Z/28 blows C7 away !

[Norm Peterson]

Originally Posted by 72MachOne99GT

I realize the Boss 302 and LS have been surpassed, but why is it suddenly a horrible car?

Nobody here was saying that it's horrible, only that with those exceptions and a couple more the Mustang has been seen as a straight line car for its entire existence. In this particular section, that's not exactly an enviable trait, even when people realize that it isn't entirely true.


Norm

[BlackinBlack]

Originally Posted by Norm Peterson

Nobody here was saying that it's horrible, only that with those exceptions and a couple more the Mustang has been seen as a straight line car for its entire existence. In this particular section, that's not exactly an enviable trait, even when people realize that it isn't entirely true.


Norm

Never understood that idea that the Mustang was a straight line car. The Mustang has a very long proud history as a road course car. 65 GT350, and of course many many years of successful Trans AM racing.

Originally Posted by 72MachOne99GT

I realize the Boss 302 and LS have been surpassed, but why is it suddenly a horrible car?

I have never read a bad review or heard negative word from an owner of a Boss, but now that the Z/28 is out everything else is just garbage.

I'm looking forward to eventually seeing a Z28 on the road as I find the ZL1 surprisingly attractive in person I and think the new Z is even better looking than it is in photos.

It is the "new hottest thing" mentality.... search the ZL1 forum for posts around the time the ZL1 was released. You will see old posts about it being a "track only car" that is too extreme to drive on the street. Most now talk about it like some slow POS only good for getting groceries.

[102SS]

Originally Posted by 2013 RaceRed 5.0

You mean besides making the first pony car?

True but it took GM to perfect it

[Skylane765]

Originally Posted by 2cnd chance

Here ya go.

Where do you get the poster?

[Norm Peterson]

Originally Posted by BlackinBlack

Never understood that idea that the Mustang was a straight line car. The Mustang has a very long proud history as a road course car. 65 GT350, and of course many many years of successful Trans AM racing.

You know that, I know that, and so do a few of the people on various Mustang forums. But corner-carving has always been the small niche in the world of performance cars almost no matter what U.S. domestic car we're talking about, so the general awareness just isn't there.

These days, the average Mustang owner thinks mostly in terms of a louder exhaust, lowering purely for the sake of being lower, forced induction, staggered tires and wheels, tinted you-name-it, and appearance mods.

A few more are starting to come around, but it still feels like there are more cornering enthusiasts among 1LE-ZL1-Z/28 owners.


Norm

[Ragnar]

Gotta love the slash!!!!

[102SS]

Originally Posted by 2013 RaceRed 5.0

Oh, is that what they were doing from 2003-2009?

Actually they(GM) signed a contract in 1999 with the CAW that the Camaro would only be built at St Therese for the next 10 yrs.

Well the 2002 couldn't be upgraded to 2004 crash standards without major changes to the greenhouse and the decision was made to mothball the car.

It was well worth the wait though.

[hotlap]

Originally Posted by 2013 RaceRed 5.0

Oh, is that what they were doing from 2003-2009?

GTO 2004 (5.7L 350HP)
GTO 2005-2006 (6.0L 400HP)
G8 GXP 2008-2009 (6.2L 415HP)

CTS-V 2004-2007 (5.7L 400HP)
CTS-V 2009 - Present (6.2L 556HP)

I won't even mention the Corvette.

[McRat]

What killed the Camaro for 2003?

Poor sales due to poor marketing.

It was certainly the most Bang For The Buck musclecar in 2002. But nobody knew.

It was seldom advertised as a high performance car, or as a fuel efficient car.

[Camaro_Corvette]

Originally Posted by hotlapZL1

GTO 2004 (5.7L 350HP)
GTO 2005-2006 (6.0L 400HP)
G8 GXP 2008-2009 (6.2L 415HP)

CTS-V 2004-2007 (5.7L 400HP)
CTS-V 2009 - Present (6.2L 556HP)

I won't even mention the Corvette.

Exactly

[102SS]

Originally Posted by 2013 RaceRed 5.0

Pony car lovers didn't have to wait, the Mustang was there the whole time.

If they(Ford) had the guts to release a 400+ hp NA version in 2005 they might of had me and several others who had cars that made 325+ from the factory.

Nope they roll out the lame 305hp GT for the next 5 yrs,oh I forgot it made a whopping 315 for 2007.

425HP would have cornered the market and GM would never have got its market share and then some back.

Ford dropped the ball

[Norm Peterson]

It's kind of hard to say that Ford dropped the ball when in the years leading up to the 2005 model year there was exactly zero competition within the ponycar category. Competitively, there simply wasn't any need, and to start out too high up the power ladder would have made future power upgrades less significant (for the average enthusiast) and probably cost a few MPG credits (for Ford).

That the new 5.0 motor might have been a couple of years late getting to market - hindsight being what it is, that's probably true.

What Ford did manage to do starting in 2005 was get about the same amount of power* out of the then-new all-aluminum 3-valve SOHC version of the 4.6 modular motor as they'd had to go to 4-valves and DOHC to get before. That's a 'win' of some sort, even though it was against themselves.


* the "regular" GT's had 300 HP at least through 2008, except for the Bullitt and Shelby GT versions, which had 315 & 319 respectively. Ford's own kind of "captive aftermarket" FRPP tune is likely identical or essentially the same tune.


Norm

[J-vette]

Originally Posted by Norm Peterson

It's kind of hard to say that Ford dropped the ball when in the years leading up to the 2005 model year there was exactly zero competition within the ponycar category. Competitively, there simply wasn't any need, and to start out too high up the power ladder would have made future power upgrades less significant (for the average enthusiast) and probably cost a few MPG credits (for Ford).

That the new 5.0 motor might have been a couple of years late getting to market - hindsight being what it is, that's probably true.

What Ford did manage to do starting in 2005 was get about the same amount of power* out of the then-new all-aluminum 3-valve SOHC version of the 4.6 modular motor as they'd had to go to 4-valves and DOHC to get before. That's a 'win' of some sort, even though it was against themselves.


* the "regular" GT's had 300 HP at least through 2008, except for the Bullitt and Shelby GT versions, which had 315 & 319 respectively. Ford's own kind of "captive aftermarket" FRPP tune is likely identical or essentially the same tune.


Norm

In 2005, the 300hp was still low considering the ls1 camaro had what 345? In 2002 & the ls2 had 400hp. The 05 mustang was a good looking car & it helped with the rerelease of the camaro. I think the 5.0 mustangs & boss 302 are some of the best looking cars in the road. That ties in also bc the ls1 camaro was a superior car, but the mustang outsold them, low HP & all.
What I'm saying is that HP alone don't sell cars.
I agree with you Ford did not drop the ball, just fumble it alittle, lol. They did what worked at the time & sold cars. But when the challenger came out then the camaro, ford should have stepped their game up faster than what they did. It maybe would forced chevy to step the HP in the camaro.
The camaro have it all, great power, good looks & it's not pricey like the challenger.
Now the mustang has it also but for me it was the smaller cab space & the fact that the ls3 is easier to work on.
I like all cars, I'm partial to GM but I know when they drop the ball as they did when the stopped the camaro. That said when the companies compete, we win because it forces them not to pull the punches.

[2cnd chance]

I thought this thread was comparing the Z/28 and C7 Corvette???