Stock 2010 GT500 vs. Magnuson 2SS

[Ninjak]

Originally Posted by blackedout010

that was a challenger rt not an srt8

Hmm ok good call you are correct there. My mistake.

[blackedout010]

Originally Posted by Ninjak

Hmm ok good call you are correct there. My mistake.

though honestly i love the challenger its just to damn heavy..

[MontyCarlo]

Originally Posted by Ninjak

Its beating a SRT8. On the track driven by real people, and in the books. MT had the 2010 GT stang in second place(photo finish) behind the camaro and AHEAD of the SRT8. The Camaro is ahead, but not by the margins people thought it would be.

Yep, the stang is keeping up with its lil ol 289...and handling on the same level with its live axle. That's on the GT level. the GT500 is alone at the top of the Mountain pony car for now.

Who thought it would be a huge margin? We've been hearing from reviews for quite a while now that the Camaro just barely edges out the Mustang, and the one that's really left behind is the Challenger. It's impressive that the Mustang is almost as good with its lower horsepower. There aren't a lot of people who'd try to say the Mustang's a failure on the track - just people who get severely annoyed with Mustang fans who insist the Camaro's narrow victories don't count. The "yeah, you won, but you should've won by a lot more, and you didn't, so really you lost" idiots.

[garagelogic]

So, it looks like my original estimate of 550-560 crank hp for the Magnuson-Camaro was pretty close.

[blackedout010]

Originally Posted by garagelogic

So, it looks like my original estimate of 550-560 crank hp was pretty close.

yea most likely. i still havent seen where they are out yet though. some of on svtperformance are saying end of this month.

[Ninjak]

Originally Posted by MontyCarlo

Who thought it would be a huge margin? We've been hearing from reviews for quite a while now that the Camaro just barely edges out the Mustang, and the one that's really left behind is the Challenger. It's impressive that the Mustang is almost as good with its lower horsepower. There aren't a lot of people who'd try to say the Mustang's a failure on the track - just people who get severely annoyed with Mustang fans who insist the Camaro's narrow victories don't count. The "yeah, you won, but you should've won by a lot more, and you didn't, so really you lost" idiots.

I would agree with you here. To quote ol VIn.."It does not matter if you win by a inch or a mile...winning is winning" Its just that many in both camps...use the HP argument for everything. There are people in this thread that thinks Camaro's will crush Mustang by car length's simply because of the greater HP numbers and as we see, that is simply not true.

Camaro I feel will be a great mod car again..(if GM does not screw it up) and the battles will rage on But in the end...is that not why we are car guys ? REAL car guys always appreciate a spirited convo about cars, and understands what another car can do. That's a good thing.

[lil_chef]

are you not all comparing the camaro's "winter times" to the mustangs more "normal temp" times? as much as i love both cars the camaro definitely has more potential to pull away during more ideal conditions.

instead of being 3 tenths quicker to 60 it could be more like 4 or 5 tenths quicker. and considering 0-60 times thats like a whole nother class of performance

[garagelogic]

Originally Posted by lil_chef

are you not all comparing the camaro's "winter times" to the mustangs more "normal temp" times? as much as i love both cars the camaro definitely has more potential to pull away during more ideal conditions.

instead of being 3 tenths quicker to 60 it could be more like 4 or 5 tenths quicker. and considering 0-60 times thats like a whole nother class of performance

Would people quit using the "season" thing as a talking point?!

Yes, we are all aware that the Camaro test times were ran in winter (i.e.cold) weather and the Mustangs were made in the spring. However, as anyone who has even basic knowledge of driving a performance car can tell you, colder air will net you more power from the engine.

Using your example, it is likely that whatever time was lost by testing the Camaro with "cold tires" was likely offset by the fact that the engine was ingesting cold air versus the Mustang that was taking in warmer air in the spring but might have had better traction because of the temperatures.

Quit magazine racing and see if you can arrange to have both cars on the same track on the same day this summer/fall and debate those results. My feeling is that 8 out of 10 times the Camaro is going to come out on top.

[1320junkie]

Cold air, sticky track, lower tire pressure in the rear, add some air to the fronts..and have at it..
Shifting style plays a big factor in manuals times also...some people man handle the shifter...they push clutch all the way in all the way out(which isnt the right way..all of the time).etc..etc..all that stuff matters in tenths of time

[classicam]

I can see alot of buyers remorse in camaro owners futures. If your wanting a car for straight line performance and can resist the urge to drop that much change on a new car you will be better off in the future. The MSRP argument is a ricer argument and will mean nothing on the street when your ass is handed too you. How many times do you hear MSRP brought up during street races between 2 to 3 yr old cars.

The smart money is to pick the best platform for what you want and get a 1 to 2 yr old model, whether it be a GT500, Z06, or Camaro. In this case the camaro is way out of its league as 07 GT500's with low miles are in the low 30's and with small change make crazy reliable power. The Z06 needs no explanation. You can even dump money into your 4th gen or even a 1st gen.

Im a chevy fan, but there is no way in hell I would buy the 2010 with the hopes of turning it into a street brawler. The GT500 is at least able to overcome the massive weight with superior components from the factory.

Im not trying to take sides just give it some serious thoughts before you put down your hard earned money while caught up in the big hype.

[pharmd]

Originally Posted by classicam

I can see alot of buyers remorse in camaro owners futures. If your wanting a car for straight line performance and can resist the urge to drop that much change on a new car you will be better off in the future. The MSRP argument is a ricer argument and will mean nothing on the street when your ass is handed too you. How many times do you hear MSRP brought up during street races between 2 to 3 yr old cars.

The smart money is to pick the best platform for what you want and get a 1 to 2 yr old model, whether it be a GT500, Z06, or Camaro. In this case the camaro is way out of its league as 07 GT500's with low miles are in the low 30's and with small change make crazy reliable power. The Z06 needs no explanation. You can even dump money into your 4th gen or even a 1st gen.

Im a chevy fan, but there is no way in hell I would buy the 2010 with the hopes of turning it into a street brawler. The GT500 is at least able to overcome the massive weight with superior components from the factory.

Im not trying to take sides just give it some serious thoughts before you put down your hard earned money while caught up in the big hype.

Very good points....but some folks what to have the latest greatest thing, not the best "value"...A couple year old Vette would be one of the greatest values as would the couple year old GT500, but straight line speed and stuff that everyone has seen before are not what folks have been waiting for since 2002 right?

[GMRULZ]

Originally Posted by garagelogic

Would people quit using the "season" thing as a talking point?!

Yes, we are all aware that the Camaro test times were ran in winter (i.e.cold) weather and the Mustangs were made in the spring. However, as anyone who has even basic knowledge of driving a performance car can tell you, colder air will net you more power from the engine.

Using you example, it is likely that whatever time was lost by testing the Camaro with "cold tires" was likely offset by the fact that the engine was ingesting cold air versus the Mustang that was taking in warmer air in the spring but might have had better traction because of the temperatures.

.

Through my years of drag racing what you say is fact. The only exception possible is on a not very good prepped track on a car that relies on a great 60 foot time to get its low et. I could run quicker in my 1.49 60 foot TA on a warm air prepped track than on a cold day poorly prepped track w/ say a 2.1 60 foot. The slingshot effect of the big stall converter alowed my relatively low hp TA 390rwhp to outrun other high 400 hundred low 500 hp cars that weren`t set up to 60 foot well. But that is the only exception I can think of. Otherwise, you are absolutely on the mark.

[garagelogic]

Originally Posted by GMRULZ

Through my years of drag racing what you say is fact. The only exception possible is on a not very good prepped track on a car that relies on a great 60 foot time to get its low et. I could run quicker in my 1.49 60 foot TA on a warm air prepped track than on a cold day poorly prepped track w/ say a 2.1 60 foot. The slingshot effect of the big stall converter alowed my relatively low hp TA 390rwhp to outrun other high 400 hundred low 500 hp cars that weren`t set up to 60 foot well. But that is the only exception I can think of. Otherwise, you are absolutely on the mark.

Absolutely. Drag races are usually won and lost in the first 60ft. If you are willing/able to setup you car to achieve the best 60ft possible, you are likely to be rewarded with a better timeslip.

A lot of people give me flack for having a car that made ~650rwhp but only managing a PB time, at that level of boost, of 11.18 @ 130mph. But what they don't take into account it the fact that the suspension on my car is set up to maximize its handling and not its 1/8 or 1/4 mile performance.

Sure, I could remove the front swaybar, put some 90/10 and 50/50 struts/shocks on it, get a better tire with more sidewall flex than the 265/4018 M/T drag radial I run now, but I would be giving up something in other areas just for the sake of a better track time. No thanks.

[lil_chef]

Originally Posted by garagelogic

Would people quit using the "season" thing as a talking point?!

Yes, we are all aware that the Camaro test times were ran in winter (i.e.cold) weather and the Mustangs were made in the spring. However, as anyone who has even basic knowledge of driving a performance car can tell you, colder air will net you more power from the engine.

Using your example, it is likely that whatever time was lost by testing the Camaro with "cold tires" was likely offset by the fact that the engine was ingesting cold air versus the Mustang that was taking in warmer air in the spring but might have had better traction because of the temperatures.

Quit magazine racing and see if you can arrange to have both cars on the same track on the same day this summer/fall and debate those results. My feeling is that 8 out of 10 times the Camaro is going to come out on top.

what good is that extra power in the cold air if the cold tires cant put it to the ground?

magazine racing is all i can do considering i own neither car. i should also point out im as big of a fan of the mustang as i am of the camaro. im not trying to put one car down im just attempting to put my opinion in.