The new GT is basically the Bullitt,and that's great IMO. Every review i've read of the Bullitt has been great and it's performance isn't too far off the more powerful SRT8 Challenger due to that cars fat-***. 315HP is okay by me. I wonder if the '11 5.0L will be a optional engine for the GT or maybe a SE,because the '10 GT 4.6 is pretty nice to be a one year only lame duck car.

 

Didn't Ford just announce factory available superchargers? So if you can get one installed on a base GT at the dealer and keep the warranty, that changes the scenery a bit, doesn't it? I don't know any details, but that's what I read this morning.

 

Thought I should add, for the record, that I love the current (and, generally, the 2010 redesigned) Mustang.

I hope it does well (and the Camaro, too!).

I would like to see a more powerful engine option, however. Looks like we have to wait until 2011 for that.

 

Although some may feel that a 300lb's would somehow even up the advantage the V6 Camaro has on power it's simply not the case. In reality the Camaro could get away with only a 40hp advantage over the V6 Stang and then it would be close. The 90+ hp advantage the Camaro has will easily pull the v6 Stang and scare some GT drivers who thought just having GT on the fender meant an easy win.
As for other performance categories the weight disadvantage the Camaro has would be more in play depending on how much work GM did to compensate.

 

Is this the same Mustang thats gonna weigh 3400lbs? Or are they gonna wait 1 year for that too?

 

Speaking of which, I saw one of the most awesome S-197 pictures ever. I guy got t-boned right at the A pillar by a woman in an alero doing 45-50 mph (and she didn't hit the brakes). The car was totaled with the passenger side of the dash buckled a bit and the door/fender area dented a bit, but both passengers walked away with no need for medical treatment. Had this been a fox (epsecially) or SN95/New Edge I'm sure it would have been worse.

 

I'm not to sure about that, the M5 GT has the power advantage along with a better p/w ratio compared to the A6 V6 Camaro when you start multiplying things through the trans, diff and wheels. The V6 F5 gets the nod for quicker/more gear changes though. I remember racing a V6 G8 (had to be with 15 second 1/4 times) and I handlily beat it every time we matched up.

 

I finally found some specs for the 2010 Mustang.

Base weight for the GT M5 version is estimated at 3533 pounds. A5 is 3575. That makes it about 330 pounds lighter than the new Camaro. Percentage-wise, that's about the same as it was in 1985, 1990, 1995, etc.

Comparing Camaro V6 to Mustang GT, the V6 Camaro is 200 pounds heavier and down 15hp. The Mustang will be faster, but it won't walk away from the Camaro -- probably a few 10ths to 60 and the 1/4 and maybe 4-5 mph. It'll certainly be much closer than a 6 cyl version of either has been to a performance V8 version.

 

I remeber hearing that while watching the 2010 reveal on speedvision. I wonder if that means there will be a box to check off on the order form? Currently you can have some of the bits and pieces available from FRPP dealer installed with a warranty (superchargers among them) they just aren't on the order sheet.

 

My frustration overcomes my ability to overlook sometimes, so I will apologize for bringing a negative point to the front, and momentarilly hijacking an otherwise fairley decent thread. Now having said that, I will defend my position.

Being on a GM-based board is always considered when I come here.
Been doing it for a little while now.

But just because it is a GM board does not/should not exclude people from demonstrating a little common sense. There must have been 200 threads in the last 3 years about how lame the power is in the GT, and how the LSx engines all had that 15 years ago, etc. But despite the best efforts of many in this forum (as you yourself pointout - not all are bashers) to educate all readers on the marketing strategy of Ford and the Mustang, some folks either don't read, or can't comprehend. Rest assured, I get FAR more pizzed on a Mustang board over goofiness than I do here - just because I know I am on a GM site when I come here. I utterly lambaste folks on a homesite for me over senseless comments.

Defending the uneducated for wanting to stay uneducated is probably not the best position to advocate. Comments like "they probably over-rated the power like they always do..." is absolute insanity for anyone who has followed the products Ford has released in the last 8 years, and demonstrates no knowledge at all of the recent restructuring of required power output claims and test procedures. And, right here in this forum has been one of the best places to read about it all too.

You are 100% correct about opinions. Everyone is entitled to them - me included. And my opinion is that it is unwise to stand up in front of some of the best talent and smartest folks behind the scenes in the auto industry and reveal how naive and uneducated you truly are about subjects-automotive.

And for the record - yes, I agree... there are many positive comments and constructive criticisms made here that are 100% reasonable and well-written. A big reason why I frequent this board myself.
Again, there are many "car guys" in this forum in particular that understand what is going on, and that there is a plan in place regarding Mustang, Camaro, Charger, and every other specialty car or truck that is put to market. My desire is for everyone to understand how and why they are being marketed - there is a reason to the madness. SOmetimes it works and the company makes a boatload of money. Sometimes the marketing fails and they lose money, or worse yet - they stop producing the vehicle alltogether. It would be wise to study and understand these practices as they pertain to whichever vehicle you love (or hate). The balance of this thread hints and bangs into these very reasons well... mentioning the Bullitt, special eds, and future programs. The reason the 400hp engine is not in the '10 model is right here in this thread.

One would be wise to listen to some of the folks trying to spell out what is happening and why, as opposed to defending ignorance and telling those who know and care to "get the F over it".
Peace.

 

This 2010 is a reskin/update to the existing platform. This update has actually been done for quite a while now.

The significant weight-savings effort is going to show up in the next iteration of platform.

 

If we compare previous Bullitt 0-60 and 1/4 mile with what we know about the V6 Camaro - there is almost a one second difference. So, yes, I think the GT will walk away from it.


Between the restyle and the cost advantage, I see Mustang putting alot of sales pressure on the Camaro. Even more so when the new powertrains come online next year.

 

And you my good friend just nailed about 80% of the marketing portion of the delayed powertrain change.

There needs to be something to draw buyers from a Camaro or Challenger or Charger, or G37, and all the others. It's like seeing the word "new" on a box of cereal you have been eating since you were 5. They want to be able to stand up and scream "new" every year with something to keep interest up. Why shoot the entire wad on a new skin and a new powertrain at the same time?

You know the big 2.8 are all on the same team when it comes to global competition (especially right now), but you'd be foolish to think that Ford is not watching the Camaro debut very closely. In essence, every Camaro, Challenger, etc sold is a potential lost sale for Ford. The competition will be fierce... and the winners will be ... US!

 

I have owned several Mustangs and still spent a lot of time on the Mustang boards up until a couple years ago. After buying the Camaro I still found myself sucked into the Brand X vs. Brand Y wars more often than I like to admit, except on the other side of the coin. After a time it became a lot easier to tell which threads would welcome an opposing point of view and which wouldn't. The title of this particular thread points to the latter. I'm not defending ignorance, I'm just advising you to accept that the lunatic fringe is alive, well, and completely uninterested in anything you have to say that may be contrary to what they believe.

 

12.3 lb/hp vs 16.4 lb/hp. In what world is a 25% lower power/weight ratio "not giving up much"? You could double the weight difference and the Camaro would still enjoy a decent advantage.