Motor Trend Head to Head: 2015 Camaro 1LE vs. new 2015 Mustang 5.0 GT PP

[LostPony]

Stickier tires would only have highlighted the soft spring and shock setup even more. It would have helped ultimate grip, and many of us that track our cars swap tires anyway. The point is that as delivered Chevy is delivery the faster car for the track junky that also needs it to be a daily driver.

[cbass]

Originally Posted by GONIF

I give up , if you thing a OHV engine is better than a DOCH or SOHC ,the rest of the auto industry must be wrong including MB, BMW ,Audi, Rolls Royce ,Bentley, Ferrari, Ford, Honda ,Toyota , Mazda, Porsche, Aston Martin, Jag ,Bugatti ect ect ect. No point in going on you will not convince me and I will not convince you . The future is OHC until electric powered cars kick every other type of powers ass . The M1 Garand was the best at one time too.

Because others do it that doesn't mean it's better. Many of those brands are non-american and there were or still are countries that tax based on displacement regardless of emissions or fuel economy or power output. Those markets go for lower displacement and thus higher revving to make power engines which is where OHC has an advantage.

Also nobody is doubting RPM is a good way to make power, however, high rpm racing engines do not necessarily make good street engines. The stop and go of street driving suits itself much better to a higher displacement engine that makes more hp at lower rpm.

[GONIF]

Originally Posted by X25

The future is neither DOHC, nor OHV. Who knows what will prevail until gas engines die completely, but looks like some kind of smart valvetrain, like magnetic valves might win. Imagine an engine with no camshaft, and valvetrain operated by compact electromagnetic controllers, where the valves can open faster than the most aggressive cam, yet is still reliable. Oh, the possibilities... : )

OHV has limitations (especially on cam timing), but time and time again, GM proved that benefits outweigh the compromises. I am sure one day it won't make sense, and will be replaced by a better technology, but make no mistake, DOHC is also on its way out. We'll see...

So what about the 3.6 that GM has ? What did the prove there.

[GONIF]

Originally Posted by Billy10mm

Yes. An OHV engine is clearly better at some things than an OHC engine. Yes, an OHC engine is clearly better at other things than a OHV engine. Your problem is you don't know enough about the total package each brings to the table.

Every single manufacturer in your list above (except for Ford, which switched to OHC simply because they couldn't keep up with Chevy engineers in the OHV space) started in markets where displacement brings tax. These markets were, and are still today, forced to find ways to make more power out of smaller displacements. OHC engines do offer significant higher-rpm breathing advantages ... and high RPMs are what is needed to make small engines perform better. But when you aren't saddled with absurd displacement taxes, you can do what 'Merica has done. Build fuel-efficient OHV motors that get their efficiency from the low-RPM motoring these engines are capable of. And of course with their size, comes power. And with their simpler design comes more compact packaging, lighter weight per liter, lower friction (which directly affects brake-specific fuel consumption, a true measure of how efficient a motor is), and greater reliability.

If OHV was truly a sub-par design, then the Corvette Racing program (and the Viper racing program, which has had a lot of success in the past 20 years), would have been complete flops.

The only people who continue to praise the benefits of "horsepower-per-liter" are Civic owners who need something to argue back with when their car runs a 16-second quarter .... oh, and you.

How they doing with OHV at LeMans, or formula 1 ? How did GM loose the number 1 spot in sales ? The winner in the auto biz is the number one sales volume company ,and they have no OHV cars.

[BaylorCamaro]

Originally Posted by LostPony

I am a life long Mustang fan, but am also an enthusiast who has owned a wide variety of cars over the years. This car disappoints, plain and simple.

First "Weightgate", and Ford's claims to have met their goals on weight. They changed their tune mid stream on this one, first saying or implying it would be lighter. Later just saying they met their goals and not saying what the hell that goal was.

Then saying they targeted the Boss 302 for performance. This was dumb as the 1LE had already trounced the Boss in magazine tests. They also offered that the competition was every car BUT a Camaro. BS!!!

Every person who has ever looked at a Mustang knows the Camaro is the DIRECT competition to this car. Saying things like targeting a 911 or M3 does not distract from that fact.

The next gen Camaro will be even quicker than the current one, even if it weighs the same, or God forbid a little more.

I for one find little redeeming about the new Mustang. I could give two s%^&s about how it cruises on the road because that is not my primary reason for buying a Mustang. It is performance, plain and simple. Deliver me a car that can lay the smack on cars twice its price, and its cross town rival. The Boss 302 did that. Then GM responded. Now Ford has dropped the ball.

It's 1994 all over again.

You sir are my new favorite Mustang owner and judging from your sig you do the proper type of tracking.

Originally Posted by 72MachOne99GT

My take on it is Ford improved the MAJOR complaint...a solid rear.
Gave it a fresh look (whether the majority on a camaro forum like it aside)
Updated and improved the interior.
And made sure it was still faster than a Camaro in a straight line.

Those 4 facts are what they need to sell 95% of their cars. Plain and simple.

Enthusiasts may be a little displeased by it's improvements, but it did improve in most of the areas it was lacking in.

Agreed, however the NEW Mustang is only marginally faster than the CURRENT Camaro. When the 6th gen comes out, it will more than likely get the Corvette LT1 engine and *hopefully* weigh less on Alpha. For Ford faithful I hope Ford is simply holding back to see what Chevy does with the 6th gen.

Originally Posted by Egon

I don't understand this just from a consumer perspective. If I was one of the early adopters of the 2015 Mustang and then the next model year later they add a whole bunch of stuff to make the car better than my 2015 model I would be quite upset.

You mean like what Ford did with the 2010/2011 Mustang?

Originally Posted by Egon

Fellow Camaro fans keep in mind that the 1LE was created by taking some of the go fast bits from the ZL1 along with some nice chassis tuning to produce something that sits between the base SS and the ZL1 and focused for the track. This also allowed Chevrolet to spread out their development costs for some of those go fast bits across more models, and its one of the reasons why the 1LE package is such a great deal. Since they already had those parts on the shelf why not make a few more bucks with an intermediate package and the 1LE was born. Unless Chevrolet plans on releasing the ZL1 or whatever its equivalent will be for the 6th Gen right out of the gates the base SS will not have a ready made set of go fast parts to do this with. So for that reason we may not have a 1LE for the 2016 model year.

I'm expecting a lack of 1LE, ZL1 & Z/28 in the first year or two of the 6th gen. I'm sure GM is going to roll out with those models similar to what they did for the 5th gen.

[cbass]

Originally Posted by GONIF

Ford is a direct /same price competitor ,and were the Coyote engine 6.3 liter ,it would flat out kill the pushrod LS3 , 74 cubic inches is a lot to give up . So apples to apples cubic inches to same cubic inches . DOHC multi valve has better breathing capacity' i.e. volumetric efficiency especially at lower valve lifts. ...Proven time and time again . Will a OHV engine win LeMans ever again ? Will Porsche ever go back to OHV ? As Danny Divito said in the movie Other peoples money ' I bet the last company that made buggy whips probably made the best buggy whip ever made. I want to see a DOHC 376 ci NA motor in a 3000 pound C7 . Now that would be a world beater ,until GM turbo charges a DOHC V8 .

I have heard this many times, but because the coyote is is a DOHC engine it can't be 6.3 because the engine is already too damn big and wide. At 5.0 it's already a challenge to fit under the hood. The advantage of OHV is that it packages better and for the displacements the engines in much tighter spaces. In OHC engines packaging starts becoming an issue.

Here is an illustration. Can you guess which one is the OHC engine?

[cbass]

Originally Posted by GONIF

So what about the 3.6 that GM has ? What did the prove there.

On the flip side what about the Northstar? The DOHC V8 that GM doesn't make.

[X25]

Originally Posted by GONIF

So what about the 3.6 that GM has ? What did the prove there.

.. that you need OHC to get more power out of smaller displacement, and they did.

[Angrybird 12]

I think Ford was more concerned about losing the sales race to the Camaro for the last 5 years than losing to them on the track. They concentrated on areas they could hype it up such as the Electronic fluff, nicer interiors, IRS and Ecoboost. Because they feel that's what the general public wants. But anyway just as the Camaro did in 2010 models we had to wait a couple years for the real performance Mustang killers started showing up. By 2016 or 17 I bet we see more performance out of the Mustang. Hopefully the 6th gen Camaro will come out of the box ready to kill.

[GONIF]

that is a Old school SBC not a LS3 that is wider then the SBC. and the engine on the left is not a Ford Coyote. And someone must have forgotten to tell Mercedes that their 6.3 DOCH is too big .

[cbass]

Originally Posted by GONIF

that is a Old school SBC not a LS3 that is wider then the SBC. and the engine on the left is not a Ford Coyote.

It's the best picture I could find. There aren't too many examples out there. However, look into the hood of a mustang and look into the hood of your camaro and see how much space the engine takes up.

[X25]

2 liter Miata engine on the left, LS3 on the right. 2 liters vs. 6.2 liters!

[Ragnar]

After reading this I have to go to the fridge, yep it's that time....Carry on

[2cnd chance]

Originally Posted by GONIF

First off I get 13 to 15 mpg in my LE1 ,it doe's not consume less ,the way I drive it or any other car or truck . The CAGS is a loop hole that GM uses to skirt the gas guzzler tax , lets get real . None of us get's great fuel mileage. Oh and I do get it ,you own a Chevy and think it is best . I own 3 Chevy's ,and know the truth. As I have said I like and Buy GM"s and have since 1968 ,but want them to be better then the rest . And you will see GM rise to the challenge sooner or later.

You and others no doubt buy the Chevy product do to its value. If they GM add the tech you're asking for will it still hold value in your and others minds? It will be considerably more expensive no doubt.

Also isn't there still an argument regarding displacement when comparing OHC vs OHV engines in that they should be measured differently?