Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums - Camaro5.com
 
TireRack
Go Back   Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums - Camaro5.com > General Camaro Forums > Chevy Camaro vs...


Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old 08-19-2009, 12:26 PM   #15
GTAHVIT
Blessed
 
GTAHVIT's Avatar
 
Drives: 2013 Sonic RS MT
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Saint Augustine FL
Posts: 28,444
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrIcky View Post
I don't think GM really wants to fix the understeer. They probably view it as a 'safety feature' to help keep people from killing themselves. I'd guess that if they do decide to fix it, they'd do it with some sort of z28 or track pack.
Maybe so.. But they need to offer something that improves the obvious problem.

I'd love a track pack like option for the SS.


Maybe our Mustang guys can answer this? Is a GT without the track pack significantly worse than with?

GTAHVIT is offline  
Old 08-19-2009, 01:44 PM   #16
2010-1SS-IBM

 
Drives: 1998 Nissan, 2010 Camaro
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Dallas, Tx
Posts: 827
Nice article. Sounded like those guys had fun.

Quote:
Originally Posted by syr74 View Post
Obvious Mustang problems: Brake fade comes in fast and hard, 315hp isn't cutting it, a problem which really shows up in the mid range.
You forgot live rear axle. PJ Jones had the Mustang sideways in that article (first paragraph). If a non-pro driver had done that, the car probably would have been wrecked. Now imagine doing that in a car with 400+ horsepower. Ouch.

Quote:
Originally Posted by syr74 View Post
1: Can the gearing be fine tuned any further to improve acceleration and or fuel economy even a little? Neither area is bad, but more never hurts and BMW and Porsche have made a literal living by making cars go faster than the power ratings would suggest that they should. How? They tweak the gearing until it is genuinely perfect.
Maybe gearing, but I doubt the engine performance can be enhanced much. It's a mature Corvette engine already.

Quote:
Originally Posted by syr74 View Post
2: Where can we drop some weight. It is possible that meaningful weight loss cannot be had, but it never hurts to try.
I kind of doubt this, at least not without increasing the cost substantially. If anything, the Mustang is underweight because of it's less powerful engine.

Don't forget the GT500 weighs 100lbs more than the Camaro, and 400lbs more than the GT. Weight appears to be the thing that has to give in order to put that much affordable power into these cars.

Quote:
Originally Posted by syr74 View Post
3: Obviously, tweak the suspension heavily. Adjust rear spring rates, chage tire size, but solve the understeer issue. Car needs to be more nuetral all the way through the corner.
From what the aftermarket guys are saying, the understeer appears to be fairly easy to solve.

Last edited by 2010-1SS-IBM; 08-19-2009 at 01:45 PM. Reason: Spelling
2010-1SS-IBM is offline  
Old 08-19-2009, 01:49 PM   #17
rayhawk

 
rayhawk's Avatar
 
Drives: Camaro SS
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Miami
Posts: 1,060
Quote:
Originally Posted by GTAHVIT View Post
Maybe so.. But they need to offer something that improves the obvious problem.

I'd love a track pack like option for the SS.


Maybe our Mustang guys can answer this? Is a GT without the track pack significantly worse than with?

There are Mustang guys here? On a Camaro forum? No way, they must have better things to do than hang out here.

__________________
rayhawk is offline  
Old 08-19-2009, 01:56 PM   #18
GTAHVIT
Blessed
 
GTAHVIT's Avatar
 
Drives: 2013 Sonic RS MT
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Saint Augustine FL
Posts: 28,444
Quote:
Originally Posted by rayhawk View Post
There are Mustang guys here? On a Camaro forum? No way, they must have better things to do than hang out here.

No kidding


And you can never find one when you need em...

GTAHVIT is offline  
Old 08-19-2009, 02:02 PM   #19
Sleestack
 
Sleestack's Avatar
 
Drives: '07 SRT8 SuperBee, '09 GT500
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Austin, Tx
Posts: 684
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2010-1SS-IBM View Post
You forgot live rear axle. PJ Jones had the Mustang sideways in that article (first paragraph). If a non-pro driver had done that, the car probably would have been wrecked. Now imagine doing that in a car with 400+ horsepower. .
Why imagine? I do it in a car with 500+ HP everyday.


Quote:
Originally Posted by 2010-1SS-IBM View Post

Don't forget the GT500 weighs 100lbs more than the Camaro, and 400lbs more than the GT. Weight appears to be the thing that has to give in order to put that much affordable power into these cars.

The GT500 is not a good proxy for the '11 GT. The Shelby GT500 has an iron block to support ~1000HP at a moderate cost, which adds 100+ lbs. It also has additional weight from the supercharger, intercooler, and associated plumbing (100+ lbs). Lastly, it comes with heavy duty goodies to support crazy power, including upgraded brakes, suspension, and 9.5 in rims all around (~100 lbs).
__________________
Sleestack is offline  
Old 08-19-2009, 02:11 PM   #20
2010-1SS-IBM

 
Drives: 1998 Nissan, 2010 Camaro
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Dallas, Tx
Posts: 827
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sleestack View Post
The GT500 is not a good proxy for the '11 GT. The Shelby GT500 has an iron block to support ~1000HP at a moderate cost, which adds 100+ lbs. It also has additional weight from the supercharger, intercooler, and associated plumbing (100+ lbs). Lastly, it comes with heavy duty goodies to support crazy power, including upgraded brakes, suspension, and 9.5 in rims all around (~100 lbs).
Point is, adding power appears to add weight to all these cars. So don't expect the '11 GT to weight 3500lbs and have 400hp.
2010-1SS-IBM is offline  
Old 08-19-2009, 02:15 PM   #21
KarFan
 
KarFan's Avatar
 
Drives: 2023 SGM Camaro 2SS 1LE 6M
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: SoCal
Posts: 575
This test falls right in line with all of the other tests we've seen when these two cars are compared. The Track Pack Mustang handles very well and seems to be easier to drive fast but doesn't have the power to take advantage of the SS's understeer issues and is further exposed in a straight line. In the end it's good old preference as both cars will dig into your wallet about the same amount.
__________________
Past Camaro rides
1997 Black Camaro Z28 A4
1999 Silver Camaro SS 6M
2002 White Camaro Z28 A4

Last edited by KarFan; 08-19-2009 at 02:51 PM.
KarFan is offline  
Old 08-19-2009, 02:31 PM   #22
Sleestack
 
Sleestack's Avatar
 
Drives: '07 SRT8 SuperBee, '09 GT500
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Austin, Tx
Posts: 684
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2010-1SS-IBM View Post
Point is, adding power appears to add weight to all these cars. So don't expect the '11 GT to weight 3500lbs and have 400hp.
Agree that better suspension and brakes are both needed, and will add more weight. I also get the sense that Ford may be positioning the Mustang as more of a sports car (3500lbs and nimble) than a grand touring car (4000lbs and comfortable), so they may have some tricks up their sleeves if this is truly their strategy.
__________________
Sleestack is offline  
Old 08-19-2009, 02:36 PM   #23
2010-1SS-IBM

 
Drives: 1998 Nissan, 2010 Camaro
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Dallas, Tx
Posts: 827
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sleestack View Post
Agree that better suspension and brakes are both needed, and will add more weight. I also get the sense that Ford may be positioning the Mustang as more of a sports car (3500lbs and nimble) than a grand touring car (4000lbs and comfortable), so they may have some tricks up their sleeves if this is truly their strategy.
Could be. If they can pull it off, kudos to them. If they can keep everything else relatively the same (weight, cost, handling, etc...) and add 100hp, that'll be quite an accomplishment. And one hell of a ride.
2010-1SS-IBM is offline  
Old 08-19-2009, 04:01 PM   #24
attymf

 
attymf's Avatar
 
Drives: 2017 SS
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: LI, NY
Posts: 755
Great article. Seams like the cars are evenly matched, each with their own particular advantages.

To those of you who argue if Ford does this (more HP) or Chevy does that (better handling) and thus their car is better need to remember that the two companies could certainly and easily add it but it costs the buyer money. The main thing is car sales and profit. Both companies made great cars for the money and I am happy for that. Wouldn't be fun if one car was clearly better than the other. The driver will most likely make the difference.

For those with deep pockets there is the aftermarket.
attymf is offline  
Old 08-19-2009, 04:32 PM   #25
AZCamaroFan
Camaro6 2016-2018
 
AZCamaroFan's Avatar
 
Drives: sometimes
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 18,449
To say the SS wasn't intended to be a great gt car is silly. Of course it was. They just had an overweight structure to deal with.
AZCamaroFan is offline  
Old 08-19-2009, 04:58 PM   #26
MrIcky

 
MrIcky's Avatar
 
Drives: Dodge Ram Megacab & Cobalt SS
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Boise
Posts: 1,536
I think the SS clearly is a great GT car. At some point though you have to decide how edgy customers want their handling to be. When they started this project they still had the Solstice GXP and the Vette (of course) for people who really wanted to tear up canyons- so I think dialed down the suspension a little more for cruisers. I think that was a good choice and you can't make the car all things to all people.
MrIcky is offline  
Old 08-19-2009, 05:00 PM   #27
Kurt_OH
Member
 
Drives: BMW, Hyundai
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Ohio
Posts: 192
Would a G8 GT/GTP out-handle a Camaro SS? Do they get the same understeer scorn?
Kurt_OH is offline  
Old 08-19-2009, 05:36 PM   #28
2010-1SS-IBM

 
Drives: 1998 Nissan, 2010 Camaro
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Dallas, Tx
Posts: 827
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrIcky View Post
I think the SS clearly is a great GT car. At some point though you have to decide how edgy customers want their handling to be. When they started this project they still had the Solstice GXP and the Vette (of course) for people who really wanted to tear up canyons- so I think dialed down the suspension a little more for cruisers. I think that was a good choice and you can't make the car all things to all people.
Yeah, I was thinking that too. But the drivers said the Camaro was hard to drive, where the Mustang was a joy, so apparently the edginess was in the Camaro due to the sloppier front end.
2010-1SS-IBM is offline  
 
Closed Thread

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
OFFICIAL 2010 Camaro Specifications (full tech specs PDF inside) Tran Guides, Manuals, Bulletins, Documentation Archive 394 06-11-2010 06:16 PM
2010 camaro SS vs. 2010 Mustang GT/Track Package Devil-eyes Chevy Camaro vs... 57 03-17-2009 07:30 PM
New Shelby Mustang revealed as race-only 'R Model' Sizzox General Automotive + Other Cars Discussion 4 01-30-2009 09:12 PM
Edmunds: 2010 Ford Mustang First Look Scotsman General Automotive + Other Cars Discussion 32 11-23-2008 09:55 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:53 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.