The 2011+ Mustang Thread - Page 198 - Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums

cab2g · 04-05-2010, 02:27 PM

Ok so I'm starting to get concerned that the early reviews of the 2011 Mustang are a little biased. I know Ford made some major updates and upgrades, but I just read the Motor Trend comparison between the Mustang and Camaro and the final verdict just seems a little off. Apparently most of the staff at MT would chose the Challenger over the Camaro, putting it in 3rd place... even though it outperforms the Challenger in their tests??

Then there are the numbers in the final table...

Ok the standard gear ratio is 3.55 but MT tested with a 3.73 ratio setup in the track pack... Now this in itself isn't upsetting, because it's a factory option, but wouldn't this change the mileage that the standard 3.55 ratio would give you? MT reports that the mileage should be 17/26... But wouldn't the gear ratio decrease this?

Another thing I noticed is that they said the recommended fuel for the Camaro SS was regular unleaded... I sure hope this was a typo because if they put regular fuel in the car for their tests, that certainly would've hurt the #s!

I may be crazy for being annoyed by this, but people are going to be buying either the standard mustang and get 17/26 mileage with slower accelleration or the 3.73 track pack mustang as tested and get another mileage, but the review as far as I could tell never mentioned that the mileage would be affected by the upgrades purchased.

And that brings me to my last point. If Chevy did one thing to shut up the media in proclaiming that the Mustang was top dog, it would be to offer factory performance upgrades like the Mustang! I wish they would!

I'm not trying to start a one sided discussion about how the Camaro rules or how the Mustang sucks. I just want to know if the articles are really as biased as I think...

source: Motor Trend

ULTRAZLS1 · 04-05-2010, 02:29 PM

It looks like the mustang hooks up better so I can see a 12.3 given the camaros current 12.5 record. 12.3-12.4 would be my guess from Evan Smith and or private owner.

Wasnt the 03 cobras stock record a 12.4? That car had a 114 trap in that run as well.

The IRS must have been really holding back the 03/04 cobras.

a_Username · 04-05-2010, 02:32 PM

I see this new GT being at least on par with the Terminator, and I expect it to be a just a tad quicker.

Sax1031 · 04-05-2010, 02:36 PM

It is biased. Just as the first reviews of the 2010 SS were biased.

The new kid on the block is always drooled over.

ViperTomcat · 04-05-2010, 02:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by a_Username

I see this new GT being at least on par with the Terminator, and I expect it to be a just a tad quicker.

Thats a pretty high goal for a stock 2011 GT. I dont see it quite getting to the point where it pars with the Terminators, but close.

But..that being said..modded 2011 GT > stock Terminator.

nova · 04-05-2010, 02:44 PM

Whoever buys the most ad copy is drooled over is more like it. Its the reason I don't buy any of those worthless rags...

Sax1031 · 04-05-2010, 02:46 PM

Cab on the fuel thing it is a little confusing. Both the GT and SS say recommended fuel is unleaded regular. However I don't know if that is the fuel they were running.

As both the GT and SS would benefit from having premium fuel.

a_Username · 04-05-2010, 02:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ViperTomcat

Thats a pretty high goal for a stock 2011 GT. I dont see it quite getting to the point where it pars with the Terminators, but close.

But..that being said..modded 2011 GT > stock Terminator.

Think of it this way, the Terminators stock record is 12.4 (and if you want to go the magazine route, it's been getting at least 12.8s like the terminator did when it was introduced) and the Camaro's is standing at a 12.5. Going by the assumption the GT proves to be quicker, then it's going to have to at least match the Terminator in order to outdo the SS.

ViperTomcat · 04-05-2010, 02:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by a_Username

Think of it this way, the Terminators stock record is 12.4 (and if you want to go the magazine route, it's been getting at least 12.8s like the terminator did when it was introduced) and the Camaro's is standing at a 12.5. Going by the assumption the GT proves to be quicker, then it's going to have to at least match the Terminator in order to outdo the SS.

True..hadnt considered that.

justincase_2008 · 04-05-2010, 04:41 PM

Just like when they compared the GT500 to the SS and not to the ZL575...

*Milk 1027* · 04-05-2010, 04:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sax1031

Cab on the fuel thing it is a little confusing. Both the GT and SS say recommended fuel is unleaded regular. However I don't know if that is the fuel they were running.

As both the GT and SS would benefit from having premium fuel.

no. The recommended fuel for the SS is premium unleaded.

Sax1031 · 04-05-2010, 04:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Milk 1027

no. The recommended fuel for the SS is premium unleaded.

I was just stating what the article said. It was confusing.

Sax1031 · 04-05-2010, 04:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by justincase_2008

Just like when they compared the GT500 to the SS and not to the ZL575...

Does GM make the ZL575?

garagelogic · 04-05-2010, 04:55 PM

I see a merge coming.

View Poll Results: .
Camaro	0	0%
Mustang	0	0%
Voters: 0. You may not vote on this poll

04-05-2010, 02:27 PM	#2759
cab2g love. my. car. Drives: 2011 2SS/RS Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Chicago Posts: 3,372 View My Garage	Camaro vs Mustang comparison slight inconsistencies Ok so I'm starting to get concerned that the early reviews of the 2011 Mustang are a little biased. I know Ford made some major updates and upgrades, but I just read the Motor Trend comparison between the Mustang and Camaro and the final verdict just seems a little off. Apparently most of the staff at MT would chose the Challenger over the Camaro, putting it in 3rd place... even though it outperforms the Challenger in their tests?? Then there are the numbers in the final table... Ok the standard gear ratio is 3.55 but MT tested with a 3.73 ratio setup in the track pack... Now this in itself isn't upsetting, because it's a factory option, but wouldn't this change the mileage that the standard 3.55 ratio would give you? MT reports that the mileage should be 17/26... But wouldn't the gear ratio decrease this? Another thing I noticed is that they said the recommended fuel for the Camaro SS was regular unleaded... I sure hope this was a typo because if they put regular fuel in the car for their tests, that certainly would've hurt the #s! I may be crazy for being annoyed by this, but people are going to be buying either the standard mustang and get 17/26 mileage with slower accelleration or the 3.73 track pack mustang as tested and get another mileage, but the review as far as I could tell never mentioned that the mileage would be affected by the upgrades purchased. And that brings me to my last point. If Chevy did one thing to shut up the media in proclaiming that the Mustang was top dog, it would be to offer factory performance upgrades like the Mustang! I wish they would! I'm not trying to start a one sided discussion about how the Camaro rules or how the Mustang sucks. I just want to know if the articles are really as biased as I think... source: Motor Trend __________________

04-05-2010, 02:44 PM	#2764
nova Drives: 2010 Camaro 2SS/RS, VR, PW, WR Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Huntsville, AL Posts: 838 View My Garage	Whoever buys the most ad copy is drooled over is more like it. Its the reason I don't buy any of those worthless rags... __________________ 2010 2SS/RS, M6,VR,White Rally's,Polished Wheels Mods: skip shift eliminator (hey everybody's gotta start somewhere ) crappily painted engine cover...

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Camaro VS Mustang Mega Thread	Beau Tie	Chevy Camaro vs...	3644	03-09-2012 08:45 PM
Gran Turismo 5... No Camaro?	5thGenOwner	5th Gen Camaro SS LS LT General Discussions	111	12-06-2011 11:06 AM
Official 2011 Mustang GT info released	nester7929	General Automotive + Other Cars Discussion	81	12-28-2009 04:13 PM

04-05-2010, 02:29 PM	#2760
ULTRAZLS1 Drives: 14 Silverado LTZ Z71, 16 Camaro SS Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Jackson, Michigan Posts: 4,418	It looks like the mustang hooks up better so I can see a 12.3 given the camaros current 12.5 record. 12.3-12.4 would be my guess from Evan Smith and or private owner. Wasnt the 03 cobras stock record a 12.4? That car had a 114 trap in that run as well. The IRS must have been really holding back the 03/04 cobras.

04-05-2010, 02:32 PM	#2761
a_Username Drives: 2010 2SS Camaro Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Murfreesboro, TN Posts: 3,890 View My Garage	I see this new GT being at least on par with the Terminator, and I expect it to be a just a tad quicker.

04-05-2010, 02:36 PM	#2762
Sax1031 Drives: 2000 Mustang GT Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Elgin,SC Posts: 2,707	It is biased. Just as the first reviews of the 2010 SS were biased. The new kid on the block is always drooled over.

04-05-2010, 02:46 PM	#2765
Sax1031 Drives: 2000 Mustang GT Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Elgin,SC Posts: 2,707	Cab on the fuel thing it is a little confusing. Both the GT and SS say recommended fuel is unleaded regular. However I don't know if that is the fuel they were running. As both the GT and SS would benefit from having premium fuel.

04-05-2010, 04:41 PM	#2768
justincase_2008 The Freak Kid Drives: ABM 2010 SS/RS White strips Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: Tampa Posts: 1,212 View My Garage	Just like when they compared the GT500 to the SS and not to the ZL575...

04-05-2010, 04:55 PM	#2772
garagelogic Account Suspended Drives: 2010 Shelby GT500 Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Tennessee Posts: 1,686 View My Garage	I see a merge coming.