further to improve acceleration and or fuel economy even a little? Neither area is bad, but more never hurts and BMW and Porsche have made a literal living by making cars go faster than the power ratings would suggest that they should. How? They tweak the gearing until it is genuinely perfect.
Maybe gearing, but I doubt the engine performance can be enhanced much. It's a mature Corvette engine already.

Quote:
Originally Posted by syr74 View Post
2: Where can we drop some weight. It is possible that meaningful weight loss cannot be had, but it never hurts to try.
I kind of doubt this, at least not without increasing the cost substantially. If anything, the Mustang is underweight because of it's less powerful engine.

Don't forget the GT500 weighs 100lbs more than the Camaro, and 400lbs more than the GT. Weight appears to be the thing that has to give in order to put that much affordable power into these cars.

Quote:
Originally Posted by syr74 View Post
3: Obviously, tweak the suspension heavily. Adjust rear spring rates, chage tire size, but solve the understeer issue. Car needs to be more nuetral all the way through the corner.
From what the aftermarket guys are saying, the understeer appears to be fairly easy to solve.

Last edited by 2010-1SS-IBM; 08-19-2009 at 02:45 PM. Reason: Spelling
2010-1SS-IBM is offline  
Old 08-19-2009, 02:49 PM   #17
rayhawk

 
rayhawk's Avatar
 
Drives: Trailblazer SS
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Miami
Posts: 891
Quote:
Originally Posted by GTAHVIT View Post
Maybe so.. But they need to offer something that improves the obvious problem.

I'd love a track pack like option for the SS.


Maybe our Mustang guys can answer this? Is a GT without the track pack significantly worse than with?

There are Mustang guys here? On a Camaro forum? No way, they must have better things to do than hang out here.

__________________
Hooters, hooters, yum yum yum, hooters, hooters on a girl thats dumb.
-Al Bundy

07 2WD Trailblazer SS, LS1 E-fans, 4" FWI, pcmforless tune
72 VW Beetle, 2275cc, Dual 44 IDF's
rayhawk is offline  
Old 08-19-2009, 02:56 PM   #18
GTAHVIT
Blessed
 
GTAHVIT's Avatar
 
Drives: 2013 Sonic RS MT
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Saint Augustine FL
Posts: 28,850
Quote:
Originally Posted by rayhawk View Post
There are Mustang guys here? On a Camaro forum? No way, they must have better things to do than hang out here.

No kidding


And you can never find one when you need em...

GTAHVIT is offline  
Old 08-19-2009, 03:02 PM   #19
Sleestack
 
Sleestack's Avatar
 
Drives: '07 SRT8 SuperBee, '09 GT500
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Austin, Tx
Posts: 684
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2010-1SS-IBM View Post
You forgot live rear axle. PJ Jones had the Mustang sideways in that article (first paragraph). If a non-pro driver had done that, the car probably would have been wrecked. Now imagine doing that in a car with 400+ horsepower. .
Why imagine? I do it in a car with 500+ HP everyday.


Quote:
Originally Posted by 2010-1SS-IBM View Post

Don't forget the GT500 weighs 100lbs more than the Camaro, and 400lbs more than the GT. Weight appears to be the thing that has to give in order to put that much affordable power into these cars.

The GT500 is not a good proxy for the '11 GT. The Shelby GT500 has an iron block to support ~1000HP at a moderate cost, which adds 100+ lbs. It also has additional weight from the supercharger, intercooler, and associated plumbing (100+ lbs). Lastly, it comes with heavy duty goodies to support crazy power, including upgraded brakes, suspension, and 9.5 in rims all around (~100 lbs).
__________________
Sleestack is offline  
Old 08-19-2009, 03:11 PM   #20
2010-1SS-IBM

 
Drives: 1998 Nissan, 2010 Camaro
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Dallas, Tx
Posts: 783
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sleestack View Post
The GT500 is not a good proxy for the '11 GT. The Shelby GT500 has an iron block to support ~1000HP at a moderate cost, which adds 100+ lbs. It also has additional weight from the supercharger, intercooler, and associated plumbing (100+ lbs). Lastly, it comes with heavy duty goodies to support crazy power, including upgraded brakes, suspension, and 9.5 in rims all around (~100 lbs).
Point is, adding power appears to add weight to all these cars. So don't expect the '11 GT to weight 3500lbs and have 400hp.
2010-1SS-IBM is offline  
Old 08-19-2009, 03:15 PM   #21
KarFan
 
KarFan's Avatar
 
Drives: CARS
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 479
This test falls right in line with all of the other tests we've seen when these two cars are compared. The Track Pack Mustang handles very well and seems to be easier to drive fast but doesn't have the power to take advantage of the SS's understeer issues and is further exposed in a straight line. In the end it's good old preference as both cars will dig into your wallet about the same amount.

Last edited by KarFan; 08-19-2009 at 03:51 PM.
KarFan is offline  
Old 08-19-2009, 03:31 PM   #22
Sleestack
 
Sleestack's Avatar
 
Drives: '07 SRT8 SuperBee, '09 GT500
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Austin, Tx
Posts: 684
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2010-1SS-IBM View Post
Point is, adding power appears to add weight to all these cars. So don't expect the '11 GT to weight 3500lbs and have 400hp.
Agree that better suspension and brakes are both needed, and will add more weight. I also get the sense that Ford may be positioning the Mustang as more of a sports car (3500lbs and nimble) than a grand touring car (4000lbs and comfortable), so they may have some tricks up their sleeves if this is truly their strategy.
__________________
Sleestack is offline  
Old 08-19-2009, 03:36 PM   #23
2010-1SS-IBM

 
Drives: 1998 Nissan, 2010 Camaro
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Dallas, Tx
Posts: 783
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sleestack View Post
Agree that better suspension and brakes are both needed, and will add more weight. I also get the sense that Ford may be positioning the Mustang as more of a sports car (3500lbs and nimble) than a grand touring car (4000lbs and comfortable), so they may have some tricks up their sleeves if this is truly their strategy.
Could be. If they can pull it off, kudos to them. If they can keep everything else relatively the same (weight, cost, handling, etc...) and add 100hp, that'll be quite an accomplishment. And one hell of a ride.
2010-1SS-IBM is offline  
Old 08-19-2009, 05:01 PM   #24
attymf
 
attymf's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 SS/RS 6M
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: LI, NY
Posts: 700
Great article. Seams like the cars are evenly matched, each with their own particular advantages.

To those of you who argue if Ford does this (more HP) or Chevy does that (better handling) and thus their car is better need to remember that the two companies could certainly and easily add it but it costs the buyer money. The main thing is car sales and profit. Both companies made great cars for the money and I am happy for that. Wouldn't be fun if one car was clearly better than the other. The driver will most likely make the difference.

For those with deep pockets there is the aftermarket.
attymf is offline  
Old 08-19-2009, 05:32 PM   #25
AZCamaroFan
Coming Soon
 
AZCamaroFan's Avatar
 
Drives: Camaros
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 18,138
To say the SS wasn't intended to be a great gt car is silly. Of course it was. They just had an overweight structure to deal with.
AZCamaroFan 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
OFFICIAL 2010 Camaro Specifications (full tech specs PDF inside) Tran Guides, Manuals, Bulletins, Documentation Archive 394 06-11-2010 07:16 PM
2010 camaro SS vs. 2010 Mustang GT/Track Package Devil-eyes Chevy Camaro vs... 57 03-17-2009 08:30 PM
New Shelby Mustang revealed as race-only 'R Model' Sizzox General Automotive + Other Cars Discussion 4 01-30-2009 10:12 PM
Edmunds: 2010 Ford Mustang First Look Scotsman General Automotive + Other Cars Discussion 32 11-23-2008 10:55 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:35 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.