Logansneo

I've been checking reviews and specs on a few performance cars recently and have been comparing them with the newly released power numbers for the SS Camaro just for fun. Here's what I've come up with so far:


2009 M3 BMW

414 Hp (8.93 lb per Hp)
295 lb/ft (12.54 lb per lb/ft)
Weight: 3700 lbs 0.93 LatG
12.6@113 mph 4.1 - 60 mph
3.15 final gear 50.8/49.2 f/r balance


2009 911 Carrera

345 Hp (9.62 lb per Hp)
288 lb/ft (11.52 lb per lb/ft)
Weight: 3320 lbs 0.93 LatG
12.5@113 mph 4.1 - 60 mph
3.44 final gear 38/62 f/r balance


2009 Nissan 370Z

332 Hp (10.2 lb per Hp)
270 lb/ft (12.5 lb per lb/ft)
Weight: 3373 lbs 0.97 LatG
13.5@106 mph 4.9 - 60 mph
3.69 final gear 55/45 f/r balance


2009 Ferrari California

453 Hp (8.49 lb per Hp)
358 lb/ft (10.75 lb per lb/ft)
Weight: 3850 lbs 0.95 LatG(est)
12.3@114 mph 3.9 - 60 mph
3.30-3.60(est) final gear 47/53 f/r balance


2010 SS Camaro

426 Hp (9.06 lb per Hp)
420 lb/ft (9.19 lb per lb/ft)
Weight: 3860 lbs 0.92-0.94 LatG(my est)
12.7@113 mph(my est) 4.4 - 60 mph (my est)
3.45 final gear(?) 52/48 f/r balance


I know I'm speculating on the Camaro's performance numbers but based on what we've seen from the GXP, as well as what the above cars can do, I feel pretty confident that the Camaro could come damn close to my estimates. Also if you research the Ferrari's peak power rpm, and compare them to what the LS3 in the GXP does that motor achieves peak rpm for both Hp and torque WELL before the Ferrari does. I don't think it will beat the California, but it's still interesting!

JasonD

Interesting indeed! I am surprised this one didn't generate more conversation.

SSPORT10

I think it is very interesting and kind surprised as well that nobody has discussed this. Everyone always talks about how the C6 is up there with the best and most expensive sports cars in the world, whether it is power-to-weight comparisons, or best bang for the buck, or a number of other comparisons, but the SS might be overlooked a little (at least right now), but definitely should not be. Now we can say that a $30,000 GM sports car can keep up and be rightfully so compared to a lot more expensive sports cars in the world, instead of just a $45,000 sports car

mdacton

well seeing as how some of the info is est. not too much to go on yet.


I will say the aftermarket is going to blow up like never before........... all the ducks are in a row, and I mean some serious serious performance....... more than anyone can handle, will be available. I was really suprised at some of the stuff coming out from PRI

foxbat

i think we're witnessing the peak of the final 4-5 years of big motor/high hp fun. with the impending cafe standards, environmental concerns, and the car companies on life support, we must make note of these bountiful times and enjoy these great cars while we can....the fun will not last forever

Freak

I really hope some of the "The car wont handle well because of the weight" crowd take note of this. Ferrari isn't known for crappy handling.

Same thing happened in the 70's, and the manufacturers turned to technology to bring the power back bigger, cleaner and more efficiently than ever. The fun cars may go poopoo again, but they'll come back. Hell, right now you can actually buy a completely electric Shelby "427" or Mustang and they are working on one that will make about 2000 lb-ft of torque.

Yes, they are expensive right now, and the electric thing isn't my bag personally, but it shows you there are already ideas in use to overcome the problems facing our favorite toys in the near future.

Big Als Z

I remember the Camaro team telling us that the Camaro SS auto clicked off a 4.6 0-60 time at Indy.
But I did see where the bigger and heavier G8 GXP clicked off a 4.4 in MT's review. If thats the case, the Camaro could possibly click off something faster?
The NEW 540hp GT500 fo the 2010 Mustang and the current GT500KR click of 0-60 at 4.3.

As for the Ferrari Cali comparo to the Camaro is a bit far fetched. Ferrari can add a lot more technology and advanced systems to assist the cars handling. But thats not to say that you still couldnt feel the weight. Thier 599 GTB is still a heavy car as well coming under 3800lbs but is one of the best Ferrari's ever. But again, MRC shocks help the Ferrari.
To anyone that has driven the G8 GT, I think we have a very good idea at what it will feel like when we get into our Camaros.

SSPORT10

But you ahve to remember that the 599 GTB has 630 something HP, that engine is a monster! Also the G8 GT is a great car, but it is almost 70 HP less than the SS will have in the LS3 and it is also a couple hundred pounds heavier than the SS will be.

King Moose SS

Out of all the cars on the list, I think the camaro is the only one you could use as a daily driver for multiple things. I mean the trunk space, the rear seat space, and the head room on the camaro (I Belive) is better than all the others. Its also less expensive, and its backed by a 5year/100k mile warrenty.

I live in Michigan and I know for fact that the M3, carrera, and California, cannot handle Michigans winter (snow) and spring (pot-holed) roads, and the 370z would struggle. So, if you can't afford a play toy, but you need a car, that camaro is by far the best bang for the buck.

Logansneo

This is a re-post of specs I put on another thread a couple weeks ago and now that I have this thread going I felt it necessary to put the post in it's proper place:


I know that I have been notorious for comparing cars to the SS Camaro that most feel shouldn't be (my GT500 thread being the most recent comparator) but continuing on my obsessive research I couldn't help but make one with the recently reviewed Aston Martin V8 Vantage Roadster. Here's there test numbers (via Motor Trend):


VEHICLE TYPE: front-engine, rear-wheel-drive, 2-passenger, 2-door roadster

PRICE AS TESTED: $153,170 (base price: $135,950)

ENGINE TYPE: DOHC 32-valve V-8, aluminum block and heads, port fuel injection
Displacement: 289 cu in, 4735cc
Power (SAE net): 420 bhp @ 7000 rpm (9.14 lb per Hp)
Torque (SAE net): 347 lb-ft @ 5750 rpm (11.06 lb per lb/ft)

TRANSMISSION: 6-speed automated manual

DIMENSIONS:
Wheelbase: 102.4 in Length: 172.4 in Width: 73.4 in Height: 49.4 in
Curb weight: 3840 lb

C/D TEST RESULTS:
Zero to 60 mph: 4.5 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 10.6 sec
Zero to 150 mph: 27.9 sec
Street start, 5–60 mph: 5.1 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 12.9 sec @ 111 mph
Top speed (drag limited, mfr’s claim): 180 mph
Braking, 70–0 mph: 175 ft
Roadholding, 200-ft-dia skidpad: 0.87 g

FUEL ECONOMY:
EPA city/highway driving: 13/19 mpg
C/D observed: 15 mpg


With similar dimensions, nearly the same weight, horsepower, and upon further inspection wind drag, but with far less torque it will be quite interesting to see how the SS Camaro stacks up against a car costing nearly $120,000 more, in performance at least.
__________________

sphnx1989

Weight HP $/ per HP Weight:HP $Base MSRP

Challenger R/T 3623 250 $87.28 14.49 $21,820.00
Challenger SRT 8 4027 425 $93.69 9.48 $39,820.00
Mustang GT (2007) 3483 300 $85.65 11.61 $25,695.00
Mustang GT (2010) 3600 315 $88.87 11.43 $27,995.00
Mustang GT500 3900 550 $83.63 7.09 $45,995.00
Camaro LT 3741 300 $76.65 12.47 $22,995.00
Camaro SS 3860 426 $72.76 9.06 $30,995.00
Corvette 3217 430 $112.94 7.48 $48,565.00
Corvette Z06 3180 505 $146.39 6.30 $73,925.00
Corvette ZR1 3352 638 $162.96 5.25 $103,970.00

I know its hard to read LOL

FS3800

interesting to note, besides the GT-500 (which has better pounds per hp) the Camaro has the best V6 and V8 dollar per hp and pounds per hp of all the muscle cars..

Logansneo

Very good illustration, if not somewhat hard to read. I really get this uncanny feeling that the Camaro, both in V6 and V8 form will be THE performance/muscle/Gran Touring car to beat, simply in terms of bang for the buck, style, and sheer sexyness in the next few years!

JasonD

https://www.camaroz28.com/forums/blog.php?b=45

SSPORT10

Very true! GM definitely has a winner on their hands, and the first sold production car has not even been built yet!