Camaro Z/28 vs Challenger SRT-8 vs Mustang GT500
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 1,870
Re: Camaro Z/28 vs Challenger SRT-8 vs Mustang GT500
Originally Posted by RussStang
It has been my experience with turboed motors, that they do not behave like their N/A counterparts when out of boost, due to their usually much lower compression ratios. They never have that snappiness to them, and they always produce less power.
Besides, I am not trying to belittle turboes. I was commenting on a previous post about how I would prefer the more usable powerband of a good positive displacement supercharger than of a "really huge single turbo", as we all know that large turbo is going to come inherently with lag. Of course, I understand this term to be relative to the engine size as well, because a huge turbo on a 2.0L is not going to be so huge on a 6.0L, so I assumed it would be a "really huge turbo" for the size of the engine.
For all out drag racing I can see why turbo lag would be much less of an issue, but for driving on the street, or even road racing, I would prefer to steer clear of a powerband that only shines over very few rpm.
Besides, I am not trying to belittle turboes. I was commenting on a previous post about how I would prefer the more usable powerband of a good positive displacement supercharger than of a "really huge single turbo", as we all know that large turbo is going to come inherently with lag. Of course, I understand this term to be relative to the engine size as well, because a huge turbo on a 2.0L is not going to be so huge on a 6.0L, so I assumed it would be a "really huge turbo" for the size of the engine.
For all out drag racing I can see why turbo lag would be much less of an issue, but for driving on the street, or even road racing, I would prefer to steer clear of a powerband that only shines over very few rpm.
Todays turbo technology has come a long ways (now we have twin scroll and ballbearings), and if you go for one best suited for your engine and combination, there's no reason why lag shouldn't be minimized. Especially on a larger cube v8 where low-end tq isn't as big a concern.
Truth is, you CAN make full boost at low rpms with the proper turbo. Again, the key is properly matching the turbo to your engine. There's no reason why real usuable power can't be achieved with the right combo.
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 33
Re: Camaro Z/28 vs Challenger SRT-8 vs Mustang GT500
Originally Posted by 94LightningGal
I find many of the posts here to be rather humorous. Why, you ask??? Well, because many of you are asking for the next Camaro to emulate the Gen IV car that failed. The most common response I'm seeing on this is, more power than Mustang, outrun Mustang, and out handle it.
Nowhere am I seeing anyone stating that the car, that competes with the Mustang GT, should have a moderately powered V8, good driving dynamics with a good ride, seating position that someone over 25 would feel comfortable with, decent, ergonomically correct interior.......... that the average owner would be comfortable with on a daily basis, and good looks that don't make everyone who drives it feel like a boy racer.
Why don't we make a Z28 that is the spiritual successor to the 1969 Z28??? How about a road racer with a decent engine. It would not be the muscle car, like the Yenko's................ with a big engine and gobs of power (akin to the GT500), but a moderately powered engine that does not overwhelm the chassis, and gives the car great balance.
Remember that your car does not need to outdo everything that Mustang does to be successful. It only needs to be the best Camaro that it can be. A great engine, wrapped by a substandard car is not going to work again (as it clearly didn't in the Gen IV cars). Great handling, with a punishing ride, is not going to work again (as it clearly didn't in the Gen IV cars). There needs to be the base V6 cars, that have the options available to make the majority of buyers (male and female) happy. There needs to be an entry V8 model (akin to the Mustang GT), that offers a low entry price V8 (RS maybe), with the options available to make the majority of buyers happy (this and your V6 car are your bread and butter cars). Then you can have your Z28 that is tailored more to the road race crowd............ and a higher model (such as the Yenko used to be) to be your ***** to the wall drag car. SS could be what it always was.......... an option package. How cool would it be to once again be able to buy a Camaro RS/SS???
If that description sounds alot like the 67-69 Camaro lineup (updated of course)........... you are correct. Why not copy your most successful versions recipe for success. This way you are not copying anyone (Mustang) but yourself. This way, you have a Camaro that is truly a Camaro........... instead of a poor mans Vette.
Remember, I have a 1968 SS Camaro................ but no Mustang.
Nowhere am I seeing anyone stating that the car, that competes with the Mustang GT, should have a moderately powered V8, good driving dynamics with a good ride, seating position that someone over 25 would feel comfortable with, decent, ergonomically correct interior.......... that the average owner would be comfortable with on a daily basis, and good looks that don't make everyone who drives it feel like a boy racer.
Why don't we make a Z28 that is the spiritual successor to the 1969 Z28??? How about a road racer with a decent engine. It would not be the muscle car, like the Yenko's................ with a big engine and gobs of power (akin to the GT500), but a moderately powered engine that does not overwhelm the chassis, and gives the car great balance.
Remember that your car does not need to outdo everything that Mustang does to be successful. It only needs to be the best Camaro that it can be. A great engine, wrapped by a substandard car is not going to work again (as it clearly didn't in the Gen IV cars). Great handling, with a punishing ride, is not going to work again (as it clearly didn't in the Gen IV cars). There needs to be the base V6 cars, that have the options available to make the majority of buyers (male and female) happy. There needs to be an entry V8 model (akin to the Mustang GT), that offers a low entry price V8 (RS maybe), with the options available to make the majority of buyers happy (this and your V6 car are your bread and butter cars). Then you can have your Z28 that is tailored more to the road race crowd............ and a higher model (such as the Yenko used to be) to be your ***** to the wall drag car. SS could be what it always was.......... an option package. How cool would it be to once again be able to buy a Camaro RS/SS???
If that description sounds alot like the 67-69 Camaro lineup (updated of course)........... you are correct. Why not copy your most successful versions recipe for success. This way you are not copying anyone (Mustang) but yourself. This way, you have a Camaro that is truly a Camaro........... instead of a poor mans Vette.
Remember, I have a 1968 SS Camaro................ but no Mustang.
Also, I believe that even if the Camaro/Firebird were selling as many units as the Mustang per year, I still think the F/body's would have been canceled. There were more reasons behind the hiatus than just weak sales. I'm not saying that is didn't spur the whole thing, but it was just one of the contributing factors. I would be interested to know what Scott had to say about that.
And by the way, although they definately had there issues, I by no means think the 4th Gen. F-body was a failure. It did what it was suppose to do from a performance standpoint. I was a die hard Mustang fanatic for years until 1 day I took a drive in a 6sp. lt1 Z28 and the first thing that hit me about the car after driving Mustangs for so long was, man this is how a performance car should feel. It actually had torque, the seating/shifter position actually felt natural unlike the Mustang. No, Camaro isn't meant to cross all the barriers that Mustang does. And thats fine with me.
Last edited by gmcvt; Jun 16, 2005 at 07:43 PM.
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 3,011
From: Exton, Pennsylvania
Re: Camaro Z/28 vs Challenger SRT-8 vs Mustang GT500
Originally Posted by Gold_Rush
Hence why you go with a properly sized turbo or a twin-turbo setup.
Todays turbo technology has come a long ways (now we have twin scroll and ballbearings), and if you go for one best suited for your engine and combination, there's no reason why lag shouldn't be minimized. Especially on a larger cube v8 where low-end tq isn't as big a concern.
Truth is, you CAN make full boost at low rpms with the proper turbo. Again, the key is properly matching the turbo to your engine. There's no reason why real usuable power can't be achieved with the right combo.
Todays turbo technology has come a long ways (now we have twin scroll and ballbearings), and if you go for one best suited for your engine and combination, there's no reason why lag shouldn't be minimized. Especially on a larger cube v8 where low-end tq isn't as big a concern.
Truth is, you CAN make full boost at low rpms with the proper turbo. Again, the key is properly matching the turbo to your engine. There's no reason why real usuable power can't be achieved with the right combo.
I know what turboes are capable of today, I go to a school with more than enough turbo cars there for me to sample from. Again, this was more aimed at the "large single turbo" comment that I read so much about people doing nowadays, forsaking their powerband. I don't want to get this thread much more off track than this, but I am in no way disagreeing that a good turbo setup can make usable torque in the low rpm. I will say this though, I have never been in a turbo car that pulled as hard at low rpm as a positive displacement blower car, but then again I am not saying that I have experienced every turbo setup out there.
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 16,176
From: Chicagoland IL
Re: Camaro Z/28 vs Challenger SRT-8 vs Mustang GT500
Originally Posted by 94LightningGal
Nowhere am I seeing anyone stating that the car, that competes with the Mustang GT, should have a moderately powered V8, good driving dynamics with a good ride, seating position that someone over 25 would feel comfortable with, decent, ergonomically correct interior.......... that the average owner would be comfortable with on a daily basis, and good looks that don't make everyone who drives it feel like a boy racer.
Registered User
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 2,402
From: Toronto, ON Canada
Re: Camaro Z/28 vs Challenger SRT-8 vs Mustang GT500
I think many of us here just learned to ignore various posts, or are too tired to provide any sort of feedback to things like "Camaro needs to be x, y and z."
My take on things? No way will there be a Camaro to outpower the GT500. And it doesn't have to. It accomplishes nothing more than appeasing a number of internet racers and purely for bragging rights... also among internet racers.
As Gloria said, make a product that will sell to keep the car alive, have a number of combinations to tailor to various demographic groups, and offer some optional performance packages/models. Don't go overkill.
My take on things? No way will there be a Camaro to outpower the GT500. And it doesn't have to. It accomplishes nothing more than appeasing a number of internet racers and purely for bragging rights... also among internet racers.
As Gloria said, make a product that will sell to keep the car alive, have a number of combinations to tailor to various demographic groups, and offer some optional performance packages/models. Don't go overkill.
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 3,180
From: Yadkinville, NC USA
Re: Camaro Z/28 vs Challenger SRT-8 vs Mustang GT500
Originally Posted by muckz
My take on things? No way will there be a Camaro to outpower the GT500. And it doesn't have to. It accomplishes nothing more than appeasing a number of internet racers and purely for bragging rights... also among internet racers.
As Gloria said, make a product that will sell to keep the car alive, have a number of combinations to tailor to various demographic groups, and offer some optional performance packages/models. Don't go overkill.
As Gloria said, make a product that will sell to keep the car alive, have a number of combinations to tailor to various demographic groups, and offer some optional performance packages/models. Don't go overkill.
More importantly, I think it is critical for GM to execute a consumer-friendly Camaro first and foremost... PERIOD. If the car can't sell itself well enough to sustain it's existence, then we will never have to worry about it being faster than a Mustang or Charger anyways.
I understand the desire of GM faithful to have the fastest thing on wheels for nothing in price, and I hope that they can see that I truely am not using any rose-colored glasses here to keep Mustang on top of the performance list. HEAVEN KNOWS the stock Mustang was sucking hind tit for many years (especially 93-2003), but you know what... it is not only still here, but it is flourishing in a time when the "fastest" car is long gone. I'd HELLUVA lot rather be able to buy my ponycar of choice in a good V8 package, and modify it to suit my need for speed, than to have nothing available to me at all.
Let me rephrase... is it more important to you that you win the war, or win a battle? We are talking all battles in this threrad so far. Gloria was just reminding us of the "war" part of the car, and honestly that part is far more significant in GM's eyes - especially the BOD and approval committe - I promise.
I understand the topic of the thread, and it certainly makes for interesting thought and conversation (which I will revertback to after this post), but PLEASE guys, let's just concentrate on getting a competitive Camaro back first - it doesn't have to beat a Carrera GT or even the GT500 to ba an awesome car.
Registered User
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,370
From: Germany
Re: Camaro Z/28 vs Challenger SRT-8 vs Mustang GT500
Originally Posted by V8 Slayer
How do they do this with gas prices at $3 per gallon? But i still like the cars 
its still much cheapest then it should be
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 16,176
From: Chicagoland IL
Re: Camaro Z/28 vs Challenger SRT-8 vs Mustang GT500
Originally Posted by ProudPony
I understand the desire of GM faithful to have the fastest thing on wheels for nothing in price, and I hope that they can see that I truely am not using any rose-colored glasses here to keep Mustang on top of the performance list. HEAVEN KNOWS the stock Mustang was sucking hind tit for many years (especially 93-2003), but you know what... it is not only still here, but it is flourishing in a time when the "fastest" car is long gone. I'd HELLUVA lot rather be able to buy my ponycar of choice in a good V8 package, and modify it to suit my need for speed, than to have nothing available to me at all.
Mustang didn't thrive because it had less power and Camaro didn't die because it had more power.
Mustang did alot of things right and Camaro did alot of things wrong. We all know what those right/wrong things are/were - we've discussed them a million times.
Regardless of how some 4th gen enthusiasts want to frame themselves, Camaro died almost 3 years ago and Mustang is backordered till '06. The 4th gen having "too much power" is certainly not to blame for any of that.
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 3,180
From: Yadkinville, NC USA
Re: Camaro Z/28 vs Challenger SRT-8 vs Mustang GT500
Originally Posted by Z284ever
Regardless of how some 4th gen enthusiasts want to frame themselves, Camaro died almost 3 years ago and Mustang is backordered till '06. The 4th gen having "too much power" is certainly not to blame for any of that.
Like sitting on the road, sitting at a 45* angle, a 14" stepover, a 3-acre dash board, the "aerodynamic" ovehangs, an engine (though beautiful) that is closer to the glovebox than the headlights, the longest door in the industry, etc etc etc.
These are sacrifices that were made to have a sleek, aerodynamic land missile. It worked.... for those who wanted land missiles... to the tune of 30k units/year or so.
I'm with you - honest I am. I'm just trying to play a little devil's advocate here so that these guys screaming for the land missile don't forget from whence we recently came... that's all.
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 16,176
From: Chicagoland IL
Re: Camaro Z/28 vs Challenger SRT-8 vs Mustang GT500
Originally Posted by ProudPony
Points well taken, but in those many discussions to which you refer, we also concluded that MANY of the things F4 did wrong were in fact due to the persuit of having the fastest ponycar on the planet....
Like sitting on the road, sitting at a 45* angle, a 14" stepover, a 3-acre dash board, the "aerodynamic" ovehangs, an engine (though beautiful) that is closer to the glovebox than the headlights, the longest door in the industry, etc etc etc.
These are sacrifices that were made to have a sleek, aerodynamic land missile. It worked.... for those who wanted land missiles... to the tune of 30k units/year or so.
Like sitting on the road, sitting at a 45* angle, a 14" stepover, a 3-acre dash board, the "aerodynamic" ovehangs, an engine (though beautiful) that is closer to the glovebox than the headlights, the longest door in the industry, etc etc etc.
These are sacrifices that were made to have a sleek, aerodynamic land missile. It worked.... for those who wanted land missiles... to the tune of 30k units/year or so.
See Proud, that's exactly what I'm talking about. Most people didn't see those aspects as being in any way attractive or useful or performance oriented...frankly, alot of people saw those things as...well...stupid and ugly and performance diminishing. And BTW, my pet peeve is when people say - very ridiculously - that those features made the car "too performance orientated" for all the other common non-hardcore/non-niinja/non-jedi civilian buyers. Those elements had absolutely nothing to do with performance (or for the majority of the populace - good looks). They added NOT ONE IOTA OF PERFORMANCE.....in fact probably reduced it. The sole result of those questionable elements...as it turned out..... was purely to turn off buyers.
Getting back to this horsepower thing.......
The LS1 was a marvelous over-achieving powerplant. That's the ONE thing that Chevy got right!!
Last edited by Z284ever; Jun 17, 2005 at 02:56 PM.
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 16,176
From: Chicagoland IL
Re: Camaro Z/28 vs Challenger SRT-8 vs Mustang GT500
Originally Posted by dream '94 Z28
Where did this become top dog vs. top dog vs. top dog and become the well played out arguement of what the next car should be? 
Yeah, what he said...............
Registered User
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 9,705
From: Oakland, California
Re: Camaro Z/28 vs Challenger SRT-8 vs Mustang GT500
Oh, great so now we're listening to a bunch of Ford fanatics that say the Top Camaro doesn't need to out do the Top Mustang... AND AGREEING WITH THEM?
No offense but, we should all want this. Hear me out.
A Chevy vs. Chrysler vs. Ford Ponycar Horsepower war will drive each manufacturer to out do the other. Each successive year they will make improvements and refinements and add features just to beat out the other two. They won't rest on their laurels as some have in the past and each will continue to try to one up the other two guys year after year.
You want competition. You want them to try and out do each other.
If one or two decides, "what's the point, we can't keep up with the Joneses" it'll kill the whole program for everyone. For instance, if GM says, "You know what, we can't build a Camaro to beat out the GT500", and if Chrysler says, "we can't build a Challenger to beat out the GT500", that doesn't mean GT500 and Ford enthusiasts win. In fact they lose. For what would be Fords drive after selling a few GT500's? It'll be, "heck with GM and Chrysler out of the picture, we can start cutting corners and increase profit. Heck, we can even raise prices, after all, they don't make one like this!"
No friends, we want a bloody ponycar horsepower war, and as performance car enthusiasts we should demand it.
There, I've said my peace, I go back to my cave now.
No offense but, we should all want this. Hear me out.
A Chevy vs. Chrysler vs. Ford Ponycar Horsepower war will drive each manufacturer to out do the other. Each successive year they will make improvements and refinements and add features just to beat out the other two. They won't rest on their laurels as some have in the past and each will continue to try to one up the other two guys year after year.
You want competition. You want them to try and out do each other.
If one or two decides, "what's the point, we can't keep up with the Joneses" it'll kill the whole program for everyone. For instance, if GM says, "You know what, we can't build a Camaro to beat out the GT500", and if Chrysler says, "we can't build a Challenger to beat out the GT500", that doesn't mean GT500 and Ford enthusiasts win. In fact they lose. For what would be Fords drive after selling a few GT500's? It'll be, "heck with GM and Chrysler out of the picture, we can start cutting corners and increase profit. Heck, we can even raise prices, after all, they don't make one like this!"
No friends, we want a bloody ponycar horsepower war, and as performance car enthusiasts we should demand it.
There, I've said my peace, I go back to my cave now.
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 1,808
From: FL/MI
Re: Camaro Z/28 vs Challenger SRT-8 vs Mustang GT500
Originally Posted by Stewie
Presuming the LS2 doesn't get a horse power upgrade, I honestly don't think we will see a camaro north of 390hp available at the dealership. Corvette rule anyone?
The rule that kept the LS2 out of the GTO? Maybe the one that kept the LS6 out of the CTS-V? Perhaps the "rule" that kept a 390 HP GenIV engine out ot the SSR?
Perhaps you refer to the "rule" that allowed the Buick GNX to be so slow compared to the same model year 'vette?
Last edited by 1fastdog; Jun 17, 2005 at 06:17 PM.
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 1,870
Re: Camaro Z/28 vs Challenger SRT-8 vs Mustang GT500
Originally Posted by 1fastdog
What "Corvette rule"?
The rule that kept the LS2 out of the GTO? Maybe the one that kept the LS6 out of the CTS-V? Perhaps the "rule" that kept a 390 HP GenIV engine out ot the SSR?
Perhaps you refer to the "rule" that allowed the Buick GNX to be so slow compared to the same model year 'vette?
The rule that kept the LS2 out of the GTO? Maybe the one that kept the LS6 out of the CTS-V? Perhaps the "rule" that kept a 390 HP GenIV engine out ot the SSR?
Perhaps you refer to the "rule" that allowed the Buick GNX to be so slow compared to the same model year 'vette?
It's not exclusive to chevy. It holds true just about everywhere else and is the norm. The GT500's 5.4 is easily capable of 550hp like the Ford GT's, but it was detuned to under 500. You mentioned the GN, and it so happens that the T-types 3.8 was a detuned GN/GNX motor. There’s a sort of hierarchy, and that hierarchy goes a bit ways in dictating what hp or performance rating cars X, Y, and Z will have. And it just so happens that corvette is above camaro in that regards.
This is one of the reasons why i'm not expecting a 505hp Ls7 camaro. I could see a special camaro having more hp than the standard 400hp ls2, but i think z06 like hp and such is 100% out of the question.
Just my 2 cents on this whole subject.