Edmunds: 2010 Shelby GT500 Crushes 2010 Camaro SS

[fdjizm]

Originally Posted by 25thanniversary

well look at the bright side that's the only way ford could ever take down a chevy is putting a supercharger on there cars. unlike chevy they have the power and the engine with out the supercharger. the only bad thing is for ford there are going to price up the car more than the corvette like in 2008. and i don't see much of those mustangs as we see corvette.

a lighter smaller engine with a supercharger is more practical than a big giant engine with horsepower... who cant just make a huge engine? anyone can do that.

[vladkgb]

[ ] 10k price difference. last i checked SS starts @ 32k while Fraud gt500 rustang starts at 46k, simple math shows its actually a 14k diff.

Might as well compare a lamborghini or something, since thats way out of the price range as well.

HEY GUISE! An ACR Viper crushes a gt500! 1/4 is 11 sec vs 12 for the rustang!

Anyways $9k makes ur Camaro SS an 11 second car so rustangs = fail.

[vladkgb]

Originally Posted by fdjizm

a lighter smaller engine with a supercharger is more practical than a big giant engine with horsepower... who cant just make a huge engine? anyone can do that.

Sir, please compare the weight of ur little 4.6L with 4 cams and 32 valves, its waaaaaaaay heavier that even the LS7, thats why rustangs =fail.

[fdjizm]

Originally Posted by vladkgb

Sir, please compare the weight of ur little 4.6L with 4 cams and 32 valves, its waaaaaaaay heavier that even the LS7, thats why rustangs =fail.

lol fraud gt500
rustangs = fail?

Hmm well on earth where i am from they have been around for 46 years and sold 9 1/2 million cars and been the #1 selling sports car in america for 22 years... i would hardly call that a fail... your thoughts?

it sucks when people hate good things for the simple fact that their good.

[snizzle]

Originally Posted by fdjizm

a lighter smaller engine with a supercharger is more practical than a big giant engine with horsepower... who cant just make a huge engine? anyone can do that.

FI practical? No thanks to decreased engine/powertrain life for a "tiny" 420LB+ 4.6. No replacement for displacement.

[fdjizm]

Originally Posted by snizzle

FI practical? No thanks to decreased engine/powertrain life for a "tiny" 420LB+ 4.6. No replacement for displacement.

i havent heard of any decrease in reliability with forced induction when done right. the gt500 from the factory is built to last. just dropping huge motors in is cool and all but not everyone needs or wants a 600lb 9.5 liter v8 just not practical.

[snizzle]

Originally Posted by fdjizm

i havent heard of any decrease in reliability with forced induction when done right. the gt500 from the factory is built to last. just dropping huge motors in is cool and all but not everyone needs or wants a 600lb 9.5 liter v8 just not practical.

Build Ford tough eh? Interesting.

Agreed that FI can be done right. And the whine from a supercharger is orgasmic, but that doesn't make a FI 5.4 any more practical than the Camaro's pushrod LS3 and especially not based on weight.

Also, buying a sportscar is the antithesis of practical regardless.

[THE EVIL TW1N]

Originally Posted by snizzle

FI practical? No thanks to decreased engine/powertrain life for a "tiny" 420LB+ 4.6. No replacement for displacement.

There's people who've crossed the 150k mark on their 500+ hp 03/04 cobras and are still going strong. There's even a couple at the 200k mark and still going.

I'm sure there is some decrease in lifespan, but how much is not sure. In the real world to the average driver, maybe yes. But to enthusiasts, I think they last way past what would be an acceptable lifespan.

[porcupinekiller]

I think that a few guys are getting to caught up in debating which type of engine is better (large N/A vs smaller supercharged)and forgetting that both GM and Ford have come along way over the last 30 years. For the younger guys you don't remember the crap we had to deal with from about 1974-1984(and beyond), I remember the days of 120 hp Mustangs and 195 hp Corvettes and to see the performance these manufacturers are now getting without sacrifices to fuel economy or safety makes me quite excited. For many years I figured factory muscle was dead and never returning, now I'm happy to embrace all offerings that the modern muscle car has to offer.
The new GT500 and Camaro are both amazing cars and we are fortunate as car guys to live in a time when they both exist.

[Sleestack]

Originally Posted by snizzle

FI practical? No thanks to decreased engine/powertrain life for a "tiny" 420LB+ 4.6. No replacement for displacement.

You need to read up on the Ford products. The SC Fords are engineered for boost. Crank the GT500 up to 800RWHP on the stock block and you can still sleep at night. That's the way you do it!

[camaro5]

Originally Posted by Fireball

Source: http://www.edmunds.com/ford/shelbygt...testdrive.html

2010 Shelby GT500 vs 2010 Camaro SS

0-60: 4.3 vs 5.0 (4.0 vs 4.7 with 1' rollout)
1/4-mile: 12.4 vs 13.0

Supercharger, please.

What a stupid comparison, Edmunds...

[fdjizm]

The amount of mis-information about any other car on this board is mind blowing lol do people just makes things up?

[DeathChill]

Originally Posted by fdjizm

The amount of mis-information about any other car on this board is mind blowing lol do people just makes things up?

Everyone knows Mustang's blow up if you wink twice at them. That is a scientific fact.

[Zeus]

When you make a comparison about cars like this, you need to factor in the single most influencing factor: Price.


Id say the SS wins. Of course im not an Editor for Edmunds who is having my bread and butter go down the drain in a bad economy, forced to fabricate some out-worldy comparison in an attempt to sell magazines and attract attention that obviously none of the other magazines had the clear lack of sense to do. Why do you compare the GT500 to the SS? because it gets attention. The end.