Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums - Camaro5.com
 
Solo Performance
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 09-21-2009, 06:45 PM   #1871
Stew


 
Drives: 92 Luminadead/01 Dakota/97 F150 4x4
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Eastern, Ky
Posts: 3,789
Quote:
Originally Posted by S8ER01Z View Post
I won't go as far as saying Ford and Chrysler are better but I see where you are going and agree. My LT1 4th Gen Camaro Z28 dropped the 4L60E at ~78K... The rearend went shortly after, airpump, a/c compressor... well actually I could probably name a shorter list of things that didn't fail.

CamaroFemme - Trying to claim Mustangs are junk is just a bad path to go down. GM cars are far from bullet proof... don't worry your honeymoon will be over soon and you will see.
Each person has different experiences, IMHO they overall pretty close. I will say my 96 LT1 Caprice was pretty good, needed a fuel pump and had the wonderful gunk buildup in the coolant tank,but that was it, oh and the window track breaking. But I miss that big old boat, not a better car for long trips, exept maybe my 96 Roadmaster LOL.
Stew is offline  
Old 09-21-2009, 07:23 PM   #1872
S8ER01Z
 
Drives: Camaro Z28
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Quad Cities
Posts: 429
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stew View Post
Each person has different experiences, IMHO they overall pretty close.
exactly.
__________________
2001 Camaro Z28 M6 (MTI Lid/FRA, LS6 Cam, BBK LTs)
S8ER01Z is offline  
Old 09-21-2009, 07:29 PM   #1873
Black5thgen
Account Suspended
 
Drives: 2007 C6
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: chicago
Posts: 2,252
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stew View Post
Every test I have seen put the camaro at 4.7 to 60, the mustang at 4.9, camaro at 13.0 and the mustang at 13.5, that is not that much difference
Even at 5/10's that's 5 car lengths. Not close when you think about it. Car and driver I think ran a 13.6 with the mustang and 13.0 with the Camaro. 2/10's would be close. half a second is not.
Black5thgen is offline  
Old 09-21-2009, 09:58 PM   #1874
CamaroFemme

 
CamaroFemme's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 Black Camaro 2SS/RS
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 1,879
Quote:
Originally Posted by S8ER01Z View Post
yeah they only made 110,000 F-bodies that year...and all of them brokedown... sure glad it didn't have anything to do with CAW and that union contract. My point was it has nothing to do with the 'brand' or 'maker'... every car is different. Some are perfect and some fall apart. You can hardly claim all of them are faulty when there is nothing to back it up. Avoiding ALL fords because of problems had with 1 or 2 cars is ignorance IMHO.
Well, I think the maker has SOMETHING to do with it! But nah, I'm not claiming they're all faulty, but if you heard from a few people close to you that Product X was the worst they'd ever had, and you had had a damn fine experience with their competition, I daresay that would affect your buying practices.

Quote:
Sorry.. just paraphrasing...you certainly didn't say anything good.
If I hear anything good about a Ford automobile from anyone close to me, I'll let you know, how 'bout that?
CamaroFemme is offline  
Old 09-21-2009, 10:02 PM   #1875
syr74
Account Suspended
 
Drives: Thunderbird
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 951
Quote:
Originally Posted by Black5thgen View Post
Did you even bother to read my link where it states that the crash tests will be measured using a different ram to better represent a real car and new cars will have to use more body bracing to pass the inspection.
I read it, but I didn't learn anything new. Remember that revised side impact ratings system and those new standards I discussed? Think that new ram might have something to do with that?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Black5thgen
That is where the added weight will come from, not the airbags that you're stuck on so passionately.
You are drawing conclusions out of thin air. Nowhere does the NHTSA dictate how automotive manufacturers must modify their cars in order to pass the new test, assuming the cars need to be modified in the first place. There is no mandate for side impact reinforcement, just revised test measures and a new ratings system. Mustang breezes through the current test and will do just fine in the new one. Like I said, the only likely changes are side head airbags for the rear seat passenger, which is minor to say the least.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Black5thgen
As for your question about how much the airbags will weigh i'll say 250lbs. They new mustang will weight 250lbs. more than the current.
Wow, side headbags weigh 250lb? By those standards if you took all the airbags out of the Mustang GT it would weigh about 2500lb.
syr74 is offline  
Old 09-21-2009, 10:06 PM   #1876
levi1922

 
levi1922's Avatar
 
Drives: 2LT RS CGM
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,379
Quote:
Originally Posted by syr74 View Post
I read it, but I didn't learn anything new. Remember that revised side impact ratings system and those new standards I discussed? Think that new ram might have something to do with that?



You are drawing conclusions out of thin air. Nowhere does the NHTSA dictate how automotive manufacturers must modify their cars in order to pass the new test, assuming the cars need to be modified in the first place. There is no mandate for side impact reinforcement, just revised test measures and a new ratings system. Mustang breezes through the current test and will do just fine in the new one. Like I said, the only likely changes are side head airbags for the rear seat passenger, which is minor to say the least.
in his defense, i did read something, somewhere, on a magazine, a longg time ago, about the mustang needing more structural reinforcements. i cannot cite a source for this right now, i will look though.
__________________
levi1922 is offline  
Old 09-21-2009, 10:11 PM   #1877
syr74
Account Suspended
 
Drives: Thunderbird
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 951
Quote:
Originally Posted by levi1922 View Post
in his defense, i did read something, somewhere, on a magazine, a longg time ago, about the mustang needing more structural reinforcements. i cannot cite a source for this right now, i will look though.
I appreciate the thought out response, but to be honest, if it isn't Ford saying that the Mustang needs reinforcement then it doesn't mean anything. The only three bodies in any position to know whether the Mustang would need structural reinforcements are Ford, the IIHS, and the NHTSA since they are the only three bodies testing these cars. If Mustang barely passed the current test then it might be obvious, but since Mustang breezes through we are in a position where the oonly golks who could possibly know this are those three bodies.

Honestly, I think the Mustang needing new structural reinforcement for side impact is a rumor that was spawned from GM's explanations regarding why the Camaro weighs so much.
syr74 is offline  
Old 09-21-2009, 10:35 PM   #1878
meanmike
Account Suspended
 
Drives: FIRST ON RACE DAY
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Indiana
Posts: 1,170
Quote:
Originally Posted by syr74 View Post
I appreciate the thought out response, but to be honest, if it isn't Ford saying that the Mustang needs reinforcement then it doesn't mean anything. The only three bodies in any position to know whether the Mustang would need structural reinforcements are Ford, the IIHS, and the NHTSA since they are the only three bodies testing these cars. If Mustang barely passed the current test then it might be obvious, but since Mustang breezes through we are in a position where the oonly golks who could possibly know this are those three bodies.

Honestly, I think the Mustang needing new structural reinforcement for side impact is a rumor that was spawned from GM's explanations regarding why the Camaro weighs so much.
Honestly I thought the extra weight was so it would have a 5 star crash rating. I guess they missed the mark on that one though.
meanmike is offline  
Old 09-21-2009, 11:09 PM   #1879
Black5thgen
Account Suspended
 
Drives: 2007 C6
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: chicago
Posts: 2,252
Quote:
Originally Posted by syr74 View Post
Wow, side headbags weigh 250lb? By those standards if you took all the airbags out of the Mustang GT it would weigh about 2500lb.
Since according to you all the mustang needs is airbags and I believe it will gain 250lbs. then each airbag must weigh 125lbs. I guess we'll have to wait and see. I'm sure you'll be right, you seem to have all the answers.
Black5thgen is offline  
Old 09-21-2009, 11:55 PM   #1880
syr74
Account Suspended
 
Drives: Thunderbird
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 951
Quote:
Originally Posted by Black5thgen View Post
Since according to you all the mustang needs is airbags and I believe it will gain 250lbs. then each airbag must weigh 125lbs. I guess we'll have to wait and see. I'm sure you'll be right, you seem to have all the answers.
This is what drives me crazy. If you think the Camaro is better I have no issue with that. If you think the Camaro will still outperform the 2011 Mustang when the 5.0L shows up I take no issue with that, opinions make the world go 'round. That said, bring me something more than simple rhetoric to make your case. Care about your opinion enough to make certain that it is a credible opinion.

As for me having all the answers, I learned something from this since I didn't know the Mustang only got four stars for the rear side impact rating, likely because it simply isn't a very broadly publicized rating. Will it still pass under the new regs? Maybe, but it would likely do so poorly that Ford would never let it slide by so yeah, we are getting head bags for the rear seat passengers.

The more we all know about our cars the more we'll enjoy them, and the more we'll enjoy the rivalry.
syr74 is offline  
Old 09-21-2009, 11:57 PM   #1881
Black5thgen
Account Suspended
 
Drives: 2007 C6
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: chicago
Posts: 2,252
Quote:
Originally Posted by syr74 View Post
The more we all know about our cars the more we'll enjoy them, and the more we'll enjoy the rivalry.
I'll agree with that and agree to disagree.
Black5thgen is offline  
Old 09-22-2009, 12:19 AM   #1882
fazm
 
Drives: ex-500hp v6 mustang
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: arizona
Posts: 606
Quote:
Originally Posted by S8ER01Z View Post
13.1 really? Pretty sure this was just drug up on mustangforums and it was a 13.3 (Evan Smith went 13.3 @ 103mph, and GeneK busted out a 13.3 @ 104mph) ... there is a 13.2 pass with no slip or anything else out there but I've never heard of a 13.1 pass before. Do you have any proof?
i remember it being brought up a while back, i thought there was a 13.19 stock.

if not my bad.

but even at 13.3 to 12.8 thats .5 not .8

not bad for 126 horsepower deficit

is the camaro faster? absolutely. trap speed alone shows that
fazm is offline  
Old 09-22-2009, 01:06 AM   #1883
derklug

 
derklug's Avatar
 
Drives: 12 Boss 302
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Grand Rapids, Mi
Posts: 1,371
CAFE will determine the new muscle car wars, but it is good to have them back for now. As a side note, the best car I ever owned as far as reliability was a 92 Tempo. I prayed that it would quit so I could justify buying a new car.
derklug is offline  
Old 09-22-2009, 01:34 AM   #1884
latinoslife
 
Drives: silver ice 2010 camaro 2lt RS
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: dyer, indiana
Posts: 136
no way 315 that how much the gts have
__________________

[IMG][CENTER][/IMG]
latinoslife is offline  
Old 09-22-2009, 01:36 AM   #1885
ArcAngel


 
ArcAngel's Avatar
 
Drives: 07 Black Cobalt SS/SC
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Manalapan-NJ
Posts: 2,872
Send a message via AIM to ArcAngel
Quote:
Originally Posted by latinoslife View Post
no way 315 that how much the gts have
Bro where you been the 2011 GT's will have 400HP/400TQ
__________________
Through HIM you believe in GOD, who raised HIM from the dead and Glorified him..
ArcAngel is offline  
Old 09-22-2009, 01:38 AM   #1886
latinoslife
 
Drives: silver ice 2010 camaro 2lt RS
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: dyer, indiana
Posts: 136
ooh idk about the 2011 gts lol im saying the current gts but if thats true then damn chevy got it in the ass w no lube lol
__________________

[IMG][CENTER][/IMG]
latinoslife is offline  
Old 09-22-2009, 08:16 AM   #1887
2010-1SS-IBM

 
Drives: 1998 Nissan, 2010 Camaro
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Dallas, Tx
Posts: 827
Quote:
Originally Posted by syr74 View Post
I appreciate the thought out response, but to be honest, if it isn't Ford saying that the Mustang needs reinforcement then it doesn't mean anything. The only three bodies in any position to know whether the Mustang would need structural reinforcements are Ford, the IIHS, and the NHTSA since they are the only three bodies testing these cars. If Mustang barely passed the current test then it might be obvious, but since Mustang breezes through we are in a position where the oonly golks who could possibly know this are those three bodies.

Honestly, I think the Mustang needing new structural reinforcement for side impact is a rumor that was spawned from GM's explanations regarding why the Camaro weighs so much.
I'm surprised you make that argument considering all you know about the new Mustang is conjecture and rumor. How about we stop calling each other out and just get back to facts:

Camaro > Mustang.
2010-1SS-IBM 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 05:46 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.