2010 Mustang

[headpunter]

Originally Posted by gladiatoro

your forgetting the weigh issue , the STANG WILL BE MUCH LIGHTER than the MARO which makes a BIG DIFFERENCE IN PERFORMANCE it will be a close race don't kid yourself Ford knows it has to compete in order to maintain MARKET DOMINANCE

[Georgie]

sorry bud it'll be 200lbs lighter. 20 hp won't cut it when you line em up. make sure you get her # when she reams you though lots of women like to take care of broken men

[Congoman775]

Originally Posted by Georgie

sorry bud it'll be 200lbs lighter. 20 hp won't cut it when you line em up. make sure you get her # when she reams you though lots of women like to take care of broken men

A. I'm Calling bullshit.

IF the rustang has a 5.0 it adds weight. If they want higher quality materials, that adds weight. If they adjust platform/suspension/gearbox, that adds weight.

you saying the car will DROP 200 lbs is like Nissan telling us about how their GTR can really go around a track faster than a GT2.

And if it doesnt add a 5.0, then it will loose horribly to the camaro to an extent that would embarrass the whole company.

B. its 22hp, 45lbs of torque for less than a 100lbs difference between the two. If you dont think that matters, than your a good example of the people who will still make the mistake of buying a mooostang.

[Georgie]

"weight" and see!!! fords got a weight saving program across the board plus the refresh is just going to be a smaller car. the tq will of course give the edge to craparo at high speeds but when you line em up the hp advantage aint gonna be enough to beat it on the strip... and wouldn't it be nice to have a "21st" century DOHC 4V motor since people are so concerned bout having modern technology?

[syr74]

Originally Posted by Congoman775

I understand your line of thinking.
and im glad you dont object to the mustang being a Chick Car

ROFL. I appreciate your enthusiasm. Personally, I wouldn't call the Mustang a 'chick car', but then I wouldn't call it a 'guy's car' either although I do think there are versions which lend themselves to both of those descriptors (GT500 is certainly more of a guy thing while the 'pink' versions throughout time obviously appeal more to the ladies) This goes back to the point I was trying to make above, I don't think the Mustang as a whole is limited in scope like most other cars have been and still are. IMO the car transcends those kinds of boundaries, and is in a way the modern fulfillment of the Model T promise for sporty 2+2's. It is truly the performance car for every man...and chick.

That said I get your point, and I actually would call the new Camaro a guys car. In other words I don't expect the new Camaro to hold much appeal for women, but then neither did the fourth gen. In fact, I think the closest the Camaro ever got to universal appeal, at least in terms of the sexes, was with the third gen model. I think the best comparison is to say that the current Mustang is a pony car in the purest sense while the new Camaro is more of a muscle-car, pony-car cross breed arguably slanting more toward the muscle side of the equation.

That said, this is the one respect where I truly worry about the new Camaro. Limiting appeal of the car so exclusively to men doesn't really seem like a good long term strategy to me and it certainly didn't work well for the fourth gen car...but then GM may know something I don't this go-round and they do claim to have fairly modest sales expectations which seems to be in line with a more niche oriented product.

Originally Posted by congoman

No. It wont be "MUCH LIGHTER"

it already breaches the scales at 3590lbs, give 100lbs for an engine, and 100 lbs for the sake of saftey... NOT COUNTING the 100's of lbs that will be added once ford gets around to developing a 21st century IRS, your already at 3790 which is basically 3800. think of it this way... The GT500 is going to have a lighter engine than the new GT's.

What would make you think that the GT500 uses or will use a lighter engine than the new GT? I think you may be confusing the upcoming 5.0L with the new Boss/Hurricane engine family which is completely unrelated. The 5.0L is a rather involved update of the existing modular engine family the 4.6L is currently a part of. Put simply, it is functionally a very different engine in several respects, but in terms of packaging and weight a 5.0L DOHC is very similar to what the old 4.6L DOHC engines were. (the 5.0L may be a bit lighter since Ford did believe early on that they could trim some fat from the cylinder heads but I wouldn't expect much) To put it simply, the aluminum 4.6L, SOHC, 3-valve V8 used in the current Mustang GT is nowhere near 100lb lighter than even an all aluminum 4.6L DOHC 4-valve (the difference isn't even 50lb for that matter). The GT500's 5.4L is a boat anchor comparatively speaking, and still would be even with an aluminum bloc.

As for safety upgrades, I think this has been blown a bit out of proportion. They aren't unexpected, they wont affect the revised S197 at all, and they probably wont hamper the GWRD model coming for 2012+ either. Ford already tests their cars for most of the new regulations, and I would be more than a little surprised if the Mustang couldn't meet the majority of them as is. As for the IRS setup, it could add significant weight, but the most likely candidate for the Mustang's IRS...a control blade setup....wouldn't and the design has gained a great deal of favor at Ford because of it's extremely light weight, overall effectiveness, and low cost.

To sum it up...the 2011 GT is going to be a ~3600lb car in base form, and likely wont gain much from there unless larger wheels or an auto tran are added because most major options appear to be going standard for 2010. I would think a fully loaded auto trans car will weight in at about 3750lb. Across the board I would say you are looking at a 300lb weight difference between the 2011 Camaro SS and the 2011 Mustang GT.

What will the GRWD-based 2010MY car weigh? That is still a matter for folks who read tea leaves. Ford has stated that they expect every model to lose at least 250lb during their next, major redesign with the goal being more than that....250lb is a minimum expectation. In other words, Ford expects a base, 6M, V8-powered, Mustang GT to weigh in at a maximum of ~3250lb when it transfers to the GRWD platform. Whether or not they can hit that goal is an issue I cannot comment on one way or another.

Originally Posted by congoman

. its 22hp, 45lbs of torque for less than a 100lbs difference between the two. If you dont think that matters, than your a good example of the people who will still make the mistake of buying a mooostang.

All cheer-leading aside there is absolutely no way the difference will be less than 200lb between the 2011 Mustang GT and Camaro SS, the numbers just don't support such a notion. In real world trim I think we are looking at more like 300lb, and potentially a little more than that. As for a 22hp, 45lb-ft of torque difference....do remember that 400hp and 360lb-ft of torque are minimum numbers. Output will be above that, we just don't know by how much. Either way power to weight numbers appear likely to be very close between these two.

I personally think the acceleration contest between the Camaro and the Mustang is going to get extremely interesting during the 2010CY, and while I appreciate loyalty and enthusiasm I think the GM faithful are doing themselves a disservice when they assume this is going to be the standard, n/a Mod vs LS scenario we've seen over the last decade and change. The fuel situation is different, the platforms are very different, and Ford's upcoming 5.0L V8 is very different.

Originally Posted by headpunter

Mustang owners are always a little hurt that the Camaro is always better.

In all seriousness, come 2011 I think we'll be hearing a lot about the Camaro's IRS from GM, but very little about how the SS model's acceleration compares to the Mustang GT. At the moment I think the numbers slant a little in the Mustang's favor, and I think the current fuel situation has put GM into a position where they can no longer simply solve the issue by throwing more cubes, larger ports, and/or a bigger cam at the LS series V8 even if the GT wasn't a problem. Can GM answer? Sure. Will it be as easy as it once was? No.

IMO the pony/muscle car wars are about to get very interesting again.

[Congoman775]

Originally Posted by syr74

ROFL. I appreciate your enthusiasm. Personally, I wouldn't call the Mustang a 'chick car', but then I wouldn't call it a 'guy's car' either although I do think there are versions which lend themselves to both of those descriptors (GT500 is certainly more of a guy thing while the 'pink' versions throughout time obviously appeal more to the ladies) This goes back to the point I was trying to make above, I don't think the Mustang as a whole is limited in scope like most other cars have been and still are. IMO the car transcends those kinds of boundaries, and is in a way the modern fulfillment of the Model T promise for sporty 2+2's. It is truly the performance car for every man...and chick.

That said I get your point, and I actually would call the new Camaro a guys car. In other words I don't expect the new Camaro to hold much appeal for women, but then neither did the fourth gen. In fact, I think the closest the Camaro ever got to universal appeal, at least in terms of the sexes, was with the third gen model. I think the best comparison is to say that the current Mustang is a pony car in the purest sense while the new Camaro is more of a muscle-car, pony-car cross breed arguably slanting more toward the muscle side of the equation.

That said, this is the one respect where I truly worry about the new Camaro. Limiting appeal of the car so exclusively to men doesn't really seem like a good long term strategy to me and it certainly didn't work well for the fourth gen car...but then GM may know something I don't this go-round and they do claim to have fairly modest sales expectations which seems to be in line with a more niche oriented product.



What would make you think that the GT500 uses or will use a lighter engine than the new GT? I think you may be confusing the upcoming 5.0L with the new Boss/Hurricane engine family which is completely unrelated. The 5.0L is a rather involved update of the existing modular engine family the 4.6L is currently a part of. Put simply, it is functionally a very different engine in several respects, but in terms of packaging and weight a 5.0L DOHC is very similar to what the old 4.6L DOHC engines were. (the 5.0L may be a bit lighter since Ford did believe early on that they could trim some fat from the cylinder heads but I wouldn't expect much) To put it simply, the aluminum 4.6L, SOHC, 3-valve V8 used in the current Mustang GT is nowhere near 100lb lighter than even an all aluminum 4.6L DOHC 4-valve (the difference isn't even 50lb for that matter). The GT500's 5.4L is a boat anchor comparatively speaking, and still would be even with an aluminum bloc.

As for safety upgrades, I think this has been blown a bit out of proportion. They aren't unexpected, they wont affect the revised S197 at all, and they probably wont hamper the GWRD model coming for 2012+ either. Ford already tests their cars for most of the new regulations, and I would be more than a little surprised if the Mustang couldn't meet the majority of them as is. As for the IRS setup, it could add significant weight, but the most likely candidate for the Mustang's IRS...a control blade setup....wouldn't and the design has gained a great deal of favor at Ford because of it's extremely light weight, overall effectiveness, and low cost.

To sum it up...the 2011 GT is going to be a ~3600lb car in base form, and likely wont gain much from there unless larger wheels or an auto tran are added because most major options appear to be going standard for 2010. I would think a fully loaded auto trans car will weight in at about 3750lb. Across the board I would say you are looking at a 300lb weight difference between the 2011 Camaro SS and the 2011 Mustang GT.

What will the GRWD-based 2010MY car weigh? That is still a matter for folks who read tea leaves. Ford has stated that they expect every model to lose at least 250lb during their next, major redesign with the goal being more than that....250lb is a minimum expectation. In other words, Ford expects a base, 6M, V8-powered, Mustang GT to weigh in at a maximum of ~3250lb when it transfers to the GRWD platform. Whether or not they can hit that goal is an issue I cannot comment on one way or another.



All cheer-leading aside there is absolutely no way the difference will be less than 200lb between the 2011 Mustang GT and Camaro SS, the numbers just don't support such a notion. In real world trim I think we are looking at more like 300lb, and potentially a little more than that. As for a 22hp, 45lb-ft of torque difference....do remember that 400hp and 360lb-ft of torque are minimum numbers. Output will be above that, we just don't know by how much. Either way power to weight numbers appear likely to be very close between these two.

I personally think the acceleration contest between the Camaro and the Mustang is going to get extremely interesting during the 2010CY, and while I appreciate loyalty and enthusiasm I think the GM faithful are doing themselves a disservice when they assume this is going to be the standard, n/a Mod vs LS scenario we've seen over the last decade and change. The fuel situation is different, the platforms are very different, and Ford's upcoming 5.0L V8 is very different.



In all seriousness, come 2011 I think we'll be hearing a lot about the Camaro's IRS from GM, but very little about how the SS model's acceleration compares to the Mustang GT. At the moment I think the numbers slant a little in the Mustang's favor, and I think the current fuel situation has put GM into a position where they can no longer simply solve the issue by throwing more cubes, larger ports, and/or a bigger cam at the LS series V8 even if the GT wasn't a problem. Can GM answer? Sure. Will it be as easy as it once was? No.

IMO the pony/muscle car wars are about to get very interesting again.

first i would like to point out you spent way too much time on that.

ok. ehem.

A. Camaro is a Dude's car. Mustang is a chick car. There is a difference between a car that 'appeals' to all markets, and a car that is driven primarily by chicks. thus... Chick car.

B. This is hard to really argue on because no one knows what engine will really be in the new car. It will be heavier than the GT, and thats common sense.


C. i think you missunderstood how heavy the SS is... its 3700-3800lbs. thats a 100-200lb difference. not '300' lbs by any stretch.

Now you comfortably equip your GT with the numbers that YOU gave me, and thats 3750.. you pull up next to an SS at 3850 and your going to get a good look at our tail lights.

D. Now lets think about that good ole' Ford quality...

enough said.

E. in 2011 people very well might be talking about a mustangs acceleration. But here are a few things which im sure every mustang owner has heard before, and will continue to hear until ford gets their ducks in a row and joins the 21st century.

yea.. you've got 600hp... too bad you cant turn...

yea... you paid how much?? for a mustang!?

yea... i think thats supposed to fall off...

yea...AW! what a cute mustang!

jesus... another one!?

[Georgie]

yep. nuff said about ford quality:

http://www.automotive.com/auto-news/02/39205/index.html

and how about that 21st century DOHC modular motor, even that SOHC one that's been one of the 10 best engines in the world for 4 years in a row?

[syr74]

Originally Posted by Congoman775

first i would like to point out you spent way too much time on that.

It's a curse

Originally Posted by Congoman

Camaro is a Dude's car. Mustang is a chick car. There is a difference between a car that 'appeals' to all markets, and a car that is driven primarily by chicks. thus... Chick car.

With respect, and appreciation for the work you devoted to your survey. one survey conducted with little to no application or enforcement of statistical norms, which would be impossible given the conditions you indicate, is far from actual evidence of what the ratio of Mustang owners, vis a vis women to men, actually is. Put simply, you think the Mustang to be chick car and that is your prerogative, I disagree.

Originally Posted by congoman

This is hard to really argue on because no one knows what engine will really be in the new car. It will be heavier than the GT, and thats common sense.

Actually, weight of the 'new' engine is very nearly a given considering the foundation for the engine. Everything else makes the end numbers for weight a bit murky, but barring a move to lead suspension components it wont be anything like as heavy as most of the predictions in this thread and the truth is that we really do have a pretty good idea of what final curb weight figures will actually be.

Originally Posted by congoman

I think you misunderstood how heavy the SS is... its 3700-3800lbs. thats a 100-200lb difference. not '300' lbs by any stretch.

Chevy says ~3870lb in base trim IIRC. And since the only current V8-powered, Zeta-based platform mate to the Camaro sold in the North America market, the G8 GT, typically runs across the scale at least 50lb heavier than GM's claimed base curb weight figures I'm unwilling to go out on a limb and assume that GM's estimates are high.

Originally Posted by congoman

Now you comfortably equip your GT with the numbers that YOU gave me, and thats 3750.. you pull up next to an SS at 3850 and your going to get a good look at our tail lights.

You are using a worst case, fully loaded, auto tran Mustang GT estimate, but choose to use a Camaro SS estimate 20lb lower than what GM claims the Camaro weighs in base V8 trim. Based on Gm's own figures my money says a real world, fully-loaded, auto trans Camaro SS crosses the scales noticeably over 4000lb and that even a base, auto trans Camaro SS comes in sitting right on of 4000lb....or an easy 300lb more than the 2011 Mustang GT.

Originally Posted by congoman

D. Now lets think about that good ole' Ford quality...

Um....yeah.

Originally Posted by congoman

in 2011 people very well might be talking about a mustangs acceleration. But here are a few things which im sure every mustang owner has heard before, and will continue to hear until ford gets their ducks in a row and joins the 21st century.

yea.. you've got 600hp... too bad you cant turn...

The current Mustang has won multiple road racing championships, two recently including the Grand-Am Koni championship and the GT4 European Cup. And that is why I love racing, the podium doesn't lie.

Originally Posted by congoman

yea... you paid how much?? for a mustang!?

The 2011 Mustang appears certain to be

...the least expensive V8-powered car on the market by no small measure.
...the least expensive 400hp car on the market, again by no small measure.
...the lightest, rwd, 2+2 on the market in V6 or V8 guise, once again by no small measure.

sounds like a bargain to me

Originally Posted by congoman

jesus... another one!?

GM and Chrysler guys should have special appreciation for that particular comment. Those words consistently being muttered each time monthly Mustang sales figures were released are likely the only reason why the Charger and Camaro exist again at all.

[Congoman775]

Originally Posted by syr74

It's a curse



With respect, and appreciation for the work you devoted to your survey. one survey conducted with little to no application or enforcement of statistical norms, which would be impossible given the conditions you indicate, is far from actual evidence of what the ratio of Mustang owners, vis a vis women to men, actually is. Put simply, you think the Mustang to be chick car and that is your prerogative, I disagree.



Actually, weight of the 'new' engine is very nearly a given considering the foundation for the engine. Everything else makes the end numbers for weight a bit murky, but barring a move to lead suspension components it wont be anything like as heavy as most of the predictions in this thread and the truth is that we really do have a pretty good idea of what final curb weight figures will actually be.



Chevy says ~3870lb in base trim IIRC. And since the only current V8-powered, Zeta-based platform mate to the Camaro sold in the North America market, the G8 GT, typically runs across the scale at least 50lb heavier than GM's claimed base curb weight figures I'm unwilling to go out on a limb and assume that GM's estimates are high.



You are using a worst case, fully loaded, auto tran Mustang GT estimate, but choose to use a Camaro SS estimate 20lb lower than what GM claims the Camaro weighs in base V8 trim. Based on Gm's own figures my money says a real world, fully-loaded, auto trans Camaro SS crosses the scales noticeably over 4000lb and that even a base, auto trans Camaro SS comes in sitting right on of 4000lb....or an easy 300lb more than the 2011 Mustang GT.



Um....yeah.



The current Mustang has won multiple road racing championships, two recently including the Grand-Am Koni championship and the GT4 European Cup. And that is why I love racing, the podium doesn't lie.



The 2011 Mustang appears certain to be

...the least expensive V8-powered car on the market by no small measure.
...the least expensive 400hp car on the market, again by no small measure.
...the lightest, rwd, 2+2 on the market in V6 or V8 guise, once again by no small measure.

sounds like a bargain to me

GM and Chrysler guys should have special appreciation for that particular comment. Those words consistently being muttered each time monthly Mustang sales figures were released are likely the only reason why the Charger and Camaro exist again at all.

oh boy. the fanboy blood runs thick.

the funny thing about this is, i like mustangs. i like camaros. ive never owned either. and its no garrantee i ever will.

so im unbiased. unlike....


Now, im sorry to say it, but i stopped reading with an open mind after you claimed the SS would be " Noticeably over 4000lbs"


it concerns me that you think that. 3860 is the weight given for an SS 6-speed....

if i were to get one (and this isnt a unique stance. this holds true for 90% of drivers who are looking for performance) i would look to take weight off . personally id be using carbon fiber and removing things that i dont really need.




so the my car would be 3600-3700lbs... and 500+- hp... 450lbs of torque... IRS... and this is after 3-7k worth of mods in the first 3 months.

you couldnt point to a mustang in the known universe id take over that car. not a GT500KR, not a 67' elanor, nothing.


as for the cup races... ANY car can be good. it all depends on the company that gets ahold of it. If your going to argue that cup races are a good example of how mustangs do on a track your nuts.

ps. how did the mustang do on the Nurburgring??

good luck trying to find that time. as far as i know Ford didnt even both embarrassing the moostang by actually recording times.

[Sizzox]

New pics with camo

[kevin2323]

the front looks too much like a duck bill...and the back looks like the concept.

[syr74]

Originally Posted by Congoman775

oh boy. the fanboy blood runs thick.

Have you actually seen you own posts?

Originally Posted by Congoman

so im unbiased. unlike....

I'll ask it again, have you actually seen your own posts?

Originally Posted by Congoman

Now, im sorry to say it, but i stopped reading with an open mind after you claimed the SS would be " Noticeably over 4000lbs"
.....it concerns me that you think that. 3860 is the weight given for an SS 6-speed....

According to a press release from the General himself......

3750 / 1705 – LT w/ automatic
3741 / 1700 – LT w/ manual
3769 / 1713 – LS w/ automatic
3780 / 1718 – LS w/ manual
3913 / 1779 – SS w/ automatic
3860 / 1755 – SS w/ manual

..... and I don't see where I am wrong.

Originally Posted by Congoman

if i were to get one (and this isnt a unique stance. this holds true for 90% of drivers who are looking for performance) i would look to take weight off . personally id be using carbon fiber and removing things that i dont really need.

Not sure I get your point here since carbon fiber and weight removal work just fine on other cars as well. None of this changes what these cars weigh in at stock.

Originally Posted by Congoman

so the my car would be 3600-3700lbs... and 500+- hp... 450lbs of torque... IRS... and this is after 3-7k worth of mods in the first 3 months.

Sounds good, but much like the issue above other cars can be modded just like the Camaro. Again, this has nothing to do with how these cars compare in stock trim.

Originally Posted by Congoman

you couldnt point to a mustang in the known universe id take over that car. not a GT500KR, not a 67' elanor, nothing.

I'm glad you have found a car you like.

Originally Posted by Congoman

as for the cup races... ANY car can be good. it all depends on the company that gets ahold of it. If your going to argue that cup races are a good example of how mustangs do on a track your nuts.

I actually have a little personal experience in Grand Am Cup, and yeah....how a car performs in that series is a pretty good indication of how good the platform is. Some chassis and suspension mods are allowed, but these cars start with a stock unibody and suspension and, but for a few performance enhancements and some safety equipment, they end up rolling onto the tarmac as little more than ultra-serious, race ready versions of what you buy for the street. The series is an excellent indicator of the basic goodness of a design, and Mustang works very well.

Originally Posted by Congoman

ps. how did the mustang do on the Nurburgring??

No enforceable rules, no real sanctioning body. That is how you get automotive soap operas like the latest Porsche, Chevy, Nissan three way where everybody claims everybody else is being deceitful. The truth? My guess is that everybody who runs the ring is bending the truth to one degree or another. But I can see how times laid down at a track where the sanctioning body is effectively the honor system are ultra relevant to how one car compares to another

Originally Posted by Congoman

good luck trying to find that time. as far as i know Ford didnt even both embarrassing the moostang by actually recording times.

I have no interest in looking, and it wouldn't do me any good if I did since Ford doesn't typically use the Nurb as a testing facility. Actually, I long for the day when only the baggy-pantsed, internet fanbois worshipped all things Nurburgring....the recent GM turn toward the Ring still seems weird to me. Personally I don't get the relevance and think the Nurb is little more than a marketing ploy. There is nothing they can learn at the Ring they cannot explore in even greater depth by using tracks here in the States. Like I said, it's a marketing ploy. If it wasn't, why would they all be in such a hurry to lie about it.

[headpunter]

Originally Posted by syr74

Have you actually seen you own posts?



I'll ask it again, have you actually seen your own posts?



According to a press release from the General himself......

3750 / 1705 – LT w/ automatic
3741 / 1700 – LT w/ manual
3769 / 1713 – LS w/ automatic
3780 / 1718 – LS w/ manual
3913 / 1779 – SS w/ automatic
3860 / 1755 – SS w/ manual

..... and I don't see where I am wrong.



Not sure I get your point here since carbon fiber and weight removal work just fine on other cars as well. None of this changes what these cars weigh in at stock.



Sounds good, but much like the issue above other cars can be modded just like the Camaro. Again, this has nothing to do with how these cars compare in stock trim.



I'm glad you have found a car you like.



I actually have a little personal experience in Grand Am Cup, and yeah....how a car performs in that series is a pretty good indication of how good the platform is. Some chassis and suspension mods are allowed, but these cars start with a stock unibody and suspension and, but for a few performance enhancements and some safety equipment, they end up rolling onto the tarmac as little more than ultra-serious, race ready versions of what you buy for the street. The series is an excellent indicator of the basic goodness of a design, and Mustang works very well.



No enforceable rules, no real sanctioning body. That is how you get automotive soap operas like the latest Porsche, Chevy, Nissan three way where everybody claims everybody else is being deceitful. The truth? My guess is that everybody who runs the ring is bending the truth to one degree or another. But I can see how times laid down at a track where the sanctioning body is effectively the honor system are ultra relevant to how one car compares to another



I have no interest in looking, and it wouldn't do me any good if I did since Ford doesn't typically use the Nurb as a testing facility. Actually, I long for the day when only the baggy-pantsed, internet fanbois worshipped all things Nurburgring....the recent GM turn toward the Ring still seems weird to me. Personally I don't get the relevance and think the Nurb is little more than a marketing ploy. There is nothing they can learn at the Ring they cannot explore in even greater depth by using tracks here in the States. Like I said, it's a marketing ploy. If it wasn't, why would they all be in such a hurry to lie about it.

you were wrong weight wise by 200+ lbs

there is a reason there are no laptimes for the Mustang on the 'ring......they would be attrocious......

[KatarHol]

Well,i've owned both a Mustang and a Camaro and i grew up with a Firebird and i'd say i'm pretty unbiased. Since the '80s,both cars have been so close in performance that it's basically up to a person's personal preference,no car has ever dominated in all areas. For example,a '94 GT down 60HP on a '94 Z28 was very,very close in times on a road course test from a old Car and Driver and so on and so on. I could get an art table in the back of my Camaro,but i could actually see the front of my Mustang when parking.
The new Camaro will have the advantage in Handling and acceleration,yet with the lighter weight and hopefully,Bullitt 3.73 gears,the lowered HP GT will probably be as fun to drive as the SS. That's what i'm into,the sounds,the feel,which is more fun. A '02 Z28 was faster than my '04 GT,but i liked the smaller,airier feel of my car. Look at the Challenger R/T,superior power,yet its getting dull reviews because of the power to weight ratio,it apparently doesn't FEEL fast,i've yet to drive one so the jury is still out,it's just what i've read and heard,i read the same about the GT500,Autoweek said it didn't FEEL like 500HP.
I'm excited to try out both cars next spring. Both will have high and low points,these cars are FAST.....once you get into the 320+HP range,there are no losers,these are great times to be a pony car fan. If the new '10 is actually the Bullitt,it would be awesome.