2010 Mustang pricing.

V6 Coupe: $20,995

V6 Convertible:$25,995

GT Coupe: $27,995

GT Convertible: $32,995

GT500 Coupe: $46,325

GT500 Convertible: $51,225

Base prices I'm assuming?

IRS, a 6 speed transmission, and a 304HP direct injection V6 is worth the $2000 more that a Camaro costs.

I'll be more interested to see what the 2011 (or 2010.5) Mustang cost with the new 3.5L V6 and 5.0L V8

Base prices I'm assuming?


Yeah. The GT Premium coupe starts at $30,900 or so, right about where the 1SS starts. The GT Premium vert is 34-35.

Yeah. The GT Premium coupe starts at $30,900 or so, right about where the 1SS starts. The GT Premium vert is 34-35.how the they compare equipment wise?

how the they compare equipment wise?

Don't ask :lol:.

You'll have your standard stuff of course, the engines, IRS vs live axle ect, but the GT Premium comes standard w/ the big stereo, that Ford SYNC thing, Sirius, leather seats, ambient lighting, aluminum dash and trim, leather wheel w/ aluminum spokes (1SS Camaro may have a leather wheel, probably does), and a few other detail things. The GT premium is basically the 2SS Camaros equipment at 1SS prices. Of course the trade off is the engine, transmission, IRS, ect.

The GT premium is basically the 2SS Camaros equipment at 1SS prices. so they are not comparable. ok thanks.:)

At the same price point no, the Mustang will have more "options" at any given price, but the Camaro will have the advantage in powertrain and suspension.

The GT premium is basically the 2SS Camaros equipment at 1SS prices. Of course the trade off is the engine, transmission, IRS, ect.

so they are not comparable. ok thanks.:)

Don't forget the Mustang includes a buyer discount for purchasing a Ford. :D

Those healthily undercut Camaro's base prices, regardless of the difference in equipment.

As has been the tradition for many years, Camaro will likely be the "better" car in many ways, but more people will choose Mustang because of the price.

Suffice it to say that I am not surprised. If my pocketbook ever supports such a thing, I will still choose Camaro.

At the same price point no, the Mustang will have more "options" at any given price, but the Camaro will have the advantage in powertrain and suspension.
and "options" are what most people want.

Those healthily undercut Camaro's base prices, regardless of the difference in equipment.

As has been the tradition for many years, Camaro will likely be the "better" car in many ways, but more people will choose Mustang because of the price.

Suffice it to say that I am not surprised. If my pocketbook ever supports such a thing, I will still choose Camaro.exactly. and i would too.

Yeah, for people who want a "cool car" and don't know/care what IRS stands for, and they're deciding between the Mustang and Camaro...Plus the Mustang probably comes with at least silver painted, styled wheels versus Camaro's black-steel wheels with trim rings at $23k...I'd imagine the Mustang would be a more appealing choice for $2k less.

I'm going to choose the 304hp IRS variant, but that's just me because I've always like Chevrolet and I CAN tell an old car and technology that's been re-skinned. The Mustang should be priced less because overall I think it has less capability base-for-base. But that doesn't mean the automotive clueless is shopping for those the specific traits that Camaro values at a $2k price differential.

Yeah, for people who want a "cool car" and don't know/care what IRS stands for, and they're deciding between the Mustang and Camaro...Plus the Mustang probably comes with at least silver painted, styled wheels versus Camaro's black-steel wheels with trim rings at $23k...I'd imagine the Mustang would be a more appealing choice for $2k less.which is why they out sell the camaro.

which is why they out sell the camaro.

I know...the ideas mirror history. You'd think GM would have wanted the business from the automotive-clueless types and they would have done something to undercut Ford's pricing.

I know...the ideas mirror history. You'd think GM would have wanted the business from the automotive-clueless types and they would have done something to undercut Ford's pricing.

Some people were assuming that... but I never did. I always assumed that the new Camaro would represent an improvement over the current Mustang in several ways, and that its price would be correspondingly higher.

Some people were assuming that... but I never did. I always assumed that the new Camaro would represent an improvement over the current Mustang in several ways, and that its price would be correspondingly higher.
but some of those "improvements" most people don't care about.


personally i do but i'm sure most don't.

I know...the ideas mirror history. You'd think GM would have wanted the business from the automotive-clueless types and they would have done something to undercut Ford's pricing.its not the price in itself. its whats offered at those prices.

but some of those "improvements" most people don't care about.

Again, same as always.

I don't consider IRS an improvement. :p

Don't ask :lol:.

You'll have your standard stuff of course, the engines, IRS vs live axle ect, but the GT Premium comes standard w/ the big stereo, that Ford SYNC thing, Sirius, leather seats, ambient lighting, aluminum dash and trim, leather wheel w/ aluminum spokes (1SS Camaro may have a leather wheel, probably does), and a few other detail things. The GT premium is basically the 2SS Camaros equipment at 1SS prices. Of course the trade off is the engine, transmission, IRS, ect.

That isn't true.

The GT Premium comes standard with the STANDARD stereo which is the Shaker 500, that is not the "big" stereo. The Shaker 1000 is optional.

The 2SS Camaro comes standard with heated seats and power seats. You will have to opt for the Comfort Package (appr. $600) to get those on a Premium GT. This package also come with an auto dimming rearview mirror. The Camaro comes standard with auto dimming rearview mirror and outside heated, power-adjustable and auto dimming drivers side mirror.

You will have to opt for the Track Pack (appr. $1500) to get brakes anywhere close (and they are not equal) to the Camaro and close performance (3.73 gears help the Mustang quite a bit). Also in order to get wheels similar in size (19" wheels for the Mustang with the Track Pack) to the Camaro.

The Camaro also come standard with PASS - Key III security and the Mustang requires a Security Package (appr. $400).

Mustang GT Premium has SYNC, ambient interior lighting, and MY COLOR.

Camaro 2SS has PDIM, bluetooth, USB port, Universal Home Remote, driver information center, 4 auxiliary gauges, and interior lighting.

Similarly equipped cars:

Mustang = $33,400.............(30,900+600+1500+400)
Camaro = $34,180..............base MSRP


I am seeing GT500 prices right at $50k with HIDs being the only option. Does the $46 include the gas guzzler tax? I'm thinking it doesn't.

damn 2k less for a mustang? hmmmm...

ill hold off until the pricing comes out after they update the engines again to make my judgement.

Mustang = $33,400.............(30,900+600+1500+400)
Camaro = $34,180

Yep, and that Mustang has fewer airbags, a slightly worse crash test rating (assuming Camaro gets five stars across the board, as we've been told was the goal), worse gas mileage... the list goes on.

EDIT: I just learned that Mustang gets across-the-board 5-star ratings as of '09, so scratch that off the list of advantages.

IRS, a 6 speed transmission, and a 304HP direct injection V6 is worth the $2000 more that a Camaro costs.

I'll be more interested to see what the 2011 (or 2010.5) Mustang cost with the new 3.5L V6 and 5.0L V8

They will be more or less the same price as the current versions.

how the they compare equipment wise?

As far as convience items in the cabin, very well, but Camaro has IRS.

Yeah, for people who want a "cool car" and don't know/care what IRS stands for, and they're deciding between the Mustang and Camaro...Plus the Mustang probably comes with at least silver painted, styled wheels versus Camaro's black-steel wheels with trim rings at $23k...I'd imagine the Mustang would be a more appealing choice for $2k less..

As a person who has own alot of both, to tell you the truth, IRS itself simply doesn't mean anything and is grossly overrated. Sure, like having 422 horsepower, it's good for bragging rights, but even 422 horsepower is only going to equal 2-3 tenths of a second to 60 mph next to a car that has 100 hp less. To the seat of the pants, no one is going to notice.

The only thing IRS means is that if you encounter a bump on the road on a curve while going alot faster than you should be going, your rear end won't end up skipping sideways... or worse. Beyond that, 99.9% of ride, handling, stability, IRS doesn't offer any advantages over modern live axle cars (ie: 4th gen Camaro and current Mustang).

Choosing between the Camaro and Mustang boils down to preference, cabin, and the general "Fun" of the car. The old 5.0 Mustangs were the most crudest of all performance cars, but they were heaps more fun than a more trackworthy 3rd gen Camaro.

If the new Camaro captures the fun quotent of the Mustang (and that does NOT as opposed to simply the fastest or the stickiest), the Camaro will do very well against to the Mustang.... might even beat it in sales for a change. :)

As far as convience items in the cabin, very well,...


No they don't. Why do people keep saying this.:mad: See my breakdown above. The 2SS Camaro has more standard equipment than the Mustang GT Premium. Both substantial equipment, like heated seats, and bells and whisltes, like PDIM, bluetooth, and USB port.

Also: a limited slip diff is standard on a 2SS, but not on a GT Premium. That's an extra $300 on the Mustang's tally if you want that.

EDIT: turns out the above is false. See post #52 for explanation.

The only thing IRS means is that if you encounter a bump on the road on a curve while going alot faster than you should be going, your rear end won't end up skipping sideways... or worse.

Guy, the next time you're in Michigan, give me a buzz. I'll show you some bumps that will send a LRA car skipping sideways in a very disconcerting manner at just 20mph (less than half of the speed limit in both of the two cases I have in mind).

IRS is a lot more important to some people than others. Personally, I'm extremely interested. I suspect other people in Michigan (and anywhere else that's subject to frost heave) would agree.

A SS vs GT comparison isn't fair. They are too different. The LT vs GT would be a closer comparison. Engine power, price, options, even the weight is closer.

IRS is a lot more important to some people than others.

The more "global" GM wants the Camaro to be, the more it will need it.

...and outside heated, power-adjustable and auto dimming drivers side mirror.


an OHPAADDSM? :eek:

(seriously, that option is a mouthful! :lol:)

A SS vs GT comparison isn't fair. They are too different. The LT vs GT would be a closer comparison. Engine power, price, options, even the weight is closer.

My guess is that most buyers interested in a Mustang GT won't give a V6 Camaro a chance.

No they don't. Why do people keep saying this.:mad: See my breakdown above. The 2SS Camaro has more standard equipment than the Mustang GT Premium. Both substantial equipment, like heated seats, and bells and whisltes, like PDIM, bluetooth, and USB port.


Heated rotating mirrors aren't gonna cause a line around the block for camaros, I think guionm is stating that for the most part, both cars are pretty similar when it comes to standard equipment that drives people to make a purchase.

I think if anything the sales of camaro vs. Mustang is gonna come down to peoples faith that GM is around long enough to honor the factory warrenty. Both cars are pretty similar, price wise & content wise.

Plus the Mustang probably comes with at least silver painted, styled wheels versus Camaro's black-steel wheels with trim rings at $23k...I'd imagine the Mustang would be a more appealing choice for $2k less.

All Mustangs currently have standard aluminum wheels. Don't know if that changes for 2010 or not, but as far as the current car, the base $20,000 V6 has aluminum wheels.

Heated rotating mirrors aren't gonna cause a line around the block for camaros, I think guionm is stating that for the most part, both cars are pretty similar when it comes to standard equipment that drives people to make a purchase.

I think if anything the sales of camaro vs. Mustang is gonna come down to peoples faith that GM is around long enough to honor the factory warrenty. Both cars are pretty similar, price wise & content wise.

You don't consider 6-way power adjustable seats and heated seats an important option? Perhaps you have never lived in a cold climate!?! Or never experienced heated seats!

Also, to someone even remotely interested in performance, the Track Pack, at $1,500 is virtually a must have, especially to compare the car to the Camaro. You need this for the handling, the braking, the acceleration and the "look": the style, wheels, "rims" if you will (haha JakeRobb).

I would not touch a Mustang GT Premium without the $600 Comfort Package (heated and power seats) and the $1,500 Track Pack (suspension tuning, 19" wheels, 3.73 rear gears and limited slip diff.).

So to me, and others like me, it takes at least a $33k Mustang GT to make it an honest purchasing decision between a $34k Camaro 2SS.

In 2011, when the Mustang GT gets the 5.0, if it only gains about $500 to $1,000 in price, THEN its going to be a REALLY TOUGH decision. And in the end, we all win!

Honestly, when it comes time to replace my Camaro, a 3,600# 400hp Mustang (live axle and all) might get my vote over a 3,900# 425hp Camaro. Time will tell. I'm still betting the Mustang comes in long on weight and short on power though.

"rims" if you will (haha JakeRobb).

:mad: :lol:

Now you're just trying to goad me. :p

You don't consider 6-way power adjustable seats and heated seats an important option? Perhaps you have never lived in a cold climate!?! Or never experienced heated seats!



Personally, I don't like heated seats and certainly wouldn't consider them for a Camaro, and yes I live where it gets cold. I think that it should have been an individual option on the Camaro, rather than forcing it on anyone who wants a 2SS.

Personally, I don't like heated seats and certainly wouldn't consider them for a Camaro, and yes I live where it gets cold. I think that it should have been an individual option on the Camaro, rather than forcing it on anyone who wants a 2SS.

You get the same argument the other way... "I have to get heated seats as an option? It already costs X dollars. It should be standard on this package."

Personally, I don't like heated seats and certainly wouldn't consider them for a Camaro, and yes I live where it gets cold. I think that it should have been an individual option on the Camaro, rather than forcing it on anyone who wants a 2SS.

I love heated seats, everyone I know that has used them loves them. I wish they were an option on every car at every trim level. I hate that some cars only have them with leather. One of the reasons we got the Saturn Aura was for the heated cloth seats.

The Mustang prices above don't include the destination and delivery charge of $850.

I like heated seats well enough, but cooled seats are even better. Plus, they improve real-world fuel economy by decreasing use of air conditioning.

Personally, I don't like heated seats and certainly wouldn't consider them for a Camaro, and yes I live where it gets cold. I think that it should have been an individual option on the Camaro, rather than forcing it on anyone who wants a 2SS.

Well your in the minority on that one. I can't think of anyone that says, "Man I love these cold leather seats."

My guess is that most buyers interested in a Mustang GT won't give a V6 Camaro a chance.

Why is that? Maybe a die hard enthusiast but a regular ole dumb Joe? I bet he would.

Way more "options" on the 2LT than the base GT
On paper its only 11 hp shy of the Mustang
Very close price
27MPG rating

So for the same price I can get a V-6 well optioned Camaro that gets 27 MPG( I know I can do better) or a base GT (maybe a few options to even out the price) and look oh snap the shifter in the Camaro has a 6 on it. 6 is greater than the 5 so its got to be better. ;)

This is the first generation of Camaro that I have ever liked the V-6 car. I think its an amazing deal.

Why is that? Maybe a die hard enthusiast but a regular ole dumb Joe? I bet he would.

I think "regular ole dumb Joe" is more likely to buy a loaded up V6 Mustang for even less.

I don't care about heated OR power seats. But I'm well aware that I'm in a small minority. :)

I think that it should have been an individual option on the Camaro, rather than forcing it on anyone who wants a 2SS.

You can always exercise the option of not turning them on. ;)

We have them on our Mazda3 and I can take it or leave it.

Also: a limited slip diff is standard on a 2SS, but not on a GT Premium.

Uh no....
All Mustang GTs have a Track-Lock (Limited Slip) rear diff.
What you have to pay for extra is the gears.
Options in the track pack are 3.73s

I will be curious to see what the insurance is, on that 304hp, base Camaro.

That said, the average V6 Ponycar buyer, really does not care................ and quite possibly doesn't even know, what the horsepower is, of their engine. Short of the guys who get one because they couldn't afford the insurance on the V8................. or the 1% of the buying public, that are enthusiasts like we are............... they could care less. They buy the car because they like the look, and the idea of having a Mustang.

This is something that GM has really not figured out. I fear that, once again, the Camaro will only be purchased by enthusiasts. If that is the case, it will fail once again.

As they are saying about GM, the more things change, the more they remain the same.

You get the same argument the other way... "I have to get heated seats as an option? It already costs X dollars. It should be standard on this package."

I love heated seats, everyone I know that has used them loves them. I wish they were an option on every car at every trim level. I hate that some cars only have them with leather. One of the reasons we got the Saturn Aura was for the heated cloth seats.

Well your in the minority on that one. I can't think of anyone that says, "Man I love these cold leather seats."

You can always exercise the option of not turning them on. ;)

We have them on our Mazda3 and I can take it or leave it.

Wow, touchy subject. :)

Also: a limited slip diff is standard on a 2SS, but not on a GT Premium. That's an extra $300 on the Mustang's tally if you want that.

The GT is coming with an open axle this year? Has Ford adopted the silly as **** "e-diff"?

Honestly, when it comes time to replace my Camaro, a 3,600# 400hp Mustang (live axle and all) might get my vote over a 3,900# 425hp Camaro. Time will tell. I'm still betting the Mustang comes in long on weight and short on power though.

The new 5.0 is said to be lighter in weight (I'm guessing compared to the DOHC 4.6) and the M6 doesn't add a significant amount of weight compared to the M5 of the current car. The only way I can see the Mustang gaining some F5 size flab would be for Ford to significantly beef the structure of the car to improve crash standards, otherwise the 5.0 (even rumored at 400hp) isn't enough to overwhelm the current chassis in any form

As much as I want to believe Ford will produce a 400hp 5.0, I have my doubts, Jaguar can't do it, so i'm trimming my expectations to 350hp for the 5.0 when it debuts.

The new 5.0 is said to be lighter in weight (I'm guessing compared to the DOHC 4.6) and the M6 doesn't add a significant amount of weight compared to the M5 of the current car. The only way I can see the Mustang gaining some F5 size flab would be for Ford to significantly beef the structure of the car to improve crash standards, otherwise the 5.0 (even rumored at 400hp) isn't enough to overwhelm the current chassis in any form

As much as I want to believe Ford will produce a 400hp 5.0, I have my doubts, Jaguar can't do it, so i'm trimming my expectations to 350hp for the 5.0 when it debuts.

Sounds like we are thinking about the same. I am basing my weights of the current 2010 GT with the Track Pack, which came in at 3572 lbs. in the last test I saw. The 5.0 DOHC is certainly going to weigh more than the 4.6 SOHC. The better brakes from the Tack Pack, suspension components, etc. are going to be needed on a roughly 400hp Mustang. Will it get the Brembos from the GT500 to compete with the Brembos on the Camaro? Will the 6-speed add much if any weight, will chassis "adjustments" be needed to fit it? Will the drive shaft get any larger/heavier? Will they beef up the chassis to get a 5 star crash test rating if the Camaro does? I think the crash test rating is a big selling point to the "average" buyer.

So to me, the 5.0 DOHC Mustang GT is going to weight AT LEAST 3,600 lbs. And I think it has the potential to weight 3,650 lbs. or even a few more.

I'm not sure how much horsepower it is going to have, but they say no DI for the 2011 GT and the 5.0L in the new Jag makes 385hp with DI. They are different architectures, but they are both engines from the same camp, so it does make me wonder.

Some "what if" numbers:

2010 Camaro SS: (3860/426) = 9.06 lbs/hp
2011 Mustang GT: (3600/400) = 9.0 lbs/hp
2011 Mustang GT: (3650/400) = 9.125 lbs/hp
2011 Mustang GT: (3600/375) = 9.6 lbs/hp
2011 Mustang GT: (3650/375) = 9.73 lbs/hp

Getting to that 400hp mark is everything on the next GT in terms of performance. Even if it costs them a few more pounds.

The new 5.0 is said to be lighter in weight (I'm guessing compared to the DOHC 4.6) and the M6 doesn't add a significant amount of weight compared to the M5 of the current car. The only way I can see the Mustang gaining some F5 size flab would be for Ford to significantly beef the structure of the car to improve crash standards, otherwise the 5.0 (even rumored at 400hp) isn't enough to overwhelm the current chassis in any form

As much as I want to believe Ford will produce a 400hp 5.0, I have my doubts, Jaguar can't do it, so i'm trimming my expectations to 350hp for the 5.0 when it debuts.

How dare you bossco?

A DOHC 5.0L will absolutely deliver 400 bhp! How else could you justify the expense of DOHC? :yes:

How dare you bossco?

A DOHC 5.0L will absolutely deliver 400 bhp! How else could you justify the expense of DOHC? :yes:

Ahh, the DOHC 4.6 in the Mach 1 was nowhere near 400hp and they justified the expense.

Uh no....
All Mustang GTs have a Track-Lock (Limited Slip) rear diff.
What you have to pay for extra is the gears.
Options in the track pack are 3.73s

The GT is coming with an open axle this year? Has Ford adopted the silly as **** "e-diff"?

Turns out I was wrong. I was using their site to build and price a GT Premium, and it offered a "3.55 Limited Slip Axle Ratio" as a $300 upgrade. That sounded like the base rear end didn't have limited slip. Interestingly, that option doesn't seem to be available on a regular GT.

However, I've confirmed (via this PDF (http://www.fordvehicles.com/assets/pdf/vehicle-specs/09_Mustang_Online_Spec_Lite.pdf), page 3) that I was incorrect. I'll go back and edit my post.

Will they beef up the chassis to get a 5 star crash test rating if the Camaro does? I think the crash test rating is a big selling point to the "average" buyer.

As of '09 Mustang gets 5 stars in all categories.

http://www.automotive.com/2009/12/ford/mustang/crash-tests/index.html

The '08 got 4 stars in the side-impact rear-occupant category, and 5 stars in everything else.

http://www.automotive.com/2008/12/ford/mustang/crash-tests/index.html

How dare you bossco?

A DOHC 5.0L will absolutely deliver 400 bhp! How else could you justify the expense of DOHC? :yes:

Shhhhh..... don't snitch on me over at the blue oval camp, they'd probably pull my card for speaking heresy. :eek: :D

Although I remain hopefull, if that doesn't pan out I've got plan C right here.

http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b303/bossco/P1000004.jpg

excuse my messy garage though

Hmmm....wasn't one of the big reasons touted for the excessive (IMO) weight of the new Camaro was so that it could earn those 5 stars? Didn't we even hear the man himself say that? And if so, how is that you can have a car like Mustang weigh 400-ish lbs less and still get that crash rating?

Not that I think Mustang is svelte by any means.

I'm wondering if the Ford enthusiasts are as worried about Genesis Coupe prices as some folks here (assumed GM enthusiasts) are worried about Mustang prices. :think:

Ford guys will buy Mustangs; GM guys will buy Camaros. People on the fence will weigh all the options, however most folks looking to purchase a RWD sports coupe are typically more concerned about performance than MSRP.

The Mustang prices above don't include the destination and delivery charge of $850.do the camaro prices?

As long as they don't pick up any more weight, and they actually have some n/a mod potential (unlike the last 13 years of GT's), I'd say even 350hp would be sweet in those cars.

Hmmm....wasn't one of the big reasons touted for the excessive (IMO) weight of the new Camaro was so that it could earn those 5 stars? Didn't we even hear the man himself say that? And if so, how is that you can have a car like Mustang weigh 400-ish lbs less and still get that crash rating?

Not that I think Mustang is svelte by any means.


The big advantage which Ford has now with the Mustang, is that it is on it's very own architecture. And Ford will continue to refine it, now that GRWD is dead.

Speaking of GRWD, one of the reasons it was axed is because it would have added lots of weight to the Mustang. That's the problem with creating ONE architecture for many products. In the end, they all become compromised. The Mustang get's too heavy. The Lincoln loses legroom. The Falcon becomes too expensive.

D2C is now exclusively for Mustang, and future refinements won't have to have considerations on how they affect the Lincoln version or the Falcon version. What a nice position to be in...

And if so, how is that you can have a car like Mustang weigh 400-ish lbs less and still get that crash rating?
I figure it's because the structure is built to handle ~25% less torque.

do the camaro prices?

The prices on CamaroBuilder do.

I figure it's because the structure is built to handle ~25% less torque.

The ability to handle less torque affects crash ratings? If the Mustang had been built to handle more torque (do you know how much it CAN handle?), would that have given it any more crash rating "stars"?

My only point is that crash ratings were given as ONE of the main reasons for the Camaro's weight. I understand completely that there were other reasons (such as being able to handle more power).

Then again....how much torque did the 03/04 Cobra have to handle - regardless of crash ratings?

I figure it's because the structure is built to handle ~25% less torque.

Or is it? -->'10 GT500 - 540hp/510tq on the same body as the V6/GT Mustang. Addtional bracing is limited to some bolt on items like a strut tower brace (which I dont think the '10 GT500 has either - I'll have to go look at some engine bay pics again) and some k-member struts.

Or is it? -->'10 GT500 - 540hp/510tq on the same body as the V6/GT Mustang. Addtional bracing is limited to some bolt on items like a strut tower brace (which I dont think the '10 GT500 has either - I'll have to go look at some engine bay pics again) and some k-member struts.



Beat me to it....

You guys make it seem like the camaro weighs 5000 pounds and is gonna run 15's in the 1/4. I bet once it's out and people drive it the weight will be a non issue.

The prices on CamaroBuilder do.
are the ones qouted in this thread have it?

You guys make it seem like the camaro weighs 5000 pounds and is gonna run 15's in the 1/4. I bet once it's out and people drive it the weight will be a non issue.

Weight is ALWAYS an issue to someone that races their vehicle, and to many enthusiasts who don't.

But anyway....No, the Camaro will weigh ~3900 lbs and will probably average high 12's to low 13's in the 1/4 (some folks will get them to run a bit better, some worse).

That was not the point. But it is a point that has been beaten to death, so much to the delight of many, I shall digress from this point further (I don't know if that pun should be intended or not).

are the ones qouted in this thread have it?

LOL. Oh no...don't irk the grammer....err....grammar police! :p

are the ones qouted in this thread have it?

This price:
Camaro = $34,180..............base MSRP

is the only 2010 Camaro price I can find quoted in this thread. That is the price of a 2SS including destination.

Or is it? -->'10 GT500 - 540hp/510tq on the same body as the V6/GT Mustang. Addtional bracing is limited to some bolt on items like a strut tower brace (which I dont think the '10 GT500 has either - I'll have to go look at some engine bay pics again) and some k-member struts.

So where do the extra ~350 pounds come from on the GT500? It's not all in the engine. I'm sure some of it comes from a beefier transmission and larger wheels and tires. I don't know which rear end is included in any of the Mustang models, but I'd guess that the GT500's is heavier than the GT's, too.

Even so, all of that shouldn't add up to 350 pounds.

Weight is ALWAYS an issue to someone that races their vehicle, and to many enthusiasts who don't.

But anyway....No, the Camaro will weigh ~3900 lbs and will probably average high 12's to low 13's in the 1/4 (some folks will get them to run a bit better, some worse).

That was not the point. But it is a point that has been beaten to death, so much to the delight of many, I shall digress from this point further (I don't know if that pun should be intended or not).


I know what your saying, and I understand how the weight is a concern. All I'm trying to say is with how often it's brought up... you would think GM is trying to pass a dump truck off as the new camaro.:lol:

I will be curious to see what the insurance is, on that 304hp, base Camaro.

That said, the average V6 Ponycar buyer, really does not care................ and quite possibly doesn't even know, what the horsepower is, of their engine. Short of the guys who get one because they couldn't afford the insurance on the V8................. or the 1% of the buying public, that are enthusiasts like we are............... they could care less. They buy the car because they like the look, and the idea of having a Mustang.

This is something that GM has really not figured out. I fear that, once again, the Camaro will only be purchased by enthusiasts. If that is the case, it will fail once again.

As they are saying about GM, the more things change, the more they remain the same.I don't think that is fair. There were lots of V6 Camaros sold too.

The Mustang does enjoy a more universal appeal with non-enthusiasts, it seems. Much like the Corvette for GM. In fact, the Corvette's existence may be part of the reason for that. The Mustang has generally always been the "sportiest" Ford, whereas the Camaro was always in the shadow of the Vette. Mostly, though, it is probably the more upright seating and less aggressive styling of the Mustang over the past 25 years or so. But I really don't think the new Camaro caters excessively to enthusiasts. Like you said, a lot of V6 buyers won't care about the horsepower. So why would they care about 304 vs. 210 (or 265)? But even some non-enthusiasts at least have an inkling about power.

When the fuel economy numbers are more or less the same, it will come down to style, features, price, etc. for those non-performance biased buyers. Price will of course help the Mustang. But the Camaro is gonna turn more heads. The Mustang will look quite familiar (and good) when it comes out, but the Camaro will stand out.

the mustang will be easier to live with.

the mustang will be easier to live with.How so?

Wow, touchy subject. :)

And downright SHAMEFUL that it is such a touchy subject when talking about a PONYCAR to boot. :(

NO F-ing heated seats in a basic ponycar. From the factory? NO! NEVER!
Aftermarket - well sure... knock yourself out! :thumb:

If anyone wants a land missile with heated seats, heated mirrors, exotic leather everywhere, huds, navs, dvds, tvs, sync, ipod ports, gaming ports, microwaves, sinks, and tubs - then they need to buy a friggin Cadillac CTSv or a Lincoln MKS and have it turbo'd. I'd rather YOU live with 4-doors in your missile than force ME to have to live with (and pay for, and haul around) all kinds of retarded-@ss wiring, mounts, computers, and crap on my 2-door that I don't want or need.

STAY THE FLOCK AWAY FROM MY MUSTANGS AND CAMAROS WITH THAT SH1+!!! :mad:

And in the words of Yosemite Sam - "Yeah - them's fightin' words!"

SERIOUSLY. If you want all the doo-dads and gizmos, you DON'T want a ponycar. And if Ford and GM don't stop trying to make these cars something they are not, they WILL fail - both of them.

So, is anyone confused on my position regarding "fluff" on my ponycar? :think:

So, is anyone confused on my position regarding "fluff" on my ponycar? :think:

I'm not confused, but I disagree. :)

I think that things like that should be optional, not standard. But I am 100% against them being entirely unavailable.

I'm not confused, but I disagree. :)

I think that things like that should be optional, not standard. Generally my take as well.

As of '09 Mustang gets 5 stars in all categories.

http://www.automotive.com/2009/12/ford/mustang/crash-tests/index.html

The '08 got 4 stars in the side-impact rear-occupant category, and 5 stars in everything else.

http://www.automotive.com/2008/12/ford/mustang/crash-tests/index.html

We need to see what the 2010 Mustang gets for ratings since there are new ratings that take effect for the 2010 model year.

http://www.motorauthority.com/changes-in-store-for-us-crash-test-standards.html

This is pretty old news too:

Update: Federal officials have revealed changes to the New Car Assessment Program (NCAP), which will now consolidate front and side impact and rollover results into one rating, simulate striking a pole with a vehicle and include female crash dummies. The new rating system will also include testing for risk of leg injury and reporting whether vehicles have safety technology. The new regulations take effect for the 2010 model year, federal regulators said today.



As for the Camaro versus Mustang weight Bob mentioned. We can look at it this way.

We will round Camaro up from 3860 to 3900 pounds for simplicity. We will round Mustang with Track Pack (closer to 2011 weight, but still shy) from 3572 to 3600 pounds.

So what we see is that the Camaro is roughly 300 pounds heavier than Mustang. Depending on who you ask IRS adds anywhere from 125 to 200 pounds. Thus, an IRS Mustang GT could be around 3725 to 3800 pounds. Since the S197 chassis was designed from the ground up for IRS we will say it would be on the lighter side.

So, we have a 3725 pounds Mustang GT with IRS. If we add weight for larger Brembo brakes like the Camaro has, 20 inch wheels as opposed to 19 inch wheels, and the weight increase of the large DOHC 5.0L engine needed to come close to the Camaro's power, things look to make sense.

I could see a 400hp DOHC 5.0 Mustang GT with 20" wheels, Brembo brakes, and IRS weighing 3,800 to 3,900 pounds.

For 99/01/03-04 Cobras, the IRS added 95 lbs. This was a "band-aid" system that was not designed for the cars. No way adding IRS to the Mustang (or the Camaro) should add 125-200 lbs - unless you have info on the IRS for the S-197 chassis?

Don't really have any opinions on the other things. I have no use for 18"+ wheels.

So what we see is that the Camaro is roughly 300 pounds heavier than Mustang. Depending on who you ask IRS adds anywhere from 125 to 200 pounds. Thus, an IRS Mustang GT could be around 3725 to 3800 pounds. Since the S197 chassis was designed from the ground up for IRS we will say it would be on the lighter side.

So, we have a 3725 pounds Mustang GT with IRS. If we add weight for larger Brembo brakes like the Camaro has, 20 inch wheels as opposed to 19 inch wheels, and the weight increase of the large DOHC 5.0L engine needed to come close to the Camaro's power, things look to make sense.

I could see a 400hp DOHC 5.0 Mustang GT with 20" wheels, Brembo brakes, and IRS weighing 3,800 to 3,900 pounds.


A well designed and integrated IRS ideally only adds 25-50 pounds over a well engineered live axle. On the Camaro, the IRS added (I'm told), 80 pounds over a live axle.

So where do the extra ~350 pounds come from on the GT500? It's not all in the engine. I'm sure some of it comes from a beefier transmission and larger wheels and tires. I don't know which rear end is included in any of the Mustang models, but I'd guess that the GT500's is heavier than the GT's, too.

Even so, all of that shouldn't add up to 350 pounds.

Shockingly it is almost all engine. The GT comes with an all aluminum sohc 3v 4.6 V8 , the GT500 on the other hand comes with a iron block/aluminum head 5.4 dohc 4v S/C V8.

The shipping weight on the GT500 is around 840 pounds (vs 670 for the 429 - how crazy is that, yank your 5.4 S/C mill and drop a stroked BB in for better handling :lol:) and the 3v 4.6 is 440 pounds dressed - Even spotng the 3v 60 pounds of cardboard and wood that still leaves a 340 pound difference for the iron block, dohc heads and supercharger.

I'm not confused, but I disagree. :)

I think that things like that should be optional, not standard. But I am 100% against them being entirely unavailable.

While I appreciate your opinion and position, I respectfully submit that I hope it never happens.

To make it "available" from the factory, the car has to be designed to accomodate the "crap".

For example, there can not be 14 variations of a wiring harness... 1 for the base car with nothing in it, 1 for the car with nav, 1 for the car with nav and the Shaker 1000, 1 for the car without NAV and with the Shaker 1000, 1 for the car without nav or the Shaker but with heated seats, 1 for the car with heated seats and nav but basic stereo, 1 for the.... and on and on. So they develop the full harness with all the features and simply don't plug-in the options not installed in the car. So the guy wanting the basic V6 with no frills will STILL PAY for the extra wiring, the extra clips, the extra mounts, the extra grounds, etc for a bunch of crap he didn't even get. THAT adds unneccessary cost and weight to EVERY CAR, not tomention adding cost to the engineering, design, tooling, costing, assembly line, installers, etc that is captured in overhead and pasted into the fixed-cost of every unibody built as well. AGAIN - not fair.

Ponycars should be basic, simple cars. You want luxury crap, you DON'T want a ponycar.

If you simply MUST have a pimped-up ponycar, your Best Option? ... Aftermarket tuners and shops.
Have Roush or Shelby or Callaway or someone buy a ponycar for you and "rebuild it" to your specs. You want the extra crap - GREAT... you got it, YOU paid for it, you enjoy it! Meanwhile, I did not have to pay for the crap in my car that you wanted. That plays perfectly into Ford's position with the GT for the last 25 years too - sell you a good basic canvas and you can go paint it however you like.

:thumb:

are the ones qouted in this thread have it?

The Camaro ones do have the destination/delivery the Mustang don't.

Heh, I find it funny folks "need" alot of the options on cars these days. Heated seats being mentioned already, but I think the best is IRS (granted this usually isn't an option), but I variously heard that SRAs (and this a no BS'er) are health threatening over the long term (SRAs lead to back injury) to down right dangerous in general (which people often site here and other places).

Shockingly it is almost all engine. The GT comes with an all aluminum sohc 3v 4.6 V8 , the GT500 on the other hand comes with a iron block/aluminum head 5.4 dohc 4v S/C V8.

The shipping weight on the GT500 is around 840 pounds (vs 670 for the 429 - how crazy is that, yank your 5.4 S/C mill and drop a stroked BB in for better handling :lol:) and the 3v 4.6 is 440 pounds dressed - Even spotng the 3v 60 pounds of cardboard and wood that still leaves a 340 pound difference for the iron block, dohc heads and supercharger.

Can you imagine a GT500 with an LS7? :eek:

Ponycars should be basic, simple cars. You want luxury crap, you DON'T want a ponycar. Thank you.

I've long been disgusted by those who display nearly unbridled glee that the new Camaro has essentially become a rolling living room / entertainment center.

Can you imagine a GT500 with an LS7? :eek:

That would be awesome (although I'm a snobby purist when it comes to stuff like that, I just couldn't bring myself to do that sort of engine swap - now 600+ CID Boss 429 had I the cash to burn!)

The shipping weight on the GT500 is around 840 pounds (vs 670 for the 429 - how crazy is that, yank your 5.4 S/C mill and drop a stroked BB in for better handling :lol:) and the 3v 4.6 is 440 pounds dressed

I've heard that the 3v 4.6 is ~440 dressed before, and I still don't believe it. All-aluminum LS engines are ~450 dressed, and having seen a picture of a mod motor next to an LS (or maybe it was a traditional SBC, but those are the same size), I have a hard time believing that it's lighter. Those things are huge.

Can you provide some evidence that your 440lb figure is accurate?

I didn't use to believe it either, but somebody somewhere on this site (or perhaps another) did indeed look it up and the 3V SOHC is just about the same weight as an LSx. I'm just not motivated to go look it up.

While the dimensions of ANY mod motor are indeed large, the actual mass can be deceiving, as there is a LOT of empty air between those cylinder heads!

Can you provide some evidence that your 440lb figure is accurate?

http://www.fordracingparts.com/download/catalogs/2009-pp.pdf - page 108, although I've seen Ford list the dressed weight of the 3v as 440 pounds as of late (I cant remeber the source though)

That would be awesome (although I'm a snobby purist when it comes to stuff like that, I just couldn't bring myself to do that sort of engine swap - now 600+ CID Boss 429 had I the cash to burn!)


Yeah, me too. Just saying, if Chevy had a Camaro as light as a Mustang, or Ford had a 500 horse motor as light as an LS7 = awesome ponycar.

For 99/01/03-04 Cobras, the IRS added 95 lbs. This was a "band-aid" system that was not designed for the cars. No way adding IRS to the Mustang (or the Camaro) should add 125-200 lbs - unless you have info on the IRS for the S-197 chassis?

Don't really have any opinions on the other things. I have no use for 18"+ wheels.

Those weights came from some of the more senior guys on the svtperformance forums. As for the wheels, I was just comparing apples to apples. You asked where the weight came from and some of it is certainly in the wheels and tires.

Heh, I find it funny folks "need" alot of the options on cars these days. Heated seats being mentioned already, but I think the best is IRS (granted this usually isn't an option), but I variously heard that SRAs (and this a no BS'er) are health threatening over the long term (SRAs lead to back injury) to down right dangerous in general (which people often site here and other places).

That part about "health threatening" is hilarious. I have never heard that one.

As for "down right dangerous" it depends on the roads and who's driving. There are a couple of pavement transitions in the middle of 45mph curves (we are talking a 1" drop cutting diagonally across the road from shoulder to shoulder) on some roads in Clemson that I would NOT want my wife driving my Camaro across because it would be dangerous. If it was raining, it would be down right scary! That transition really unsettles the car and skips the whole rear sideways. An IRS would glide right over that.

We don't always have the best roads down here in SC :)

Understand on the wheels...just stating an opinion. :)

As for the IRS....I suppose anything is possible for the S197 - but given that there are no IRS systems available for the car (that I'm aware of anyway), I'd like to see real data vice what someone on svtperformance said. Do you have a link, by chance?

For the SN95 cars...my info came from me physically doing two swaps and actually weighing the car(s) before and after.

Understand on the wheels...just stating an opinion. :)

As for the IRS....I suppose anything is possible for the S197 - but given that there are no IRS systems available for the car (that I'm aware of anyway), I'd like to see real data vice what someone on svtperformance said. Do you have a link, by chance?

For the SN95 cars...my info came from me physically doing two swaps and actually weighing the car(s) before and after.

Were you putting a regular old stock Mustang GT 8.8 bolt in or a built rear?

The reason I ask, is you would come up with a lower number than what you might see with a factory rear that was not built with stronger axles, diff, cover, etc.

Correct - a good set of 31 spline axles and some aftermarket differentials are heavier than stock. With the 99, I did a direct swap out of a 99 GT. With the 04, I had a TrueTrac - which is a few lbs heavier than stock.

That part about "health threatening" is hilarious. I have never heard that one.

Yup, that one came out of a discussion about long trips in an SRA car, amazingly :rolleyes: after doing a 21 hour stint I can still walk :eek:

Yup, that one came out of a discussion about long trips in an SRA car, amazingly :rolleyes: after doing a 21 hour stint I can still walk :eek:

Ha, the 8.5 hour trip from Maryland to South Carolina used to KILL my lower back in my 95' Formula. However, I never blamed it on the SRA. I am pretty darn sure it had something to do with it being lowered with some really stiff springs and inadequate shocks! People these days. Next you know someone will be suing for back injuries caused by their SRA!!!!

Bob, I will search for those weight numbers when the search function is back up on svtperformance.

The 2SS Camaro comes standard with heated seats and power seats. You will have to opt for the Comfort Package (appr. $600) to get those on a Premium GT. This package also come with an auto dimming rearview mirror. The Camaro comes standard with auto dimming rearview mirror and outside heated, power-adjustable and auto dimming drivers side mirror.

You will have to opt for the Track Pack (appr. $1500) to get brakes anywhere close (and they are not equal) to the Camaro and close performance (3.73 gears help the Mustang quite a bit). Also in order to get wheels similar in size (19" wheels for the Mustang with the Track Pack) to the Camaro.

The Camaro also come standard with PASS - Key III security and the Mustang requires a Security Package (appr. $400).

Mustang GT Premium has SYNC, ambient interior lighting, and MY COLOR.

Camaro 2SS has PDIM, bluetooth, USB port, Universal Home Remote, driver information center, 4 auxiliary gauges, and interior lighting.

Similarly equipped cars:

Mustang = $33,400.............(30,900+600+1500+400)
Camaro = $34,180..............base MSRP


So if we correct this to include destination for the Mustang, we get:

Mustang = $34,250.............(30,900+600+1500+400+850)
Camaro = $34,180..............base MSRP including destination

Ford better be real careful with the price tag of the 2011 GT. I think their marketing/management is really messing up here. Mustang has always been cheaper than Camaro, and now in the worst economic times since the 1930's the Mustang is going to go toe to toe with the Camaro. Makes ABSOLUTELY no sense to me. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Someone needs to tell Ford that.

How so?trunk is easier to use, easier to get in and out of, seems roomier(i say seems just in case the "numbers" make the camaro bigger).

That plays perfectly into Ford's position with the GT for the last 25 years too - sell you a good basic canvas and you can go paint it however you like.

:thumb:hasn't the mustang had heated seats since 05? my 07 had them. sucked too but thats besides the point.

Mustang = $34,250.............(30,900+600+1500+400+850)
Camaro = $34,180..............base MSRP including destination

The thing is, if you're in the market for a V8-powered pony car, but you're price conscious, you probably aren't considering an optioned-up GT Premium. You're probably considering a base GT, and comparing that against a 1SS.

It's in that demographic that Mustang really has an edge, and I think it will continue to pay off in sales volume.

We'll see what happens to the price when they introduce the new motor next year...

we'll also see what happens when the camaro actually goes on sale. i don't see the mustangs sales leadership being dethroned.

hasn't the mustang had heated seats since 05? my 07 had them. sucked too but thats besides the point.

I'm curious, what led you to buy a car that apparently has failed miserably to meet any expectation you've had?

hasn't the mustang had heated seats since 05? my 07 had them. sucked too but thats besides the point.

Yes, I think that option started in 2005, but heated seats have never been standard.

I'm curious, what led you to buy a car that apparently has failed miserably to meet any expectation you've had?
1) price (msrp was 38k and i leased it at 24k)
2) was the only RWD V8 2+2 coupe out near that price
3) the seat thing was something that bother me more and more as i had it.


i did like a few things about it. i just could never get comfortable in it. that was my biggest issue.

Yes, I think that option started in 2005, but heated seats have never been standard.my point was they've had "fancy" options for awhile now. seems to me thats what people want.