Physics Question on 2SS Performance

[FastEddie]

No cause I put banana in u telpipes...

[Wizard1183]

Just go test drive an ls3 and you'll feel where you stand.

[cyberLS]

Originally Posted by xero755

The only thing that I can be certain of is the grin that flooring that new Camaro will put on your face will be 100% bigger than the grin that you experienced with that 5.0


Welcome to the family

[DanCamm]

Originally Posted by SlingShot

I think the speed "feel" is very deceiving in the SS. If you are going through the gears without looking at the speedo, you don't realize just how fast you are going.

This exactly.

[SGOS252382]

Originally Posted by hot_rod

since we are talking physics......

a body in motion at a constant velocity will remain in motion .....

I think that (attached image) has more to do with gravity than anything else.
What goes up, must come down.

[apeko]

Originally Posted by 2SS

While tracking my new car by rail to Birmingham, AL, I began pondering this question. The last "muscle" car I bought (for my then, wife), was a 1989 Mustang Convertible GT 5.0. While I'm not a huge Ford fan, it was pretty fun to drive, and I clearly remember the zip it produced when I got into it. Here's my question after comparing some HP/weight statistics. My new Camaro will have roughly a 60% increase in horsepower to weight ratio over that Mustang. Does this translate literally/linearly? In other words, should I reasonably expect the G force felt through acceleration to be 60% more than that Mustang? Should my new Camaro cover 1600 ft as that Mustang only managed 1000 ft? Will my Camaro be going through 80 mph as that Mustang went through 50 mph? If any or all of this remotely true, my already heightened anticipation will jump ten fold. I don't know that much about car physics, but was confident that someone here could analyze this for me. If it doesn't work like this, what is a better estimation on the performance increase?

The answer is very simple ...E=MC2...:bangdesk: