sorry jason. i can't say anything around here or have an opinion with out someone making a personal attack or shoving their views down my throat. i thought this thread was about the gt500 and the camaro?

 

That's why I didn't direct my post to anyone in particular, just to those involved.

 

The name calling is unnecessary, but it's almost hard to take some of your comments seriously 2010_5thgen due to the amount of bias and misinformation. No offense. You should keep things more constructive if you want to be taken more seriously.

My 2cents on this topic...
* The upcoming 540hp GT500 and CTSv should be about similar in terms of acceleration.
* The G8 Gxp is not faster than a GT500...even the 500hp version. The GT500 is both lighter and much more powerful. I'd agree that the Gxp is the better car, but it isn't the faster car.
* The GT500 is no more an overweight pig than the camaro SS since their weight figures are almost identical. Imo, they both need to go on diets.
* And you should never refer to a car making 540horses as underpowered...EVER. If anything, it's overpowered which'd explain some of the slower than expected times we've been seeing from the less experienced drivers.

 

g8 gxp 0-60 4.7, 13.0 1/4 mile, 402 hp, 6.2 v8, 4050lbs $35k base 245 wide tires
gt500 0-60 4.6,12.8 1/4 mile, 500hp ,5.4 v8, 3920lbs $43k 285 wide tires


i dont need to say any more. these facts speak for themselves.

 

i was refering to the 2009 model. and obviously they could improve on their behalf and get 40 more hp. good for ford. i told you it was and under powered motor. they found more in there somehwere. so technically i was right. they could have given it more than what they did in 2008 and they are in the 2010.

 

Fair enough, but while the GT500 has gone 12.8, it has also done 12.7 and 12.6 in the mainstream mags (it did 0-60 in 4.3 and the 1/4 mile in 12.6 in the july 08 issue of MT). Some of the less traditional magazines have gone as quick as 12.25 (MM&FF) and there have been owners who have gone under the 12.5 mark. Like others have said, it's a tricky car to launch but a good indication of its potential is its 113-115mph trapspeeds vs the Gxp's 108-109.

I thought the base price of the Gxp was closer to 40k?? 35k would have been nice since the camaro SS comes in at 31k and the G8 GT 30k. Even at 40k, it's still a great value considering what other sport sedans cost.

 

I think they didn't give it more because the Ford GT's S/c'd 5.4 was rated at 550hp and they probably didn't want the mustang matching it. Now that it's gone, the GT500 can move up.

500hp is still a lot of power even if the engine isn't tuned to its full potential.

The thing i hate about the 5.4 is that it's a very heavy motor and a big reason why the GT500 is 3900lbs, but its a tough and potent motor. There's a shop out there that was making 1,000+rwhp with the stock longblock.

 

You can also get one from Ford with the TVS upgrade that puts down 605hp and still comes with a warranty. Shelby uses this as a starting point for the Super Snake and if you opt out of the warranty you can gun for 750hp. The cool part is pretty much everything is up to snuff for the 750hp car, no cooling upgrades or drivetrain upgrades needed.

Forgeting the mod motor bias for a second here, the only substandard part in the whole GT500 powertrain is the heat exchanger for the supercharger, from what I understand its marginal with the run of the mill GT500.

 

Hahahahahah. There is a difference between recognizing a good performance car when you see one and loving Mustangs. hahhahaha. Take a look at my sig. Before this car, I had a 1995 Firebird Formula and a 1985 Monte Carlo SS. You crack me up! Hey, at least you're entertaining!

 

I love magazine stats in a e-war

 

OMG 300 hp in 2005 . What a pioneer!! And really the Mustang blowing the crap out of any muscle car??? What fantasy world to you live in? I do agree with you on one point. The Mustang is a pony car. Maybe one day it will grow up to have some muscle like the Camaro

 

haha thats why camaro guys get a bad rep? yeah cause i have never met a mustang owner who doesnt say the same thing about a camaro. while i agree its a retarded comment one guy doesnt give camaro guys a bad reputation. it goes the same both ways. i dont like mustangs at all but it doesnt mean they are junk. they are just junk to me as i would rather burn one and buy a camaro. to each their own

 

even at the numbers you showed me, thats not that far off from a non supercharged and much heavier car with a much smaller tire. you figure it would not even make it this close of a competition to come down to the driver. i dont really know where this conversation is going to go but i just have to say i dont think they are as good as people have been making them. the power numbers are impressive . sure. but the time numbers are not what they should be and given the fact the camaro is basically the same as the gxp, but lighter and wider tires, its going to be a damn close race. atleast against the 09gt500. i dont know too much about the '10.

 

what about your sig? i had a 99 camaro,99 trans am,88 berretta,01 alero,02 sts,02 tahoe,02 escalade,have an 01 silverado ,07 hummer, 07 camry(fiance's)? im lost here.

 

ok. if the times differ by magazine for the gt500, then its safe to assume the numbers i posted for the gxp could be lower also. so we might as well just use the numbers i got from the same place for both. its a pretty close race and thats just strait line performance. im sure oncethe magazines getout there and i see more of the gxp test, we can make more assumptions for the caamro. but you have to remember the tires are bigger on the camaro than they are on the gxp. thats a huge factor.
and the 35 k is for the base price. not too bad of a deal for such a powerful sedan.