Main Competition Raises price...
11-22-2008 | 01:03 AM
#31
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 619
http://wilsonniblett.wordpress.com/2...press-release/
http://www.supercarsite.net/ford/svt...bra-coupe/2003
camaro has very similar gearing, slightly more weight, and more than likely more power. they will be close.
your weights are off too.
my point still stands. it has 60 more hp than the G8 GT and it weighs less. there wont be a comparison between the '10 mustang and '10 camaro.
http://www.supercarsite.net/ford/svt...bra-coupe/2003
camaro has very similar gearing, slightly more weight, and more than likely more power. they will be close.
your weights are off too.
my point still stands. it has 60 more hp than the G8 GT and it weighs less. there wont be a comparison between the '10 mustang and '10 camaro.
also, your forgetting about tire size when it come to the gearing. it's a 25.66 tire vs. a 28.66. the camaro will wind out 4th at almost 165 mph! it practically has 3 overdrives!!
with my (stock) gearing, I thought my 5th gear was useless, but on the camaro, it's going to be garbage.
11-22-2008 | 01:52 PM
#32
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 948
From: Stroudsburg, PA
I guess we'll see when they come out. since they have damn near 29" tall tires on the back stock it shouldn't be hard to put some 30" slicks on it along with some 4.56s and go have some fun at the drags.
11-24-2008 | 08:31 AM
#33
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,217
From: Greenville, SC
Or just run a small diameter slick and call it good. That is if the rear end holds together. That is what I can't wait to see. Lets hope GM learned from their previous mistakes.
11-24-2008 | 05:02 PM
#34
Registered User
Joined: Aug 1999
Posts: 2,612
From: Cincinnati, OH
The bottom line here is that Ford feels that it can compete with the Camaro, based on Mustang's traditional sales success, current price advantage, and cosmetic freshening - even while holding back it's improved powertrains.
I'd say that Ford has traditionally shown great skill in how they work this niche, and perhaps shouldn't be dismissed casually.
I'd say that Ford has traditionally shown great skill in how they work this niche, and perhaps shouldn't be dismissed casually.
Either way, competition appears to be giving both Ford guys and GM guys a better car (weight aside, Charlie).
11-25-2008 | 10:03 AM
#35
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 948
From: Stroudsburg, PA
11-25-2008 | 10:19 AM
#36
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 16,179
From: Chicagoland IL
It'll be interesting to watch. GM finally came to town with what looks to be a pretty good interior, and Ford looks like they took the interior challenge seriously, too.
Either way, competition appears to be giving both Ford guys and GM guys a better car (weight aside, Charlie).
Either way, competition appears to be giving both Ford guys and GM guys a better car (weight aside, Charlie).
11-25-2008 | 12:21 PM
#37
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 13,711
From: The Golden State
Actually, the point does not stand. You yourself just said that the G8 GT runs with the current Mustang GT.
That seams to make perfect sense:
Mustang GT: 11.67 lbs/hp
Pontiac G8 GT: 11.11 lbs/hp
Now if we look at the 2010 models:
Mustang GT: 11.22 lbs/hp (est. weight of 3533 and 315hp)
Camaro SS: 9.15 lbs/hp (weight of 3860 from GM and 422hp)
And since it was brought up:
Terminator: 9.36 lbs/hp to 8.59 lbs/hp (weight 3650 and 390hp, but really more like 425hp)
Now I agree the 3.73 gears in the Mustang will help, but they CERTAINLY will not be anywhere near enough. We have to look no further than the Bullitt to see what a 3.73 geared 315hp S-197 Mustang runs. Answer: about a tenth or two better than a 300hp, 3.55 geared Stang. In same mag tests the two have run nearly identical times and I recall one test where the Bullitt was slower.
IF the Camaro gets traction there is NO DOUBT it will DESTROY the 2010 Mustang GT.
Now, lets take a sneak preview of the 2011 GT:
Mustang GT: 9.125 lbs/hp (assuming 3650 and 400hp)
Camaro SS: 9.15 lbs/hp
Now that is going to be a battle!!!! Lets hope Ford gives the Mustang some rear tires wider than 245 and actually puts this drivetrain in the GT for a competitive price and not some high dollar special edition Mustang. A 2011 Stang GT costing $31k with 400hp, a 6-speed transmission, and weighing only #3600 or so would be a blast! That is the kind of competition we ALL need.
*edit* Something I was just looking at for fun. A light weight LS1 F-body with a lid and exhaust (almost a given on any enthusiasts F-body at this point) would run right with both of the new guys in 2011.
1998-2002 F-body: 9.05 lbs/hp (assuming 3350 and 370hp or about 315 to 320 rwhp)
Now you guys with t-tops, leather, etc. will need to go on a diet or make sure you have some longtubes, haha.
That seams to make perfect sense:
Mustang GT: 11.67 lbs/hp
Pontiac G8 GT: 11.11 lbs/hp
Now if we look at the 2010 models:
Mustang GT: 11.22 lbs/hp (est. weight of 3533 and 315hp)
Camaro SS: 9.15 lbs/hp (weight of 3860 from GM and 422hp)
And since it was brought up:
Terminator: 9.36 lbs/hp to 8.59 lbs/hp (weight 3650 and 390hp, but really more like 425hp)
Now I agree the 3.73 gears in the Mustang will help, but they CERTAINLY will not be anywhere near enough. We have to look no further than the Bullitt to see what a 3.73 geared 315hp S-197 Mustang runs. Answer: about a tenth or two better than a 300hp, 3.55 geared Stang. In same mag tests the two have run nearly identical times and I recall one test where the Bullitt was slower.
IF the Camaro gets traction there is NO DOUBT it will DESTROY the 2010 Mustang GT.
Now, lets take a sneak preview of the 2011 GT:
Mustang GT: 9.125 lbs/hp (assuming 3650 and 400hp)
Camaro SS: 9.15 lbs/hp
Now that is going to be a battle!!!! Lets hope Ford gives the Mustang some rear tires wider than 245 and actually puts this drivetrain in the GT for a competitive price and not some high dollar special edition Mustang. A 2011 Stang GT costing $31k with 400hp, a 6-speed transmission, and weighing only #3600 or so would be a blast! That is the kind of competition we ALL need.
*edit* Something I was just looking at for fun. A light weight LS1 F-body with a lid and exhaust (almost a given on any enthusiasts F-body at this point) would run right with both of the new guys in 2011.
1998-2002 F-body: 9.05 lbs/hp (assuming 3350 and 370hp or about 315 to 320 rwhp)
Now you guys with t-tops, leather, etc. will need to go on a diet or make sure you have some longtubes, haha.
Will the 2010 Camaro SS outaccelerate the 2010 Mustang GT?
No doubt.
Will the V6 Camaro's 300 hp give the 315 hp Mustang GT a run for it's money?
Only in your dreams.
Will the Camaro SS slay the GT badly in acceleration?
To be determined. We're talking about an engine (the current Bullit) which is obviously underrated and is likely to be retuned upwards again for 2010, with a higher axle ratio than Camaro, in a car that's significantly lighter than a Camaro.
Is the current 300 horse Mustang GT as quick as the G8 GT?
At the very least.
Will the 2010 Mustang be even quicker?
Again, no doubt.
Is the Terminator Cobra (don't know where that came from, but OK) quicker than the Camaro SS?
Given it's also quite a bit lighter than a Camaro SS, it's quite possible. But the SS will definately whip it on a race course.
Bullit times are 3/10 second quicker both to 60 and the quarter mile over Mustang GTs according to Ford. This has been borne out by enough tests to strongly confirm.
All said, Camaro's weight disadvantage is NOT a complete disadvantage.
That weight on the Camaro (as with the Challenger) is well placed and has a purpose. You have a chassis that is capable of handling top speeds that you will most certainly never see. Mustang's lightweight chassis means the car is limited to 155 mph as a safety margin even though the Shelby GT500 should easily do 180. Problem is at those speeds, the Mustang becomes unstable (those who drove stock 5.0 Fox Mustangs at it's top speed of 140 mph know what I'm talking about). Challengers (as well as other LX cars) and Camaros (as well as other Zetas) take these uber-speeds in stride.
Last edited by guionM; 11-25-2008 at 12:34 PM.
11-25-2008 | 12:50 PM
#38
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 13,711
From: The Golden State
2 to 1? That's not bad at all considering GM did nothing to sell the car, they were rattle traps and basically GM just flat out killed it. Imagine if they put some positive effort towards the sales. HP is not the end all of course.
Any half brain numb skull knows that. There is something to be said for the guy that asks how much hp in that thing? 400+ sure sounds better than
300+.
Any half brain numb skull knows that. There is something to be said for the guy that asks how much hp in that thing? 400+ sure sounds better than
300+.
However, as I learned with my "meger" 210 horsepower Thunderbird SC, it's torque that wins races (it had over 320 lbs/ft of it).
The 2004 GTO had 350 horsepower that sounds great on paper next to the 300 horsepower Mustang GT. However that Mustang GT was quicker to 60 mph and matches it in the quarter mile.
Going back to my SC, I absolutely loved how many ricers I buried. I'm sure those who knew something about SCs (rare) only saw horsepower numbers which thier little 4 bangers and V6s easily outpowered. However, they forgot about torque and my low axle ratio and aggressive transmission gearing.
I used to love saying my car had "ONLY" 210 horsepower for those that focused only on that number........ people like YOU!
11-25-2008 | 04:25 PM
#39
Registered User
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 3,463
From: SoCal
2004 GTO's are 13.5 to 13.8 ET cars at 103-104 mph trap speeds. If you want to talk torque they suffer from the same problems the F-bodies had because the LS1 makes 365 ft/lbs of twist and it's harder to launch on street tires, but plenty up to the task of moving the GTO's heft.
But if we're talking drag racing and using the 1/4 mile I'd rather see 60ft times than 0-60 as that means almost nothing.
11-25-2008 | 04:45 PM
#40
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 1,214
From: City of Champions, MA, USA
Will the Camaro SS slay the GT badly in acceleration?
To be determined. We're talking about an engine (the current Bullit) which is obviously underrated and is likely to be retuned upwards again for 2010, with a higher axle ratio than Camaro, in a car that's significantly lighter than a Camaro.
To be determined. We're talking about an engine (the current Bullit) which is obviously underrated and is likely to be retuned upwards again for 2010, with a higher axle ratio than Camaro, in a car that's significantly lighter than a Camaro.
11-25-2008 | 09:27 PM
#41
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 948
From: Stroudsburg, PA
11-26-2008 | 07:39 AM
#42
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 619
11-26-2008 | 07:42 AM
#43
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 619
eh, it all depends. there are too many variables to say it plainly that tq won't win any races. horsepower can be overrated as well if the gearing is ****ty. (look at the 96-97 4v 4.6 vs. the LT1).
11-26-2008 | 12:28 PM
#44
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 16,179
From: Chicagoland IL
All said, Camaro's weight disadvantage is NOT a complete disadvantage.
That weight on the Camaro (as with the Challenger) is well placed and has a purpose. You have a chassis that is capable of handling top speeds that you will most certainly never see. Mustang's lightweight chassis means the car is limited to 155 mph as a safety margin even though the Shelby GT500 should easily do 180. Problem is at those speeds, the Mustang becomes unstable (those who drove stock 5.0 Fox Mustangs at it's top speed of 140 mph know what I'm talking about). Challengers (as well as other LX cars) and Camaros (as well as other Zetas) take these uber-speeds in stride.
That weight on the Camaro (as with the Challenger) is well placed and has a purpose. You have a chassis that is capable of handling top speeds that you will most certainly never see. Mustang's lightweight chassis means the car is limited to 155 mph as a safety margin even though the Shelby GT500 should easily do 180. Problem is at those speeds, the Mustang becomes unstable (those who drove stock 5.0 Fox Mustangs at it's top speed of 140 mph know what I'm talking about). Challengers (as well as other LX cars) and Camaros (as well as other Zetas) take these uber-speeds in stride.
That's a real stretch, Guy.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post