Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyberfan
Yeah the R/T has more weight and less horsepower than the SS. The overpriced SRT-8 has more weight and equivalent horsepower. But the GT-500s have over 500 horsepower and are very expensive- coupes sticker starting in the mid-40s and last time I heard dealers were still marking them up. So the GT-500 should perform the best of those 3. The Mustang GT has a horsepower deficiency but is priced closer to the other ones in the test.
But I agree with others that the cars they compared are not similar enough and that comparison doesn't mean much to me.
|
The GT500 going rate is 40k(still more than an SS) and yes it would perform the best. at 40 its a pretty good buy, and the new 2010s are going to be breaking into the 11's 1/4 with a good ddriver.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Icewinds
Best time recorded by a turbocharged, race-tuned Cobalt on Nurburgring is a whooping 8:22.
A green engined, stock Camaro SS did 8:20 a few days ago.
I guess it all depends on what you call "just fine." 8:22 is awesome for a FWD, but its nowhere near the standard for a true performance car.
|
The new cobalt SS is IMO a very good bang for buck performance wise. I want to hopefully atleast test one out someday.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Italianwhiplash
Indeed and I don't anyone would by a barebones car. Lets be realistic everyone wants best of the best when they go buy a car. (best in its class). I wouldn't get a bare bones camaro i would just feel like the wait was for settling for lesss.
|
for a lot of people though they want it that way. Buying one barebones = less weight and more money for mods.
Quote:
Originally Posted by fad1
to be honest, now im longing for a SRT vs. SS. Just want to see that shootout.
|
The SS im pretty sure would win, I think they'd have to include the GT500 in it too though so they could have "the big three"
That would be sweet