Car and Driver says Mustang wins
#151
Big deal on the pre-orders- The Challenger did good in intials sales as well, I'm more interested in end of model year #s (if the BK thing doesn't bone production) If GM gets 180-200k units out the door, I'd start crowing about it, otherwise lets hope they get to the point were every F5 that rolls down the line isn't a drag on GM's piggy bank..
They don't mean much other than those who want to be first.
What would it mean if you had 40,000 pre-orders, and total 60,000 in sales.
You could only entice 20,000 after the car was released? doesn't make exactly a success at that point.
I'm kinda surprised, but not at the same time...that only 40,000 orders were put in...especially after the car has been pranced around for so long, and hasn't be in production for over 6 years.
The Mustang had well over that number and it was STILL in production at the time. But in the end it sold the same as it did the next year numbers wise. The factory can only make so many a year.
But again, different car, different time, different economy.
#152
No, could you post them again, please?
Oh ya. Duh. Funny, I never realized that.
Ya, ok....I'll go along with that.
Ya, I'll go along with that too. They're both certainly of similar porkage.
Ok - perhaps. And if I used 6.2 liters of n/a displacement....or if this....or if that....but in the end, all the "ifs" don't make for a hill of beans.
Know what I mean?
Ok. One of them does not exist, but ok.
Was there a point in there somewhere?
Right. Non-existant, but similar.
Back to that "if" thing....(which was the whole point...in case you missed it).
Sorry I wasn't so clear the first time.
Bob
The zo6 is a different CLASS vehicle then the GT500.
OK,the GT500 and the SS camaro are considered 4 seat performance coupes right?
Aside from the limited production and SC engine the two are similar right?
If you supercharge the SS and add CAI with a more aggressive tune you are in close enough to compare the two on a engine power/performance level right?
Know what I mean?
Cost? Add into that further engineering into the suspension/handling/braking to match the power upgrade and you are comparing comparable vehicles.
Was there a point in there somewhere?
Still not in the same class because of production numbers,but similar CARS.
Back to that "if" thing....(which was the whole point...in case you missed it).
Sorry I wasn't so clear the first time.
Bob
#156
...Just like us Camaro guys can "temporarily" feel good until the new 5.0 debuts next year. Its an ever evolving cycle with these cars, no sense in getting that worked up about what some writers in a magazine put out. The fact is that the GT is in the low 13s with 315 horse. I don't see the SS keeping the crown(save the middle tier/top of the line model talk) for long if Ford can keep the weight close to where it is with the new Coyote engine.
#157
I dunno? Methinks in MY'11 there will probably be a role reversal (purely speculation on my part), but GM will be able to get thier hands on a track pack car by then and can benchmark it and counter it in some fashion.
MY'11 will defintely be a good year if Ford can hold up thier end in the powertrain part.
MY'11 will defintely be a good year if Ford can hold up thier end in the powertrain part.
#158
Agreed, from what we've seen so far it's a fair bet that the '11 5.0 GT w/ Track Pack will mop the floor with the Camaro SS as-is and I fear we will see little (if any) improvements/enhancements to the Camaro for a few years with GM's current state. Either car can be modified to suit anyone's taste of course but in this new economy I for one do not expect to have a boatload of discretionary income available to spend on aftermarket goodies.
"From what we have seen so far" the Mustang is better than the Camaro in interior design, steering feel/handling, and grip. I don't know what was going on in this particular test, but if you look at all the other tests, the camaro has had a skid pad number of about 0.90 to 0.92 G's with the Mustang running about 0.92 to 0.95 G's. Advantage Mustang, but that's not much when you are talking about a 300 pound lighter car. Slalom numbers show a similar trend.
As for the 2011 GT "mopping the floor with the Camaro SS as is" they have a lot of work to do. Even at 300 pounds lighter, the Mustang is half a second slower in the quarter mile and still only achieves the same braking distance with its optional Track Pack. It also gets about the same gas mileage with 100 less horsepower and 300 pounds less weight, not very impressive to say the least.
If the Mustang gains weight, which it will, it will need bigger brakes (perhaps those of its older brother the GT500) but that will again add more weight and more cost. What will the added nose weight do to the now great handling of the current car? Will the Ford engineers be able to compensate as well as they have thus far? And the all important number, what will the actual output of the 5.0L be..............
It is going to be interesting for sure, but making claims about "mopping the floor" is certainly premature. We have already seen MID 12's from a CAI and tune on Camaro on stock tires and suspension. That is stupid!
People have had insane expectations for the Camaro, which is hard to deliver on, but anyone who is saying that 13.0 from virtually EVERY magazine test of super low mileage Camaro's is somehow slow is just not living in reality. Those times with that level of repeatability are something to be celebrated.
And one last thing, the Track Pack is certainly a great option and has every right being equipped on a car for comparison to the Camaro SS, but just remember that many of the Mustangs that go up against the new Camaro on the street will not have this option. The outcome is going to look quite bad then.
#159
[QUOTE=ZZtop;5985931]I have stayed away from this post, but the above statement is really stretching it.
As if having 113 more horsepower and 100 more foot pound of torque is a meaningless advantage
The skip pad numbers were close but I'd say its not a bad showing on either part; Camaro using its better chassis and Mustang using its weight advanatage. The onus is on GM to pull ahead in the next round, it has the goods, lets see it.
The mileage numbers are probably more a result of drivetrains rather than powerplants double OD vs single OD, the Camaro loafs along in a nearly catatonic state, the Mustang is frenetic by comparison (the 5.0 is supposed to be coupled to an M6 next and if gearing turns out to be more less the same in that configuration, a more meaningful comparison will present itself).
The track pack's brakes are pads only, the Mustang makes due with hardware little different from the V6 F5, only the GT500 gets a sexy set of 4 piston calipers. Not altogether bad I'd say in the braking department.
I'd say overall, the GT did pretty good given its nearly five year old chassis hardware
The Coyote V8 is said to be lighter than current mod motors, but in what configuration I couldn't say? If its within spitting distance of the 3v 4.6 its a non issue (or maybe it will be lighter, the cylinderheads on the Coyote are certainly less massive than the mod DOHC heads). I'd certainly hope Ford upgrades the brakes, but that is maybe another 30 or 40 pounds total (I'm guessing since nobody seems to have concrete numbers for the GT500's brake hardware). The chassis is good, no needing to add weight there unless the feds start demanding cars survive nuclear powered piledrives into giant sized splitting wedges.
And speaking of GT500, that program provides alot of useful parts bin items that can be used to sharpen the GT further. The GT500 this time around in a effort to increase steering reponse and feel comes with a stiffer intermediate link in the steershaft (IIRC), wonder if it will make its way to the GT?
[quote]And the all important number, what will the actual output of the 5.0L be..............[/qoute]
Admittedly I share your ambivalence, but a Mustang guy can always hope? Ford could have stayed with recent tradition and let the S-197 languish with 300 or so horsepower until the next generation and then added just 50 more but there seems to be some fight in team Mustang this time around.
Can't agree more, but as car enthusiasts in general, we seem to have become very jaded in this respect.
Heh, trudat, the track pack also isn't available until late summer from what I understand and any '10 mustang hitting the street until then will only have the repgrogrammed TCS/ASC and 3.73 rear.
Even at 300 pounds lighter, the Mustang is half a second slower in the quarter mile and still only achieves the same braking distance with its optional Track Pack. It also gets about the same gas mileage with 100 less horsepower and 300 pounds less weight, not very impressive to say the least.
The skip pad numbers were close but I'd say its not a bad showing on either part; Camaro using its better chassis and Mustang using its weight advanatage. The onus is on GM to pull ahead in the next round, it has the goods, lets see it.
The mileage numbers are probably more a result of drivetrains rather than powerplants double OD vs single OD, the Camaro loafs along in a nearly catatonic state, the Mustang is frenetic by comparison (the 5.0 is supposed to be coupled to an M6 next and if gearing turns out to be more less the same in that configuration, a more meaningful comparison will present itself).
The track pack's brakes are pads only, the Mustang makes due with hardware little different from the V6 F5, only the GT500 gets a sexy set of 4 piston calipers. Not altogether bad I'd say in the braking department.
I'd say overall, the GT did pretty good given its nearly five year old chassis hardware
If the Mustang gains weight, which it will, it will need bigger brakes (perhaps those of its older brother the GT500) but that will again add more weight and more cost. What will the added nose weight do to the now great handling of the current car? Will the Ford engineers be able to compensate as well as they have thus far?
And speaking of GT500, that program provides alot of useful parts bin items that can be used to sharpen the GT further. The GT500 this time around in a effort to increase steering reponse and feel comes with a stiffer intermediate link in the steershaft (IIRC), wonder if it will make its way to the GT?
[quote]And the all important number, what will the actual output of the 5.0L be..............[/qoute]
Admittedly I share your ambivalence, but a Mustang guy can always hope? Ford could have stayed with recent tradition and let the S-197 languish with 300 or so horsepower until the next generation and then added just 50 more but there seems to be some fight in team Mustang this time around.
It is going to be interesting for sure, but making claims about "mopping the floor" is certainly premature. We have already seen MID 12's from a CAI and tune on Camaro on stock tires and suspension. That is stupid!
People have had insane expectations for the Camaro, which is hard to deliver on, but anyone who is saying that 13.0 from virtually EVERY magazine test of super low mileage Camaro's is somehow slow is just not living in reality. Those times with that level of repeatability are something to be celebrated.
People have had insane expectations for the Camaro, which is hard to deliver on, but anyone who is saying that 13.0 from virtually EVERY magazine test of super low mileage Camaro's is somehow slow is just not living in reality. Those times with that level of repeatability are something to be celebrated.
And one last thing, the Track Pack is certainly a great option and has every right being equipped on a car for comparison to the Camaro SS, but just remember that many of the Mustangs that go up against the new Camaro on the street will not have this option. The outcome is going to look quite bad then.
#160
My post from a thread I created without searching ( ). JakeRobb pointed out to me that it was a repost, so I'm posting my (already dated) comments here and deleting my thread:
This particular editor / group of testers really did not care for the lack of visibility, though he actually was quite praising of the dash / interior otherwise. Car and Driver is usually quite **** about that stuff, and they seem to like the interior, which is good news. (FWIW, my brother test drove a V6 car a few weeks back, and he flat out could not understand the complaints some of the auto mags have been leveling against the interior, aside from the poor visibility.)
But the Stang's lighter weight, better handling, equal braking, and in-the-ballpark acceleration (at least in the lower gears) make for a tough match...
The gunslit windows are among my primary beefs with the car (weight and lack of a convertible top being the others...). The styling is amazing, but would be even better with a bit taller side glass.
This particular editor / group of testers really did not care for the lack of visibility, though he actually was quite praising of the dash / interior otherwise. Car and Driver is usually quite **** about that stuff, and they seem to like the interior, which is good news. (FWIW, my brother test drove a V6 car a few weeks back, and he flat out could not understand the complaints some of the auto mags have been leveling against the interior, aside from the poor visibility.)
But the Stang's lighter weight, better handling, equal braking, and in-the-ballpark acceleration (at least in the lower gears) make for a tough match...
The gunslit windows are among my primary beefs with the car (weight and lack of a convertible top being the others...). The styling is amazing, but would be even better with a bit taller side glass.
#161
I have stayed away from this post, but the above statement is really stretching it.
"From what we have seen so far" the Mustang is better than the Camaro in interior design, steering feel/handling, and grip. I don't know what was going on in this particular test, but if you look at all the other tests, the camaro has had a skid pad number of about 0.90 to 0.92 G's with the Mustang running about 0.92 to 0.95 G's. Advantage Mustang, but that's not much when you are talking about a 300 pound lighter car. Slalom numbers show a similar trend.
As for the 2011 GT "mopping the floor with the Camaro SS as is" they have a lot of work to do. Even at 300 pounds lighter, the Mustang is half a second slower in the quarter mile and still only achieves the same braking distance with its optional Track Pack. It also gets about the same gas mileage with 100 less horsepower and 300 pounds less weight, not very impressive to say the least.
If the Mustang gains weight, which it will, it will need bigger brakes (perhaps those of its older brother the GT500) but that will again add more weight and more cost. What will the added nose weight do to the now great handling of the current car? Will the Ford engineers be able to compensate as well as they have thus far? And the all important number, what will the actual output of the 5.0L be..............
It is going to be interesting for sure, but making claims about "mopping the floor" is certainly premature. We have already seen MID 12's from a CAI and tune on Camaro on stock tires and suspension. That is stupid!
People have had insane expectations for the Camaro, which is hard to deliver on, but anyone who is saying that 13.0 from virtually EVERY magazine test of super low mileage Camaro's is somehow slow is just not living in reality. Those times with that level of repeatability are something to be celebrated.
And one last thing, the Track Pack is certainly a great option and has every right being equipped on a car for comparison to the Camaro SS, but just remember that many of the Mustangs that go up against the new Camaro on the street will not have this option. The outcome is going to look quite bad then.
"From what we have seen so far" the Mustang is better than the Camaro in interior design, steering feel/handling, and grip. I don't know what was going on in this particular test, but if you look at all the other tests, the camaro has had a skid pad number of about 0.90 to 0.92 G's with the Mustang running about 0.92 to 0.95 G's. Advantage Mustang, but that's not much when you are talking about a 300 pound lighter car. Slalom numbers show a similar trend.
As for the 2011 GT "mopping the floor with the Camaro SS as is" they have a lot of work to do. Even at 300 pounds lighter, the Mustang is half a second slower in the quarter mile and still only achieves the same braking distance with its optional Track Pack. It also gets about the same gas mileage with 100 less horsepower and 300 pounds less weight, not very impressive to say the least.
If the Mustang gains weight, which it will, it will need bigger brakes (perhaps those of its older brother the GT500) but that will again add more weight and more cost. What will the added nose weight do to the now great handling of the current car? Will the Ford engineers be able to compensate as well as they have thus far? And the all important number, what will the actual output of the 5.0L be..............
It is going to be interesting for sure, but making claims about "mopping the floor" is certainly premature. We have already seen MID 12's from a CAI and tune on Camaro on stock tires and suspension. That is stupid!
People have had insane expectations for the Camaro, which is hard to deliver on, but anyone who is saying that 13.0 from virtually EVERY magazine test of super low mileage Camaro's is somehow slow is just not living in reality. Those times with that level of repeatability are something to be celebrated.
And one last thing, the Track Pack is certainly a great option and has every right being equipped on a car for comparison to the Camaro SS, but just remember that many of the Mustangs that go up against the new Camaro on the street will not have this option. The outcome is going to look quite bad then.
What a non-TrackPack equipped Mustang is capable of, as well as what a modified Camaro is capable of, is another comparison altogether. As I said either car can be modified to suit anyone's taste.
What we do know is that Ford is clearly committed to the Mustang and has the resources available for continuous improvements. At this point we have no way of knowing if GM will be similarly committed to the Camaro. But clearly we are far removed from the fourth-gen days when Ford basically left it up to their customers to keep the product competitive on the racetrack.
Make no mistake about it, I am a Camaro fan and get weak in the knees at the sight of one. But as great a job as GM has done developing Zeta, at the end of the day the weight penalty is substantial and cannot be denied. A bulked up '11 Mustang will still enjoy a 200+ lb advantage over Camaro and as we've already seen this cannot be magically engineered away. When the Mustang gets a comparable powertrain the difference is only going to be more pronounced. When the comparison tests are redone a year from now I will be very suprised if the Mustang isn't declared the definitive winner.
Last edited by Dest98; 06-02-2009 at 03:23 PM.
#162
#163
Yes. Regular GT's have all-season pirelli's. Track-pack uses summer-only pirelli's which are the same ones that come standard on the SS's as someone else mentioned. So the tires are an improvement over the regular GT's all-season tires, but doesn't really give it an edge over what the SS already comes with.The biggest thing helping it is the weight difference. 300lbs less means it can get by with less serious hardware.
I wonder what it'd do with the GT500's 14" 4pistron Brembos and whether the brakes will be upgraded with the powertrain in 2011. As good as the #'s are for the 2010 track-pack equipped GT's, there's room there for improvement.
I wonder what it'd do with the GT500's 14" 4pistron Brembos and whether the brakes will be upgraded with the powertrain in 2011. As good as the #'s are for the 2010 track-pack equipped GT's, there's room there for improvement.
#164
I love it when the Vette gets dragged into pony/muscle car debates.
It happened even back in the 60's.
Usually the price comes in (like GT500 vs. Z06 etc.) and it cracks me up.
Many of you were not around or have forgotten that even in the glory days of the muscle cars some of them (like 442's) could be optioned up way past the price of a vette.
The vette is a sports car, but it has also long been a part of the muscle war.
The GT500 is a muscle car IMHO, but you can differ if you want.
Me, I like the motor in the Chevy the best, the interior of the stang best, but the looks of the Challenger speak to me the most because I like retro.
I am just glad we have gotten to live though round two of this.
I am waiting a year.
I could be drawn to a Plum Crazy Srt8 but I almost bet I won't buy that.
A yellow SS could be nice, but I still really do not like the interior...and yes I have been in one.
I really hope the new 5.0 comes out good.
Right now I am leaning towards the stang, but I also like the limited editions and might hold out for that.
I had a Bullitt and a Mach 1 and liked them alot but I am still fond of camaros (but I had more TA's than Z28's in my life though).
I would say I am at 60/40 for next year...60% chance on the Ford, 40% on the SS.
I want to see more of them rolling on the street and see what next year brings.
I don't mind the Vette getting mentioned or being a part of this, but the price thing is a dead horse and partisan.
It means nothing.
Have any of you ever looked at how expensive some GSX's, 442's, Cougars, and Mopar cars were back then?
It happened even back in the 60's.
Usually the price comes in (like GT500 vs. Z06 etc.) and it cracks me up.
Many of you were not around or have forgotten that even in the glory days of the muscle cars some of them (like 442's) could be optioned up way past the price of a vette.
The vette is a sports car, but it has also long been a part of the muscle war.
The GT500 is a muscle car IMHO, but you can differ if you want.
Me, I like the motor in the Chevy the best, the interior of the stang best, but the looks of the Challenger speak to me the most because I like retro.
I am just glad we have gotten to live though round two of this.
I am waiting a year.
I could be drawn to a Plum Crazy Srt8 but I almost bet I won't buy that.
A yellow SS could be nice, but I still really do not like the interior...and yes I have been in one.
I really hope the new 5.0 comes out good.
Right now I am leaning towards the stang, but I also like the limited editions and might hold out for that.
I had a Bullitt and a Mach 1 and liked them alot but I am still fond of camaros (but I had more TA's than Z28's in my life though).
I would say I am at 60/40 for next year...60% chance on the Ford, 40% on the SS.
I want to see more of them rolling on the street and see what next year brings.
I don't mind the Vette getting mentioned or being a part of this, but the price thing is a dead horse and partisan.
It means nothing.
Have any of you ever looked at how expensive some GSX's, 442's, Cougars, and Mopar cars were back then?
Last edited by merc50; 06-02-2009 at 08:31 PM.
#165
I was specifically refering to the brakes (I'm sure the suspension did - if it helped with brake dive - and definetely the tires), the calipers and the rotors are standard GT fare with they only change being the pads. Only the GT500 gets the sexy 4 piston calipers and larger rotors
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
ChrisFrez
CamaroZ28.Com Podcast
1
12-15-2014 03:09 PM
ChrisFrez
CamaroZ28.Com Podcast
2
12-07-2014 06:01 PM
NewsBot
2010 - 2015 Camaro News, Sightings, Pictures, and Multimedia
0
12-03-2014 12:30 PM