Motor Trend: Camaro vs Mustang vs Challenger
03-24-2009 | 11:14 AM
#32
Registered User
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 24
From: San Antonio
03-24-2009 | 11:23 AM
#33
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 1,870
I too was fairly impressed and surprised with the trackpack optioned GT for being on older platform and down 111horses. That's definitely a must have option on the GT and worth the $1,400. I'd like to see GM offer something along the same lines. I'm also looking forward to seeing what this option will do with the upgraded powertrain next year on the mustang.
The challenger was a big disappointment. It's just too big and heavy a car.
The challenger was a big disappointment. It's just too big and heavy a car.
03-24-2009 | 11:28 AM
#34
Registered User
Joined: Jul 1999
Posts: 3,647
From: Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
how much lighter? and what kind of bolt ons ? a supercharger?! haha. that would get their hp to where the camaro is. and i dont think it actually handles better than the camaro. from what i have read so far from all of these write ups. and as far as price, i have built a mustang on fords web page and it is only about 500 less than the camaro i have ordered. but it lacks in power so ill pay the extra 500 for the more hp and IRS.
It's 0.5 secs slower in the 1/4 mile.
Gets better gas mileage and runs on regular unleaded.
Wouldn't take much to get 50-60 more hp out of it with headers, exhaust, intake, tune, and a small cam.
Just so there is no confusion here, I'm still buying a Camaro. The above is just what the Ford guys are saying.
03-24-2009 | 11:34 AM
#35
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 3,650
From: Indianapolis, IN
Mustang is 300 lbs lighter.
It's 0.5 secs slower in the 1/4 mile.
Gets better gas mileage and runs on regular unleaded.
Wouldn't take much to get 50-60 more hp out of it with headers, exhaust, intake, tune, and a small cam.
Just so there is no confusion here, I'm still buying a Camaro. The above is just what the Ford guys are saying.
It's 0.5 secs slower in the 1/4 mile.
Gets better gas mileage and runs on regular unleaded.
Wouldn't take much to get 50-60 more hp out of it with headers, exhaust, intake, tune, and a small cam.
Just so there is no confusion here, I'm still buying a Camaro. The above is just what the Ford guys are saying.
And I don't consider installing a small cam (two cams, actually) to be a bolt-on, though maybe it isn't that tough. Then again, the LS3 is a cam swap away from 500 crank hp, give or take. So...
The weight advantage is real, but the Ford is way behind in the powertrain world, at least until the 5.0L comes out. Even then the playing field might not be level, but we'll see.
03-24-2009 | 11:42 AM
#36
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,503
From: BFE, Ohio
Uh, the Mustang GT is not more fuel efficient than the SS.
And I don't consider installing a small cam (two cams, actually) to be a bolt-on, though maybe it isn't that tough. Then again, the LS3 is a cam swap away from 500 crank hp, give or take. So...
The weight advantage is real, but the Ford is way behind in the powertrain world, at least until the 5.0L comes out. Even then the playing field might not be level, but we'll see.
And I don't consider installing a small cam (two cams, actually) to be a bolt-on, though maybe it isn't that tough. Then again, the LS3 is a cam swap away from 500 crank hp, give or take. So...
The weight advantage is real, but the Ford is way behind in the powertrain world, at least until the 5.0L comes out. Even then the playing field might not be level, but we'll see.
03-24-2009 | 12:21 PM
#37
Registered User
Joined: Nov 1998
Posts: 214
From: Dallas, TX
I don't really like the price comparison here because the options aren't similar. Yes the mustang was $34K, but it was a premium with track pack. I don't know if you can get the track pack on a regular GT, but the added cost of leather and other options on the premium model add up. Put the same non performance options on the camaro, and you are probably right at the same price range...
03-24-2009 | 12:27 PM
#38
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 881
From: Jacksonville Florida
Chevy really needs to offer a "Drag Pack". Better rear gears, and the Hurst Short Throw Shifter, Cold Air intake, and maybe a different tune. At least make it a dealer installed option. As long as it doesn't void the warranty.
03-24-2009 | 12:29 PM
#39
Registered User
Joined: Jul 1999
Posts: 3,647
From: Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
03-24-2009 | 01:09 PM
#41
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 4,482
From: ohio
Mustang is 300 lbs lighter.
It's 0.5 secs slower in the 1/4 mile.
Gets better gas mileage and runs on regular unleaded.
Wouldn't take much to get 50-60 more hp out of it with headers, exhaust, intake, tune, and a small cam.
Just so there is no confusion here, I'm still buying a Camaro. The above is just what the Ford guys are saying.
It's 0.5 secs slower in the 1/4 mile.
Gets better gas mileage and runs on regular unleaded.
Wouldn't take much to get 50-60 more hp out of it with headers, exhaust, intake, tune, and a small cam.
Just so there is no confusion here, I'm still buying a Camaro. The above is just what the Ford guys are saying.
all im going to do is change the gears, cam swap, lt headers, catback, remove cats, tune and im sweet. i wont really be worried about anything in my area.
Last edited by 2010_5thgen; 03-24-2009 at 01:20 PM.
03-24-2009 | 01:16 PM
#42
Registered User
Joined: Nov 1998
Posts: 214
From: Dallas, TX
That my friend is correct - this thing, already hitting 111 mph in the quarter dead stock, is going to be faster and quicker than most anything else on the street with the simple mods you're planning.
03-24-2009 | 01:19 PM
#43
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 4,482
From: ohio
without you guys and your wonderful knowledge i would be lost.