Hot Rod article... 12.95s 1/4 in the SS and 14.2 in the V6
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 4,000
From: TX Med Ctr
Hot Rod article... 12.95s 1/4 in the SS and 14.2 in the V6
http://www.hotrod.com/featuredvehicl...ive/index.html
Pretty impressive times, even if they may be simulated...
Originally Posted by Hot Rod
HOT ROD Drives the 2010 Camaro
It was cold but easily worth it just to drive these Camaros.
By Bill McGuire
Photography by Mike Yoksich
Finally. After three years of waiting we got our greasy paws on real production versions of the 2010 Camaro. Actually, we got to try all four powertrain combinations offered for inaugural model year: V-6 and V-8 with both stick and automatic transmissions. While the weather was cold - a biting 34 degrees - and the driving was limited to the General Motors Proving Grounds in Milford, Michigan, we came away with some distinct impressions and solid test numbers.
2010 Chevy Camaro V6 And V8 Versions 2010 Chevy Camaro Burnout 2010 Chevy Camaro Side View
We know you guys will want the quarter-mile figures first so here they are: The LS3-powered coupe with manual 6-speed gearbox did the quarter in 12.95 seconds at 112.92 mph. Naturally, we didn't have an actual drag strip at our disposal, so these numbers were obtained with a VBox GPS-based data-acquisition unit with 12 inches of rollout programmed into the software to simulate the staging zone on a real strip. (A drag strips's timing system gives a car about a one-foot head start. Without the rollout the e.t. is 13.24 seconds.) Best results were obtained with the electronic traction control shut off via the handy switch in the center of the dash. While the ice-cold and totally unprepared pavement provided precious little traction, dialing up some wheel speed with the throttle produced a satisfactory launch - and plenty of satisfying tire smoke, too. The 0-60 mph and 0-80 mph times were 4.70 and 7.15 seconds, respectively.
Both the manual and automatic 6.2L V-8s are electronically limited to a top speed of 155 mph, not that we got close on the 1.2-mile east/west straight at the Proving Grounds. Manual-transmission cars get the 422 hp LS3 engine, very similar to the LS3 that powers the base Corvette, while the automatic car gets the L99 mill with Active Fuel Management, which selectively drops cylinders at steady cruise to improve fuel economy. Right, just like the old 8-6-4 Cadillacs, but this time the technology works. The LS3 is rated at 426 hp and 400 lb-ft of torque, while the L99 can claim 400 hp and a little more torque, 410 lb-ft. Both V-8 models carry SS badging, while the V-6 cars are available in LT and LS trim levels.
2010 Chevy Camaro Interior 2010 Chevy Camaro Engine 2010 Chevy Camaro Rear View
Thanks to their profoundly overdriven sixth gears, at 70 mph both the automatic and manual Camaros loaf along at somewhere south of 2000 rpm, producing a very quiet cruise and decent fuel consumption; the stick car is EPA-rated at 16 mpg in the city and 24 on the highway, while the automatic is rated at 16 city and 25 highway. Bonus: The automatic is equipped with TAPshift, GM's paddle-shifter system. Place the console lever in M and then use the steering-wheel mounted paddle shifters to upshift and downshift at will, so you can play Marco Andretti - or Danica Patrick if you are so inclined. GM is marketing the fifth-generation Camaro not as a hairy old musclecar but as a refined and sophisticated touring car, and that it is. In our too-brief drives we found all the versions to be quiet, well-balanced, and smooth-mannered. But the Camaro is still a musclecar, as we see it. It's all about the muscle, darn it.
The V-6 Camaro has been drawing plenty of attention recently, for two reasons. First, its DOHC engine, equipped with advanced features including variable valve timing and direct fuel injection, is rated at 304 hp, menacingly close to the rated power of the base Mustang GT. Can a V-6 Camaro run with a V-8 Mustang? We wonder. Just as interesting: The V-6 recently nailed down an EPA fuel economy rating of 29 mpg on the highway in both the stick and automatic versions. That's a very attractive number for consumers looking to save a buck at the gas pump in these economically troubled times. So how does it run? The VBox was rigged up to the V-6 manual Camaro as we endeavored to find out. Still traction-challenged on the none-too-tacky Milford test track, launching at around 2000 rpm and shifting at 7000 rpm, the six-banger ran the quarter-mile in 14.29 seconds at 100.85 mph. That's awfully close to traditional V-8 Mustang territory, if not in it.
It was cold but easily worth it just to drive these Camaros.
By Bill McGuire
Photography by Mike Yoksich
Finally. After three years of waiting we got our greasy paws on real production versions of the 2010 Camaro. Actually, we got to try all four powertrain combinations offered for inaugural model year: V-6 and V-8 with both stick and automatic transmissions. While the weather was cold - a biting 34 degrees - and the driving was limited to the General Motors Proving Grounds in Milford, Michigan, we came away with some distinct impressions and solid test numbers.
2010 Chevy Camaro V6 And V8 Versions 2010 Chevy Camaro Burnout 2010 Chevy Camaro Side View
We know you guys will want the quarter-mile figures first so here they are: The LS3-powered coupe with manual 6-speed gearbox did the quarter in 12.95 seconds at 112.92 mph. Naturally, we didn't have an actual drag strip at our disposal, so these numbers were obtained with a VBox GPS-based data-acquisition unit with 12 inches of rollout programmed into the software to simulate the staging zone on a real strip. (A drag strips's timing system gives a car about a one-foot head start. Without the rollout the e.t. is 13.24 seconds.) Best results were obtained with the electronic traction control shut off via the handy switch in the center of the dash. While the ice-cold and totally unprepared pavement provided precious little traction, dialing up some wheel speed with the throttle produced a satisfactory launch - and plenty of satisfying tire smoke, too. The 0-60 mph and 0-80 mph times were 4.70 and 7.15 seconds, respectively.
Both the manual and automatic 6.2L V-8s are electronically limited to a top speed of 155 mph, not that we got close on the 1.2-mile east/west straight at the Proving Grounds. Manual-transmission cars get the 422 hp LS3 engine, very similar to the LS3 that powers the base Corvette, while the automatic car gets the L99 mill with Active Fuel Management, which selectively drops cylinders at steady cruise to improve fuel economy. Right, just like the old 8-6-4 Cadillacs, but this time the technology works. The LS3 is rated at 426 hp and 400 lb-ft of torque, while the L99 can claim 400 hp and a little more torque, 410 lb-ft. Both V-8 models carry SS badging, while the V-6 cars are available in LT and LS trim levels.
2010 Chevy Camaro Interior 2010 Chevy Camaro Engine 2010 Chevy Camaro Rear View
Thanks to their profoundly overdriven sixth gears, at 70 mph both the automatic and manual Camaros loaf along at somewhere south of 2000 rpm, producing a very quiet cruise and decent fuel consumption; the stick car is EPA-rated at 16 mpg in the city and 24 on the highway, while the automatic is rated at 16 city and 25 highway. Bonus: The automatic is equipped with TAPshift, GM's paddle-shifter system. Place the console lever in M and then use the steering-wheel mounted paddle shifters to upshift and downshift at will, so you can play Marco Andretti - or Danica Patrick if you are so inclined. GM is marketing the fifth-generation Camaro not as a hairy old musclecar but as a refined and sophisticated touring car, and that it is. In our too-brief drives we found all the versions to be quiet, well-balanced, and smooth-mannered. But the Camaro is still a musclecar, as we see it. It's all about the muscle, darn it.
The V-6 Camaro has been drawing plenty of attention recently, for two reasons. First, its DOHC engine, equipped with advanced features including variable valve timing and direct fuel injection, is rated at 304 hp, menacingly close to the rated power of the base Mustang GT. Can a V-6 Camaro run with a V-8 Mustang? We wonder. Just as interesting: The V-6 recently nailed down an EPA fuel economy rating of 29 mpg on the highway in both the stick and automatic versions. That's a very attractive number for consumers looking to save a buck at the gas pump in these economically troubled times. So how does it run? The VBox was rigged up to the V-6 manual Camaro as we endeavored to find out. Still traction-challenged on the none-too-tacky Milford test track, launching at around 2000 rpm and shifting at 7000 rpm, the six-banger ran the quarter-mile in 14.29 seconds at 100.85 mph. That's awfully close to traditional V-8 Mustang territory, if not in it.
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 190
From: Indianpolis, IN
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 3,597
From: oshawa,ontario,canada
well if your going to compare to older cars might as well say thats LT1 territory......
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 190
From: Indianpolis, IN
Yeah they are, I never said they wernt. But as for the Mustang and LT1 owners i know 90% of the LT1 owners would say "Thats awesome, Chevy is making some killer motors" 90% of 4.6 2vs owners would say " Ha, a v6 Camaro, ill kill that!" lol
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 3,597
From: oshawa,ontario,canada
you're right on that!
Registered User
Joined: Feb 1999
Posts: 2,887
From: northeast Miss.
the V6 is not near mustang GT times.....
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 13,713
From: The Golden State
Don't fall into the "If only" trap.... we're talking stock versus stock here. Also, there's alot more 4.6 parts than 3.6 DI parts (have you actually seen any aftermarket DI 3.6 "intakes" yet???... Didn't think so.), and the post '98 4.6 is nortoriously responsive to only modest upgrades. So, lets stick with stock versus stock.
Also, the 2v Mustang isn't exactly going to roll over and play dead to a 2010 V6 Camaro. First, Mustang GT packed 260 horsepower, but also 300 ft/lbs of torque. Camaro V6 has only 273 ft/lbs of torque.... and nearly 400 more pounds to lug around. The 1999 Mustang GT typically ran 0-60 mph in the mid 5 second range. The V6 Camaro runs about 6 flat.
Using the same yardstick, by using a single magazine's test, the quarter mile* is 14.5@99 for the V6 Camaro and 14.2@ 98 for the 1999 Mustang GT. Where weight and torque make a difference, the old Mustang walks away from the V6: 5-60mph rolling start* (5.8 vs 6.4); 50-70 top gear acceleration*...also known as the "Freeway Grand Prix" test (9.9 vs 14.3).
*Car & Driver magazine February 1999 (Mustang GT) & June 2009 (2010 Camaro V6).
Yes, quicker times are available for both, but the spread still stays the same if tested under identical conditions.
Lesson: don't buy a V6 Camaro & go hunting for even 10 year old Mustang GTs expecting a good outcome unless you're on a track, and at least running a minimum of a quarter mile. You're likely to get severely spanked on freeway challenges and 1/8 mile tracks. It goes without saying you should stay far away from any and all post 2005 GTs (especially 2010 Track Packs), at the risk of complete humililiation.
Even so.... why are we comparing a 5 to 10 year old car to a brand new one? The new Dodge Challenger R/T records the same times today that Corvettes did 15 years ago... but where's the point in it?
Last edited by guionM; May 13, 2009 at 03:10 AM.
. Even their "slow" time, without roll-out, beat another posted time for the SS 
.
Registered User
Joined: Nov 1998
Posts: 3,252
From: Knoxville, TN
12.9 is about what I would expect from the better magazine tests (though GMHTP should be able to beat it, assuming decent conditions).
Only caveat to that (as mentioned above) is the 34F temp. That might hurt traction and thus ET, but it will really help the mph. I think 113 is probably on the high end of mph numbers we'll see.
Only caveat to that (as mentioned above) is the 34F temp. That might hurt traction and thus ET, but it will really help the mph. I think 113 is probably on the high end of mph numbers we'll see.
