FIRST test---2010 Camaro v6 & v8!

[Prince Valiant]

From motor trend:
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/coupes/112_0903_2010_chevrolet_camaro_test/index.html

Quick stats:

V6 auto trans: 0-60 = 6.0 s, 1/4 mile= 14.6 @ 96.3mph, epa rating = 18/29
v6 manual trans: 0-60 = 5.9 s, 1/4 mile = 14.4 @ 98 mph, epa #'s = 17/26

v8 auto: 0-60 = 4.6s, 1/4 mile = 13.1 @ 107.5mph, epa = 16/25
v8 manual: 0-60 = 4.7s, 1/4 mile = 13.0 = 111.0 mph, epa = 16/24

it listed on the spec pages that the v6's based at 28.8G and the v8's at 34.2G...though I assume this is with destination/reasonable ttl/etc...because the article stated the base rs/ss was 23G and 31G respectively.

[Russ Jerome]

v8 auto: 0-60 = 4.6s, 1/4 mile = 13.1 @ 107.5mph, epa = 16/25
v8 manual: 0-60 = 4.7s, 1/4 mile = 13.0 = 111.0 mph, epa = 16/24



Pretty impressive, the computer must be holding a lot back
for the manual to out ET "and" out MPH the auto, doesnt
work like that in the real world.

Manual should have higher MPH, slower ET.
Auto shoud have better ET and slower MPH.

[STANMAN]

Isn't the V6 supposed to have 300HP just like the S197 Stang, and everyone stated they were supposed to be just as quick?? I can tell you a stock S197 runs faster than a 14.4.

[BAD LS1]

Ha a v6 4K lbs car trapping nearly 100 mph! Thats bad ass!

[Karps TA]

Jalopnik also posted their review
http://jalopnik.com/5176993/2010-chevy-camaro-first-drive

[jbiscuit]

holy shit thats flyin for a 6!

[Prince Valiant]

Pretty impressive, the computer must be holding a lot back
for the manual to out ET "and" out MPH the auto, doesnt
work like that in the real world.

Manual should have higher MPH, slower ET.
Auto shoud have better ET and slower MPH.They don't use exactly the same v8...the manual uses a 426hp 6.2 LS3, whereas the auto uses a a 400hp 6.2 L99.

weights were listed at 3770 for a v6, and 3859 for a v8...the auto 8 was a little lighter than the manual 8.

[STANMAN]

The much-touted performance of the V6-equipped Camaro doesn't live up to its Mustang GT-killing hype.


QFT from the link above.

[Russ Jerome]

They don't use exactly the same v8...the manual uses a 426hp 6.2 LS3, whereas the auto uses a a 400hp 6.2 L99.

.

That makes everything crystal clear now, the 426 with an
auto would be bad @$$ at the track.

[Prince Valiant]

The much-touted performance of the V6-equipped Camaro doesn't live up to its Mustang GT-killing hype. I do recall stating this:

Performance should be fine...even the v6 should be able to clip mid 14's safely, perhaps low 14's with good driving (perhaps touch 13's with heroic driving). I heard the v6 will be officially rated 29mpg? It's great performance for a base v6 coupe that runs on regular gas....but it shouldn't be something someone buys for all out performance at the drag strip. Reading the article though it sounds like it's quite competent and fun to drive otherwise...safely more so than either the base v6 mustang or v6 challenger.

Fortunately for the mopar guys we do have the 6.4 on the way ;)

[STANMAN]

I am just saying that everyone who said "Oh, the V6 maro will keep up with the Mustang GT" were wrong.

[lordairgtar]

http://www.chevyhhr.net/forums/showthread.php?t=19469
Here is a comparison with a blocky tall car, not too bad. Photos of time slips to verify.

Well the track was a mess and I suck at stick. <--- Noob. I've never driven a stick at a track nor have I driven a 4 banger at the track. I do need Slicks to get traction. It was warm out as well.
1st Run: 2.46 60ft, 1/4 mile 15.04 @ 92.8 mph
2nd Run: 2.58 60 ft, 1/4 mile 15.2 @ 98.96 mph
3rd Run: 2.60 60ft , 1/4 mile 15.2 @ 99.04 mph

Pretty comparable to the V6.

[88Nightmare]

I am just saying that everyone who said "Oh, the V6 maro will keep up with the Mustang GT" were wrong.

keep up with and beat are two different things. Nevertheless, the S197 GT has how much hp? The base V6 maro motor has how much hp???? The GT would probably win, but the V6 isn't gonna be left in the dust either

[BAD LS1]

The lack of the 2 extra cylinder does leave a defecit in torque. Torque moves shit. with 98 mph trap speeds with magazine editors driving leaves no doubt that the car will get close to or in the 13's. A V6 with 100 mph traps and 30 mpg thats is a BASE MODEL Camaro = pretty much best car evar.

[Karps TA]

Torque moves shit.


Yep you're a Briggs guy :rolf

[wrath]

Model MSRP Destination Charge
Camaro LS $22,245.00 $750.00
Camaro 1LT $23,880.00 $750.00
Camaro 2LT $26,580.00 $750.00
Camaro 1SS $30,245.00 $750.00
Camaro 2SS $33,430.00 $750.00

So for $22,995 you can have a base Camaro.

[Waver]

not bad numbers for the camaro, however before we have a mustang gt is faster than the v6 (wtf? It should be the gt has an 8) Ford has a few things on the horizon, like the 300+ ecoboost v6, the 5.0 cammer motor, the boss motor......things should be getting good

[Poncho]

Ford has a few things on the horizon, like the 300+ ecoboost v6 WAS SUPPOSED TO BE OUT 5 YEARS AGO,
the 5.0 cammer motor CATALOG MOTOR, NOT ACTUALLY INSTALLED IN ANYTHING,
the boss motor DEAD PROJECT ......
things should be getting good AFTER GM COLLAPSES AND FORD STARTS USING GM LSX MOTORS

[Poncho]

The lack of the 2 extra cylinder does leave a defecit in torque. Torque moves shit. with 98 mph trap speeds with magazine editors driving leaves no doubt that the car will get close to or in the 13's. A V6 with 100 mph traps and 30 mpg thats is a BASE MODEL Camaro = pretty much best car evar.

v6 98mph traps = 13.9's on a solid 60'
v8 111mph traps = near mid 12 second car on a solid 60'

[Waver]

hey Mr. Know it all....THE ECOBOOST IS READY FOR PRODUCTION!!!!!! IT IS GOING TO BE IN THE FUSION IN 2011 AND IN THE NEW SHOW....and you know what, the "new Camaro was suposed to be out when? and it took how long for it to be out?????

The Cammer and the Boss engines are going to be the basis for the new engines that Ford is comming out with. Maybe you should read a little more instead of doing what ever the hell it is that you have been doing with your self Dan, er Danni, or what ever the fuck else you are calling your self these days

FORD WILL NEVER USE LSX ENGINES, HAVE ALWAYS BEEN DOWN A LITTLE BIT ON POWER FROM GM, BUT HAVE ALWAYS HAD TO MOVE LESS WEIGHT, AND KEEP IN MIND, THE MUSTANG HAS BEEN AROUNDE FOR 45 CONSECUTIVE YEARS, FOR THE MOST PART HAS BEEN DOWN ON POWER FOR 45 YEARS AND STILL SELLS MORE.

All I was saying was that the horsepower wars are going to get good again now, and I didnt want another pissing match between Mustang is better than the camaro or vice versa or I know this and that......and didnt I make the comment that why the fuck are we compairing the mustang v8 to the gm v6........it was more of like a "time to step it up"

[Poncho]

lol, butthurt.

Regardless of the ecoboost finally coming out in two model years, it should have been out along time ago, the 4.0 in the S197's was never supposed to do any further than '06, Nick, Neuvagina, Nutwaver, Skeletor, Nic, whatever the hell you call yourself these days.

Camaro was supposed to be out in Fall. It was delayed a bit. They just teased us with Transformers in which the Camaro was actually a rebodied GTO.

I'm well aware of the BOSS/Hurricane motors being the basis. I'm also well aware of that program being delayed and terminated, then revived due to finances. Even that said, the motor was going to land in the trucks, and "maybe if you're really lucky" the Mustang. We still won't see it for another year. It really sucks, but they are still behind. Better to be behind the rest in horsepower, when the rest are well behind in sales anyway, don't cha think?

also being down 100hp to Chrysler and GM isn't just a little bit. But see comment above.

The Mustang is the better car, it will sell more, we know this. It always has. Better get that blower on your Mustang, it's gonna suck when v6 camaros are blowing your doors off. But then NA LSx's will still be ahead.

That being said, I pretty much agree with what you said, but your ass just got a little raw due to my joke about Ford having good new production V8's when they start buying LSx's

So which way are we going to argue? That one is faster? Or that one sells more? Either way it's a "positive" and a "negative" to both. You just gotta ask whats important, worldly power, or having the same car that 10 teenage girls down the road also have. Ohhh that reminds me, gotta put a deposit down on a new v6 stang to fit in w/ the rest of the chicks.

[Waver]

lol, butthurt.

Regardless that Ecoboost should have been out along time ago.

Camaro was supposed to be out in Fall. It was delayed a bit.

I'm well aware of the new motors being the basis. I'm also well aware of that program being delayed to the point of possible termination due to finances. Even that said, the motor was going to land in the trucks, and "maybe if you're really lucky" the Mustang.

also being down 100hp to Chrysler and GM isn't just a little bit.

The Mustang is the better car, it will sell more, we know this. It always has. Better get that blower on your Mustang, it's gonna suck when v6 camaros are blowing your doors off.


I am not butthurt, my friend. I am just sick of you adding your 2 cents into everything.

The mustang has always been about 100 hp less than the camaro since the 80's I mean 350 hp vs what 260 for the ls1 vs the 4.6 mod motor? or what did the lt1 have vs the 5.0? lets be real here. They are compairable less weight to move means less hp needed to hit the same time/speed

And the Camaro wasnt suposed to be out in fall of last year, I believe it was suposed to be out in fall of 07 if not sooner. On that note, do you read the financial report? Ford is the only one that is not worried about runing out of cash in a few months. I am sure that Ford could produce the engines and or develop it, if not put a 5.4 NA engine into the mustang gt or even a boosted 4.6 into it...Or how about reading magazines that are not geared at one make or model, I do believe that road and track, car and driver, and motortrend has all determined that the base, gt, and the gt500 is faster and over all a better car than the charger in all its forms.......get your info right before you try to make your self look like you are all knowing

[Poncho]

I am sorry, from now on, I will contribute just one cent.

The Camaro most definitely was not due in '07 as the Holden VE Chassis was barely getting off the ground at that time. '08 yes, and instead was pushed back to spring of '09 as a fall launch was a terrible idea, they learned that with the GTO, and also the dealership allocation of the latter.

I am certainly not all knowing, and I am a big fan of the Mustang, but everyone quickly forgets that when I state the obvious, that GM has the faster cars, better motors, and isn't toting around a 5-speed manual.

[Waver]

Nice edit there....good thing that I quoted it before you tried to make your self seem smart.

now lets fix your "edits"......I never asked to change my name, Andy and Yoosif changed my name and I went with it because I have a good sence of humor about having to have major surgury to save my life and all the shit that I went through. Oh and I never called my self Nic.......seems a little backdoor boys to me.....

transformers was a teaser? Wernt we teased with it before then, however it got delayed what, three times before that?

Oh and the eco boost, yeah, that is going to be in the mustang, when, I dont have that info (or do I?), but it will be soon

Was I butthurt about the whole lsx comment? No, not in the least, I just got tired of you running your mouth and trying to make your self seem like an industry insider when you cant even get your facts right. There was no reason for you to even comment on what I said, or correct anyone in this thread. Face it, you know a lot about the GTO, I will give you that, but you dont know shit about anything else car related.....

[Poncho]

wow the rage is strong in this one today.

Also any edits were done before you even replied.

[Waver]

I am sorry, from now on, I will contribute just one cent.

The Camaro most definitely was not due in '07 as the Holden VE Chassis was barely getting off the ground at that time. '08 yes, and instead was pushed back to spring of '09 as a fall launch was a terrible idea, they learned that with the GTO, and also the dealership allocation of the latter.

I am certainly not all knowing, and I am a big fan of the Mustang, but everyone quickly forgets that when I state the obvious, that GM has the faster cars, better motors, and isn't toting around a 5-speed manual.

More hp, yeah, I will agree with that, faster, oh shit yea I will agree with that too, however over all reliability? well I would say the 4.6/5.4 is on par with the lsx. In the real world, hp is not what sells a majority for cars. For every Mustang Gt buyer I get I have another 9 looking for the V6.

[07ROUSHSTG3]

nice numbers IMO.

[Poncho]

More hp, yeah, I will agree with that, faster, oh shit yea I will agree with that too, however over all reliability? well I would say the 4.6/5.4 is on par with the lsx. In the real world, hp is not what sells a majority for cars. For every Mustang Gt buyer I get I have another 9 looking for the V6.


werd. I will agree AGAIN that this is what makes the Mustang a success and the Camaro/Firebird/GTO/Oldmobile, GM Trucks inferior. It's not that they are really inferior product, just that Ford kicks their asses on sales, and allows them to sell stuff like the Mustang even when sales on that model or down, or in the 70's and part of the 80's when conservation was the model.

They sell more simply, thus offering more opportunity.

[BAD LS1]

Its amazing how much this new camaro gets people fired up and pissed off and start nit picking at it now that its reality and has some base line #'s out there and a good review. ugggghhhh. Who knows how sales will go with the obvious swill of an economy though.

[Karps TA]

I only get fired up about it cause I specifically took a 30 month lease on my Monte so I could buy a new Camaro. And now that I've seen it up close it's disappointing to me and I don't want it.

[BAD LS1]

I only get fired up about it cause I specifically took a 30 month lease on my Monte so I could buy a new Camaro. And now that I've seen it up close it's disappointing to me and I don't want it.

Get a G8 GT or GXP this go around:thumbsup

[Karps TA]

Can't afford that. I work in sales not customer ed where the big bucks are.

[Waver]

Its amazing how much this new camaro gets people fired up and pissed off and start nit picking at it now that its reality and has some base line #'s out there and a good review. ugggghhhh. Who knows how sales will go with the obvious swill of an economy though.
Agreed, I for one am impressed with the numbers, however in all reality I am impressed with the things you cando with the lsx....I am just thinking that this might be too little too late for gm, but at least they are going out with a bang with 2 of the cars that made them fameous, the Camaro and the corvette.

Get a G8 GT or GXP this go around:thumbsup

Agreed, I like the looks of the g8 and the performance numbers on it are impressive as well....

[DRK]

Pretty good numbers for a pig of a car, shit, you can buy fullsize trucks that don't weigh much more then that. It's a good looking car I just hope it's put together better then the 3rd & 4th gens where.

[wrath]

werd. I will agree AGAIN that this is what makes the Mustang a success and the Camaro/Firebird/GTO/Oldmobile, GM Trucks inferior. It's not that they are really inferior product, just that Ford kicks their asses on sales, and allows them to sell stuff like the Mustang even when sales on that model or down, or in the 70's and part of the 80's when conservation was the model.

They sell more simply, thus offering more opportunity.

Ford doesn't really sell more of anything. They have a select few models that sell more because they don't have any other option. What other performance car does Ford have besides the Mustang? What would they have today that would compete with the CTS that isn't wrong wheel drive? They don't have a Solstice/Sky, G8, Camaro, or a Corvette. If they did, they'd be beating GM and Toyota. But they haven't. And Ford has never sold more F-series than Silverado and Sierra combined as far as I've ever seen.

February 2009 sales numbers:
Silverado: 19,788
Sierra: 6,400
Ford F-series: 23,614

Mustang: 2,990
G8: 2,705

300 car per month difference between the beloved Mustang and the whale of a G8? Hmm...

[Prince Valiant]

mustang sales have plummeted in part due to people waiting for the 2010 'stang to come and ford thusly slowing production of 09's while tooling up for the 10's launch. I mean, challenger sales have surpassed the mustang last month and ytd too...but I'm not thinking that is a trend that'll stick though.

[Waver]

Ford doesn't really sell more of anything. They have a select few models that sell more because they don't have any other option. What other performance car does Ford have besides the Mustang? What would they have today that would compete with the CTS that isn't wrong wheel drive? They don't have a Solstice/Sky, G8, Camaro, or a Corvette. If they did, they'd be beating GM and Toyota. But they haven't. And Ford has never sold more F-series than Silverado and Sierra combined as far as I've ever seen.

February 2009 sales numbers:
Silverado: 19,788
Sierra: 6,400
Ford F-series: 23,614

Mustang: 2,990
G8: 2,705

300 car per month difference between the beloved Mustang and the whale of a G8? Hmm...

Some good numbers in what you have, however Ford is beating Gm right now, keeping in mind that ford has only three main car lines compaired to gm's 6. ( I am leaving out mazda and volvo for ford and saab and hummer for gm, even if they are not officially part of gm right now) So, in one way you can honestly say that gm is beating ford because they have more lines, however, what company is running out of cash quicker than a fat kid goes through a box of cookies?

Look at the entire line with ford and the strategy of marketing that Ford is using.....it used to be that Ford compaired them selvs to chevy and dodge, now the few times that they do it is only with the truck lines. In all of fords advertisements they say "compairable to toyota (put car here) and Honda (but car here). Ford has more cars on the top sellers list as well as in the most reliable list, and none of them are on the worst cars list. Gm cant really say that. The market isnt geared towards performance cars any more, that died in the 90's and is having a mild increase now. Hence why Ford is comming out with the SHO as well as an svt version of the Fusion. Ford dosnt need a super car like the corvette zr1 (the gt500 is compairable to the z06), and hasnt needed one for a while (the Ford gt was just a limited run vehicle to celebrate fords 100th anniversary), and yet still seems to be doing allright (remember they are the only ones that didnt get any money from the government unlike GM, Dodge, and now Toyota, who is asking the japaneese government for a bail out). The Mustang has always been down on power from the f bodys, but still manages to put up numbers that are close, and I think the same will be seen in the next 6-12 months.

Now as far as the "best selling truck", I laugh at that one, since gm shot them self in the foot with that one.....if they axed GMC then it would be a different story, but they havent, so the F-150 is STILL the number one selling truck....even your numbers say it.......Yeah we all know that the Silverado/siearra are the same truck, just like the Taurus/sable are the same car.....but yet, gm out sold the taurus one of the years it was out with a chevy I think, or was it a buick....no matter, you can skew those numbers to look like how you want them.

One other thing, wasnt it the Mustang that killed the camaro in the first place, as well as the covair and a few other mopar vehicles? And if it wasnt for the mustang being styled the way it is and being a huge sucess would we even have the challenger/camaro?

Hate on ford all you want, but thank ford as well.....besides, this is all a moot point.....the camaro wont save gm........the government might, or another manufacturer, perhaps honda, will

[wrath]

mustang sales have plummeted in part due to people waiting for the 2010 'stang to come and ford thusly slowing production of 09's while tooling up for the 10's launch. I mean, challenger sales have surpassed the mustang last month and ytd too...but I'm not thinking that is a trend that'll stick though.

February 2007 Mustang Sales: 10,772
February 2008 Mustang Sales: 7,752 (Down 28% year-ago)
February 2009 Mustang Sales: 2,990 (Down 61% year-ago or 73% two years-ago)
September 2006 Mustang Sales: 14,341
September 2007 Mustang Sales: 10,266
September 2008 Mustang Sales: 4,910 (Down 52% year-ago)

Seems to me the new model is only costing them about 9%.

September 2008 G8 Sales: 1,651

[Waver]

February 2008 Mustang Sales: 7,752
February 2009 Mustang Sales: 2,990 (Down 61% year-ago)
September 2007 Mustang Sales: 10,266
September 2008 Mustang Sales: 4,910 (Down 52% year-ago)

Seems to me the new model is only costing them about 9%.

September 2008 G8 Sales: 1,651


A lot of that is because of the 2010.......however mustang sales are picking up now. Besides, that is end of season sales, most mustang owners buy in the winter months or at the beginning of the season, baised on sales trends that have been observed the last few years.

[WhatsADSM]

... (the gt500 is compairable to the z06) ...

:rolf:rolf:rolf are you serious?

I agree Ford is putting out some great products right now and undoubtedly is in a better position that GM and Chrysler... They have made great strides and I also agree they are maybe the only one of the 3 that can truly compete (and in some cases beat) the Japanese.

However to say the gt500 performance-wise is anywhere near the Z06 just isn't true.


As for the Camaro... i'ts looking really good. I can't believe the sheer number of performance related cars coming from GM lately, and for a GREAT price! Kudos, that is MOOOVIN for a V6 that starts in the low 20s. :thumbsup

[Waver]

:rolf:rolf:rolf are you serious?

I agree Ford is putting out some great products right now and undoubtedly is in a better position that GM and Chrysler... They have made great strides and I also agree they are maybe the only one of the 3 that can truly compete (and in some cases beat) the Japanese.

However to say the gt500 performance-wise is anywhere near the Z06 just isn't true.


As for the Camaro... i'ts looking really good. I can't believe the sheer number of performance related cars coming from GM lately, and for a GREAT price! Kudos, that is MOOOVIN for a V6 that starts in the low 20s. :thumbsup
hp wise, yes, handeling wise.....no......the advantage with the gt500 on the drag strip is that you dont have to worry as much about snapping an axle

[STANMAN]

Its amazing how much this new camaro gets people fired up and pissed off and start nit picking at it now that its reality and has some base line #'s out there and a good review. ugggghhhh. Who knows how sales will go with the obvious swill of an economy though.

A good review for a Camaro is one where the reviewer states that the Mustang is still a better car? Ouch.:rolf

[WhatsADSM]

hp wise, yes, handeling wise.....no......the advantage with the gt500 on the drag strip is that you dont have to worry as much about snapping an axle

It has the same horsepower that is it, but the GT500 weighs 800lbs more.
The Z06 is faster in the 1/4 by a full second,
It can pull over 1g in a skid pad compared to .9gs for a GT500
The Z06 goes through the slalom about 3mph faster
The Z06 brakes from 60mph about 10 ft shorter than the GT500
:wooo


Honestly the GT500 isn't in the same league, and it shouldn't be it costs a lot less. The Z06 is competition for the exotics.

[Prince Valiant]

February 2007 Mustang Sales: 10,772
February 2008 Mustang Sales: 7,752 (Down 28% year-ago)
February 2009 Mustang Sales: 2,990 (Down 61% year-ago or 73% two years-ago)
September 2006 Mustang Sales: 14,341
September 2007 Mustang Sales: 10,266
September 2008 Mustang Sales: 4,910 (Down 52% year-ago)

Seems to me the new model is only costing them about 9%.

September 2008 G8 Sales: 1,651lol....please explain how you deduce that slowing production and anticipation for the 2010 mustang is only costing 9% from the numbers above?


<<takes excedrin in anticipation of the explanation. :rolf

[Waver]

It has the same horsepower that is it, but the GT500 weighs 800lbs more.
The Z06 is faster in the 1/4 by a full second,
It can pull over 1g in a skid pad compared to .9gs for a GT500
The Z06 goes through the slalom about 3mph faster
The Z06 brakes from 60mph about 10 ft shorter than the GT500
:wooo


Honestly the GT500 isn't in the same league, and it shouldn't be it costs a lot less. The Z06 is competition for the exotics.

I am not arguing that fact, but does gm have somthing else that is at the same hp as the gt500? It wasnt exactally a fair compairison on my part.

[07ROUSHSTG3]

lol....please explain how you deduce that slowing production and anticipation for the 2010 mustang is only costing 9% from the numbers above?


<<takes excedrin in anticipation of the explanation. :rolf

i thought i was reading something wrong. i too could not figure out the 9% comment.

[Waver]

i thought i was reading something wrong. i too could not figure out the 9% comment.

Wraith's math is usually wrong........it happens..........

[BAD LS1]

A good review for a Camaro is one where the reviewer states that the Mustang is still a better car? Ouch.:rolf

Ya ya Bob... So salty. You have a real hard time taking care of the old 4th gen's with that S197 don't ya? Ouch:durr Better "pulley down" to that thimble sized pulley pretty soon:rolf

[wrath]

lol....please explain how you deduce that slowing production and anticipation for the 2010 mustang is only costing 9% from the numbers above?


<<takes excedrin in anticipation of the explanation. :rolf

February 2009 Mustang Sales: 2,990 (Down 61% year-ago or 73% two years-ago)
September 2008 Mustang Sales: 4,910 (Down 52% year-ago)

61% - 52% = 9%.

SO, for the dolt that is constantly deriding me that can't do math and probably sucks at story problems too, that means that year-over-year sales are down 9% MORE for February 2009 than September 2008. We'd probably find that industry-wide sales are down ~9% more in February 2009 than September 2008. Therefore, the excuse of "the 2010 Mustang is coming out soon" being the reason that sales are way down is more than likely wrong.

And again, I'm not arguing with you to prove I'm right... I'm arguing to prove you're wrong. Besides, I enjoy it.

[88Nightmare]

So much hate in this thread lol


Mustangs have always sold more then the camaros did. Lets face it, the V6 mustang is about as much of a chick car as the cavaboltalier.


What I find ironic is the fact that for the past 3 years, all the Ford guys would do is bash on the Camaros absence, yet the last year (2002) Camaro would still outperform a 2009 S197 GT. Now that the Camaro is returning with some good looking numbers, The Mustang crowd has to switch back into defense mode. Oh the mustang is gonna have this, its gonna have that, Obama is gonna make my car payments and I'll have a 16 cylinder engine.

Fact of the matter is, you guys haven't had to strongly defend yourselves since 2002 when Camaros were still being built. Now that they will be on the streets in a month or two, you guys are all gettin butthurt and grabbin for any excuse in the book.


Chevy doesn't put faster motors in the F-bodies because an F-body weighs more then a Mustang, they just simply build better engines :D

[Waver]

So much hate in this thread lol


Mustangs have always sold more then the camaros did. Lets face it, the V6 mustang is about as much of a chick car as the cavaboltalier.


What I find ironic is the fact that for the past 3 years, all the Ford guys would do is bash on the Camaros absence, yet the last year (2002) Camaro would still outperform a 2009 S197 GT. Now that the Camaro is returning with some good looking numbers, The Mustang crowd has to switch back into defense mode. Oh the mustang is gonna have this, its gonna have that, Obama is gonna make my car payments and I'll have a 16 cylinder engine.

Fact of the matter is, you guys haven't had to strongly defend yourselves since 2002 when Camaros were still being built. Now that they will be on the streets in a month or two, you guys are all gettin butthurt and grabbin for any excuse in the book.


Chevy doesn't put faster motors in the F-bodies because an F-body weighs more then a Mustang, they just simply build better engines :D

I am not making any excuses here, I just know for a fact what ford is going to be doing when it comes to the Mustang. Ford did scale back production of the 09 mustang, infact some dealerships (like mine) still have some 08's left. Economy possibly, but more so it was that Ford was retooling everything for the 10's. Does Gm build better engines? Well that is all how you look at it....in all reality, as far as reliability goes, you cant really say that. As far as power goes, possibily, however, Gm has always done that to have somthing better than Ford, with different levels of sucess.......if we took hp to weight ratio, the camaro and the stang would be close, with the camaro edging out the mustang by 2-3 hp or so.......not that much when you consider it. The camaro is probably the best thing to come out of gm in a while, excluding the corvette.....will it outsell the mustang, who knows and if it does for how long? Will it save gm, probably not.

Oh and faster motors? huh, you mean higher horsepower motors?

[88Nightmare]

now youre going to break down my english? gimme a break lol.


Ford is coming in second place yet again, get over it. Its nothing new for you guys anyway

[Waver]

now youre going to break down my english? gimme a break lol.


Ford is coming in second place yet again, get over it. Its nothing new for you guys anyway

at this point, all that matters is sales. Honestly if you think that ford will not have somthing for Gm in a few months, you are nuts.

[88Nightmare]

ford never had somethin for gm lol

[wrath]

I am not making any excuses here, I just know for a fact what ford is going to be doing when it comes to the Mustang. Ford did scale back production of the 09 mustang, infact some dealerships (like mine) still have some 08's left. Economy possibly, but more so it was that Ford was retooling everything for the 10's.

So they're building 2010s and 2009s on the same line but retooling for the 2010s? That doesn't make sense. I don't see a shortage of Mustangs sitting around so I don't think the "not building enough" is the reason for "not selling enough".

I bet you can find every Mustang no one ever wanted at Griffin Ford in Waukesha. Every time I drive by there is at least a dozen Mustangs covered with road grime wishing for a new home.


Does Gm build better engines? Well that is all how you look at it....in all reality, as far as reliability goes, you cant really say that.

But you can say that Ford builds more reliable engines? I don't get it.


As far as power goes, possibily, however, Gm has always done that to have somthing better than Ford, with different levels of sucess.......if we took hp to weight ratio, the camaro and the stang would be close, with the camaro edging out the mustang by 2-3 hp or so.......not that much when you consider it.

Eh? Ford fscked themselves by going to a bastard 4.6L/5.4L setup. They ended up with a giant stroke and small bore with the 5.4L that made no power. It's like they didn't learn from GM's 305. So then they bandaided it with 3 valves. Or add a bunch of weight high on the engine and more parasitic losses by going DOHC. The 4.6L in its many forms is a fine specimen of a powerplant.

Keep adding blowers and camshafts... all it does is push it into the same fuel economy range as Chrysler.



The camaro is probably the best thing to come out of gm in a while, excluding the corvette.....will it outsell the mustang, who knows and if it does for how long? Will it save gm, probably not.

CTS and G8 aren't half bad. GTO wasn't too bad in its day.

[BAD LS1]

I am not making any excuses here, I just know for a fact what ford is going to be doing when it comes to the Mustang. Ford did scale back production of the 09 mustang, infact some dealerships (like mine) still have some 08's left. Economy possibly, but more so it was that Ford was retooling everything for the 10's. Does Gm build better engines? Well that is all how you look at it....in all reality, as far as reliability goes, you cant really say that. As far as power goes, possibily, however, Gm has always done that to have somthing better than Ford, with different levels of sucess.......if we took hp to weight ratio, the camaro and the stang would be close, with the camaro edging out the mustang by 2-3 hp or so.......not that much when you consider it. The camaro is probably the best thing to come out of gm in a while, excluding the corvette.....will it outsell the mustang, who knows and if it does for how long? Will it save gm, probably not.

Oh and faster motors? huh, you mean higher horsepower motors?

See... pretty much best car ever!

[DRK]

ford never had somethin for gm lol

winner for retarded quote of the day.:loser

[Waver]

Since you felt the need to do this so will I:

So they're building 2010s and 2009s on the same line but retooling for the 2010s? That doesn't make sense. I don't see a shortage of Mustangs sitting around so I don't think the "not building enough" is the reason for "not selling enough". I never said that they were building the 09s while they were retooling for the 10's....they halted production of the 09 midway through the production cycle.


I bet you can find every Mustang no one ever wanted at Griffin Ford in Waukesha. Every time I drive by there is at least a dozen Mustangs covered with road grime wishing for a new home. Once again, true but not true. Griffen had a larger allocation of Mustangs than a lot of dealers got due to them having sold more. They have a mix of 08/09's.......so with that being said, the more cars you have of one type, the more you will have at this time in the model year.




But you can say that Ford builds more reliable engines? I don't get it. I guess you have a reading problem now too....Re read what I said. In that statement did I once say that Ford had more reliable engines? As far as I know, the v8's from both Ford and Gm are on par with eachother as far as reliability. The rest of the engines, I cant say the same for. I just have to go by what I read in the consumer mags and other articles I read from indipendant sources.




Eh? Ford fscked themselves by going to a bastard 4.6L/5.4L setup. They ended up with a giant stroke and small bore with the 5.4L that made no power. It's like they didn't learn from GM's 305. So then they bandaided it with 3 valves. Or add a bunch of weight high on the engine and more parasitic losses by going DOHC. The 4.6L in its many forms is a fine specimen of a powerplant. yet there are some people out there making 6-700 horse na with that "bastard" powerplant. To start off they are low on torque but love to rev, kind of like a Honda engine.....I guess the japs dont know what they are doing either.


Keep adding blowers and camshafts... all it does is push it into the same fuel economy range as Chrysler. What, the fact that Ford uses tecnology that has proven to work for both power, reliability, and fuel economy make you ass hurt? When people are concerned about gas prices, but dosnt want to sacrifice styling or good power for that then Ford is a fool for doing it? I am afraid I dont understand your logic, especialy since it is that logic that has hurt gm in the first place.





CTS and G8 aren't half bad. GTO wasn't too bad in its day.Not going to argue with that, too bad the general public thought otherwise...

[BAD LS1]

Since you felt the need to do this so will I:
I never said that they were building the 09s while they were retooling for the 10's....they halted production of the 09 midway through the production cycle.

Once again, true but not true. Griffen had a larger allocation of Mustangs than a lot of dealers got due to them having sold more. They have a mix of 08/09's.......so with that being said, the more cars you have of one type, the more you will have at this time in the model year.



I guess you have a reading problem now too....Re read what I said. In that statement did I once say that Ford had more reliable engines? As far as I know, the v8's from both Ford and Gm are on par with eachother as far as reliability. The rest of the engines, I cant say the same for. I just have to go by what I read in the consumer mags and other articles I read from indipendant sources.



yet there are some people out there making 6-700 horse na with that "bastard" powerplant. To start off they are low on torque but love to rev, kind of like a Honda engine.....I guess the japs dont know what they are doing either.

What, the fact that Ford uses tecnology that has proven to work for both power, reliability, and fuel economy make you ass hurt? When people are concerned about gas prices, but dosnt want to sacrifice styling or good power for that then Ford is a fool for doing it? I am afraid I dont understand your logic, especialy since it is that logic that has hurt gm in the first place.




Not going to argue with that, too bad the general public thought otherwise...


nick stop. You sound like a classic car salesman.

[STANMAN]

Ya ya Bob... So salty. You have a real hard time taking care of the old 4th gen's with that S197 don't ya? Ouch:durr Better "pulley down" to that thimble sized pulley pretty soon:rolf

So nice of you to take everything to a personal level when I was just make a general statement that's not even based on my own opinion, but someone elses.


And to answer your question, nope, no problem at all. Take a look at both the races in question. One we were even, with the race tune I was 3 cars ahead (if we are talking about Molly's car). Both were with my added weight :goof plus a camera person in the car. Mind you I even made them as close as could be, they were both roll races as the car in question couldn't get any traction. From a dig it would have been a blowout either way. If you're talking Joe's car, we have already been down that tired ole trail, I offered up cash money to anyone that would take his car (last year mind you) vs. mine in a 1/4 from a dig, and my PM box didn't exactly overflow with people ready to take my money. Actually, nary a 1 person wanted that easy money. Funny how money talks and BS walks isn't it. Mind you, I am in it for fun, and those were strictly fun runs with BOTH parties, but when someone wants to push things, it's put up or shut up, and the silence was deaffening on that subject.

[Waver]

See... pretty much best car ever! Yeah, to come from GM, excluding the corvette, but then again the vette is in a class of its own


nick stop. You sound like a classic car salesman.
Not trying to. Simple fact is that time and reality has set in. When I first came on here I used to say Mustangs are the car that was touched by god yadda yadda yadda. However being around a lot of the F-body guys around here I can see the advantages and the disadvantages of both. I used to be a big push rod guy (owned 3 5.0 mustangs and not knowing shit about the mod motor). I see the benifit in technology now. You should be able to appreciate that Tom, being one of the Premere LSX tuners on here. I also have a little bit of a marketing background as well. So I can see that the direction that ford is going in is only in responce to the market place, where Gm seems to be trying to influence the market. The Horse power wars are starting up, this believe, and once again, Ford is in the same place as it was in the 60's with the mustang....Great seller, but way underpowered compaired to its rivals. However like the 60's I know that Ford is going to respond in turn....just wait.

I am just debating with fact..........I do a lot of reading about Ford products as well as its competitors.......Would you rather have me give a responce that was baised on opinion instead of fact?

I know, my responce seems like a sales person talking, however if it was a total sales person responce, would I have conceeded anything to the camaro?

[88Nightmare]

well you guys all thought the 5th gen F-body was just rumor and speculation and would never actually make it to this point, but guess what.... it has. So maybe you blue oval guys should get the same treatment. Keep dreaming about your unicorn mustang :D

[STANMAN]

well you guys all thought the 5th gen F-body was just rumor and speculation and would never actually make it to this point, but guess what.... it has. So maybe you blue oval guys should get the same treatment. Keep dreaming about your unicorn mustang :D

Hey, the Mustang was here BEFORE the Maro, and it has been once, and will be again, here AFTER the Camaro. We have had a car for 45 continuous years, no dreams needed here:thumbsup:rolf

[88Nightmare]

cept for dreams of maybe when the mustang is faster stock to stock :D


Even with the absense of the camaro for 7 years, it was STILL faster :rolf

[Karps TA]

GM could go belly up tomorrow. So until I actually see Camaro's on Holz's lot, I'm not confident of anything.

[Poncho]

It has the same horsepower that is it, but the GT500 weighs 800lbs more.
The Z06 is faster in the 1/4 by a full second,
It can pull over 1g in a skid pad compared to .9gs for a GT500
The Z06 goes through the slalom about 3mph faster
The Z06 brakes from 60mph about 10 ft shorter than the GT500
:wooo


Honestly the GT500 isn't in the same league, and it shouldn't be it costs a lot less. The Z06 is competition for the exotics.

but but but if the GT500 is in the same league as the Z06 and there is a 1/4 mile difference of a full second, that puts the new v6 camaro in the same league as there is what half a second difference in the 1/4 mile?

also I see nick's logic.

mustang HP to weight ratio (ricer talk) v.s. Camaro (and even we heard this arguement with the GTO)

if that is the case, why are the Mustang GT's running high 13's, Camaro v6's running low 14's, and Camaros (and the GTO previously) running 13 flat trapping a shit load higher?

[Poncho]

yet there are some people out there making 6-700 horse na with that "bastard" powerplant. To start off they are low on torque but love to rev, kind of like a Honda engine.....I guess the japs dont know what they are doing either.


define love to rev? how high we talkin? modded LSx's are usually hangining out in the 7000rpm range, thats as high as my little honda revved.

[88Nightmare]

hell, the tune in my silverado (not an LSx engine, just based on the LSx design) had the rev limiter set at 6,000. Thats revvin decently high as well

[Waver]

but but but if the GT500 is in the same league as the Z06 and there is a 1/4 mile difference of a full second, that puts the new v6 camaro in the same league as there is what half a second difference in the 1/4 mile?

also I see nick's logic.

mustang HP to weight ratio (ricer talk) v.s. Camaro (and even we heard this arguement with the GTO)

if that is the case, why are the Mustang GT's running high 13's, Camaro v6's running low 14's, and Camaros (and the GTO previously) running 13 flat trapping a shit load higher?

I was going hp for hp, a lot like a lot of people on here were doing with the camaro.....hp for hp the v6 camaro is on par with the v8 mustang....The base vette is not on par with the gt500, however the zo6 is higher up than the gt500, and for that matter I never even once mentioned the kr......come on, dont give me this ricer talk bla bla bla...I also said that hp wise they were on par, I said in a different post that otherwise, the z06 was a bit beter and that the gt500 had a slight track advantage of the solid rear axle.

[Poncho]

So nice of you to take everything to a personal level when I was just make a general statement that's not even based on my own opinion, but someone elses.


And to answer your question, nope, no problem at all. Take a look at both the races in question. One we were even, with the race tune I was 3 cars ahead (if we are talking about Molly's car). Both were with my added weight :goof plus a camera person in the car. Mind you I even made them as close as could be, they were both roll races as the car in question couldn't get any traction. From a dig it would have been a blowout either way. If you're talking Joe's car, we have already been down that tired ole trail, I offered up cash money to anyone that would take his car (last year mind you) vs. mine in a 1/4 from a dig, and my PM box didn't exactly overflow with people ready to take my money. Actually, nary a 1 person wanted that easy money. Funny how money talks and BS walks isn't it. Mind you, I am in it for fun, and those were strictly fun runs with BOTH parties, but when someone wants to push things, it's put up or shut up, and the silence was deaffening on that subject.

well we do know one thing. your car runs mid 12's, mollys car runs mid 12's, and my car runs mid 12's, and joe's car did run mid 12's.

there is a commonality here, all the GM mills were stock cars with basic bolt ons, and joe's car is the only one with a mental cam. and none of the cars get traction. your car has a big ass huffer on top of it

i'm no racer, but it sure is obvious since ford isn't willing to step up to the plate with NA cars anymore, is that the only ticket to the fast lane with a ford is to pay another company to strap their power adder on top of the ford engine.

/end thread on Ford Engine superiority

[Waver]

cept for dreams of maybe when the mustang is faster stock to stock :D


Even with the absense of the camaro for 7 years, it was STILL faster :rolf

and from what at least 70-93 the mustang was if not the same as far as speed (even though it had a hp disadvantage as well as ci disadvantage to the 350) faster than the Camaro.

[Waver]

well we do know one thing. your car runs mid 12's, mollys car runs mid 12's, and my car runs mid 12's, and joe's car did run mid 12's.

there is a commonality here, all the GM mills were stock cars with basic bolt ons, and joe's car is the only one with a mental cam. and none of the cars get traction. your car has a big ass huffer on top of it

i'm no racer, but it sure is obvious since ford isn't willing to step up to the plate with NA cars anymore, is that the only ticket to the fast lane with a ford is to pay another company to strap their power adder on top of the ford engine.


I thought bob was running the same numbers as you when he was Na.....and when did you run a 12, last I saw you were at 13.1

[Waver]

define love to rev? how high we talkin? modded LSx's are usually hangining out in the 7000rpm range, thats as high as my little honda revved.


7000? really, I would love to see that.....was that stock or with a tune?

the powerband starts at a higher rpm level on a mod motor than the lsx.....the lsx makes more torque, so there for it stands to reason that the power band would be lower....hence why a lot of people say that the second best modification that you can do to a Modular motor mustang is gears, because that shows the biggest gains as far as 1/4 mile time........

I never once said that Ford engines were superior to the lsx..........not once....but go ahead and twist what I have been saying in a pathetic way to discredit me. Seems to me like you and mike are grasping at straws here.

[88Nightmare]

and from what at least 70-93 the mustang was if not the same as far as speed (even though it had a hp disadvantage as well as ci disadvantage to the 350) faster than the Camaro.

can you back up that claim? and im talking stock to stock here

[07ROUSHSTG3]

i don't care how much faster stock for stock they will be, the bottomline is.....THEY HAVE TO SELL! the camaro's history has shown that more power and more performance doesn't equal more sales. i really hope it works out as it always helps when there is competition. ford will come out with a 400 horse gt and ecoboost v6 next year and then things will get interesting.

I stick to my prediction that they make it 2 model years.

[88Nightmare]

i don't care how much faster stock for stock they will be, the bottomline is.....THEY HAVE TO SELL! the camaro's history has shown that more power and more performance doesn't equal more sales. i really hope it works out as it always helps when there is competition. ford will come out with a 400 horse gt and ecoboost v6 next year and then things will get interesting.

I stick to my prediction that they make it 2 model years.

that may be, and I certainly hope they do sell. Although lately the population seems to just do what everyone else does instead of thinking for themselves. Hence the Obama election.


For some reason power and performance doesn't sell vehicles any more (did it ever?)



Im glad Ford is still successful with the mustang. I like them, dont get me wrong, but as I said before, they are no longer my first choice in performance. But I do like they way they look for sure. When it comes to looks, its arguable, but the Mustang has been looking better since tthe SN95's. Even Tom said people bought the 4th gen f bodies for their performance. Im guessing the same is going to happen for the 5th gen. The 16 year old daddys girl is gonna be beggin her pops for a sharp lookin mustang over the great performing, but mediocre looking maro

[BAD LS1]

7000? really, I would love to see that.....was that stock or with a tune?

the powerband starts at a higher rpm level on a mod motor than the lsx.....the lsx makes more torque, so there for it stands to reason that the power band would be lower....hence why a lot of people say that the second best modification that you can do to a Modular motor mustang is gears, because that shows the biggest gains as far as 1/4 mile time........

I never once said that Ford engines were superior to the lsx..........not once....but go ahead and twist what I have been saying in a pathetic way to discredit me. Seems to me like you and mike are grasping at straws here.


Nick,

LS1's dont make much torque for their given displacment when compared to LT1's etc... joes car is a bone stock bottom end that spends more time on the 7100 rev limiter than it does off and shows no qualms about it. stock rev limit its 6250.

[Poncho]

Nick,

LS1's dont make much torque for their given displacment when compared to LT1's etc... joes car is a bone stock bottom end that spends more time on the 7100 rev limiter than it does off and shows no qualms about it. stock rev limit its 6250.


proof...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0pTSkmeKg7Q

my video should be available shortly. Reality of owning a GM LSx.... Traction in first gear - Learn to live without it, or get DR's.

[Josepy]

well we do know one thing. your car runs mid 12's, mollys car runs mid 12's, and my car runs mid 12's, and joe's car did run mid 12's.

there is a commonality here, all the GM mills were stock cars with basic bolt ons, and joe's car is the only one with a mental cam. and none of the cars get traction. your car has a big ass huffer on top of it

i'm no racer, but it sure is obvious since ford isn't willing to step up to the plate with NA cars anymore, is that the only ticket to the fast lane with a ford is to pay another company to strap their power adder on top of the ford engine.

/end thread on Ford Engine superiority


Disclaimer. We Do not know my car runs 12's. Never been to the track. I have done 12 donuts in a row.

[Josepy]

Nick,

LS1's dont make much torque for their given displacment when compared to LT1's etc... joes car is a bone stock bottom end that spends more time on the 7100 rev limiter than it does off and shows no qualms about it. stock rev limit its 6250.

Yeah we should turn that down when the blower goes on.

[DRK]

proof...
Reality of owning a GM LSx....

piston slap :banana1:

[Poncho]

Disclaimer. We Do not know my car runs 12's. Never been to the track. I have done 12 donuts in a row.

i meant donuts, of course. none of that "tom"foolery :rolf

[Voodoo Chick]

OK.....This "Mustang vs. Camaro" thing is getting really f***ing OLD. The new Camaro, even though I honestly DON'T like how it looks, seems to perform really well. It's quick, and I would imagine probably lots of fun to drive. The people here (and you all know who you are, I need not mention names....) with their "my Mustang can beat up your Camaro," or vice versa, need to grow the **** up, get a life, and move on. They are both quick, decent-looking performance cars, and I cannot understand the "mine's better" crap. If you don't like Camaros, DON'T BUY ONE. I like the looks of the old ones, but I'm not gonna sit here and say the new one can't run, because, obviously, they run real good.......If you're a Mustang person, great, rock on with your pony.....but take your GM-bashing and shove it where the sun don't shine.

[STANMAN]

well we do know one thing. your car runs mid 12's, mollys car runs mid 12's, and my car runs mid 12's, and joe's car did run mid 12's.

there is a commonality here, all the GM mills were stock cars with basic bolt ons, and joe's car is the only one with a mental cam. and none of the cars get traction. your car has a big ass huffer on top of it

i'm no racer, but it sure is obvious since ford isn't willing to step up to the plate with NA cars anymore, is that the only ticket to the fast lane with a ford is to pay another company to strap their power adder on top of the ford engine.

/end thread on Ford Engine superiority

My car gets more traction than most. I don't think the cars above would run mid 12's because of the traction issue alone. I can tell you when I raced Joe, in the 1/4, from a dig, I beat him pretty good. He pulled after my top of 4th (my shift light comes on right at the top of 4th, right at the line), no doubt, and from a roll we were spot on. Molly's car would have been a slaughter because she had even less traction, so don't pull the mid 12 card on me. My car ran a documented,12.5 at 115, not might have, or could have, or blah, blah, blah, it did. I have some traction to take care of as well obviously, but yeah, there it is. And don't pull the "blower" shit on me, all the cars mentioned have mods, I am the only one whos still stock cam on a little 4.6L motor, why all those big bad cammed 5.7's have to pick on me:goof:rolf

[STANMAN]

OK.....This "Mustang vs. Camaro" thing is getting really f***ing OLD. The new Camaro, even though I honestly DON'T like how it looks, seems to perform really well. It's quick, and I would imagine probably lots of fun to drive. The people here (and you all know who you are, I need not mention names....) with their "my Mustang can beat up your Camaro," or vice versa, need to grow the **** up, get a life, and move on. They are both quick, decent-looking performance cars, and I cannot understand the "mine's better" crap. If you don't like Camaros, DON'T BUY ONE. I like the looks of the old ones, but I'm not gonna sit here and say the new one can't run, because, obviously, they run real good.......If you're a Mustang person, great, rock on with your pony.....but take your GM-bashing and shove it where the sun don't shine.

Ummmm, I think the Camaro people were the ones bashing, correct me if I am wrong.

[Josepy]

My car gets more traction than most. I don't think the cars above would run mid 12's because of the traction issue alone. I can tell you when I raced Joe, in the 1/4, from a dig, I beat him pretty good. He pulled after my top of 4th (my shift light comes on right at the top of 4th, right at the line), no doubt, and from a roll we were spot on. Molly's car would have been a slaughter because she had even less traction, so don't pull the mid 12 card on me. My car ran a documented,12.5 at 115, not might have, or could have, or blah, blah, blah, it did. I have some traction to take care of as well obviously, but yeah, there it is. And don't pull the "blower" shit on me, all the cars mentioned have mods, I am the only one whos still stock cam on a little 4.6L motor, why all those big bad cammed 5.7's have to pick on me:goof:rolf

I have a blower this year with a smaller cam so we can play again.
If I had dr's we would of been dead even I think. I did not and from a dig you took off.

[Z28Envy]

I have a blower this year with a smaller cam so we can play again.
If I had dr's we would of been dead even I think. I did not and from a dig you took off.

You still have time!!:goof

[Josepy]

You still have time!!:goof

I put my nuts on your car. 10 bolt is done. I will be limping it to toms house.

[Z28Envy]

I put my nuts on your car. 10 bolt is done. I will be limping it to toms house.

Good thing it rained and washed your ball mark off!! EWWW:rolf

[88Nightmare]

OK.....This "Mustang vs. Camaro" thing is getting really f***ing OLD. The new Camaro, even though I honestly DON'T like how it looks, seems to perform really well. It's quick, and I would imagine probably lots of fun to drive. The people here (and you all know who you are, I need not mention names....) with their "my Mustang can beat up your Camaro," or vice versa, need to grow the **** up, get a life, and move on. They are both quick, decent-looking performance cars, and I cannot understand the "mine's better" crap. If you don't like Camaros, DON'T BUY ONE. I like the looks of the old ones, but I'm not gonna sit here and say the new one can't run, because, obviously, they run real good.......If you're a Mustang person, great, rock on with your pony.....but take your GM-bashing and shove it where the sun don't shine.

so then stop reading the thread

[Josepy]

Good thing it rained and washed your ball mark off!! EWWW:rolf

rain might wash off the mark but not the ball dent.

[Z28Envy]

rain might wash off the mark but not the ball dent.

Dents are normal on a camaro so no one will notice! I will just say I drove through pea sized hail!:rolf

[STANMAN]

I have a blower this year with a smaller cam so we can play again.
If I had dr's we would of been dead even I think. I did not and from a dig you took off.

I stated as much in my post. A blower and more cubes. Count me out:rolf


J/K, you know I am down like a clown for ANY fun run!!!

[Z28Envy]

I stated as much in my post. A blower and more cubes. Count me out:rolf


J/K, you know I am down like a clown for ANY fun run!!!

But I thought you had a race tune Bob? :goof

[Poncho]

My car gets more traction than most. I don't think the cars above would run mid 12's because of the traction issue alone. I can tell you when I raced Joe, in the 1/4, from a dig, I beat him pretty good. He pulled after my top of 4th (my shift light comes on right at the top of 4th, right at the line), no doubt, and from a roll we were spot on. Molly's car would have been a slaughter because she had even less traction, so don't pull the mid 12 card on me. My car ran a documented,12.5 at 115, not might have, or could have, or blah, blah, blah, it did. I have some traction to take care of as well obviously, but yeah, there it is. And don't pull the "blower" shit on me, all the cars mentioned have mods, I am the only one whos still stock cam on a little 4.6L motor, why all those big bad cammed 5.7's have to pick on me:goof:rolf

Well dear, I can tell you that the sour grape and the blue roo are bonifide 12.40 cars. Amazing what DRs can do on a shitty LT1 and a wheel hopping disaster. Was a good way for some friends to play hookie on an afternoon.

[STANMAN]

But I thought you had a race tune Bob? :goof

I have 3 tunes actually. Street, race, and emissions. I rarely run the race tune. There's 2 vids out there that show the difference between street and race tunes against the same car. That runs 12.4's apparently. Wonder why mine only runs a 12.5:crying

[Poncho]

I have 3 tunes actually. Street, race, and emissions. I rarely run the race tune. There's 2 vids out there that show the difference between street and race tunes against the same car. That runs 12.4's apparently. Wonder why mine only runs a 12.5:crying

i like how you say what you say there, but disregard the fact that her car was on the 1994 Vintage dry rotted stock street tires. I drove that car w/ those tires, fuckin' dicey.

You can hear her camaro completely eat the tires alive in first AND second (in our vids) and clearly I can hear it eat them alive in yours too. I mean seriously 45-50 mph and it ate the tires. Her and I raced plenty of times and it is definitely traction limited. Akk that fuckin' LT1 torque I guess.

[DRK]

You Ford haters have a SHORT memory.

[Waver]

can you back up that claim? and im talking stock to stock here

yeah I can actually, it was in car and driver or road and track.....like 1987 or somthing.....I think I have an issue that is a little newer than that from 92......

[Prince Valiant]

February 2009 Mustang Sales: 2,990 (Down 61% year-ago or 73% two years-ago)
September 2008 Mustang Sales: 4,910 (Down 52% year-ago)

61% - 52% = 9%.

SO, for the dolt that is constantly deriding me that can't do math and probably sucks at story problems too, that means that year-over-year sales are down 9% MORE for February 2009 than September 2008. We'd probably find that industry-wide sales are down ~9% more in February 2009 than September 2008. Therefore, the excuse of "the 2010 Mustang is coming out soon" being the reason that sales are way down is more than likely wrong.

:rolf:rolf:rolf:rolf:rolf:rolf:rolf:rolf:rolf:rolf :rolf:rolf:rolf:rolf:rolf:rolf:rolf:rolf:rolf:rolf :rolf:rolf:rolf:rolf:rolf:rolf:rolf:rolf:rolf:rolf :rolf:rolf:rolf:rolf:rolf:rolf:rolf:rolf:rolf:rolf :rolf:rolf:rolf:rolf:rolf:rolf:rolf:rolf:rolf:rolf :rolf:rolf:rolf

Seriously, that's too funny. THAT's how you came up with 9%?!?

You should be a mutherfucking actuary. Priceless.

I can't believe they let you graduate high school...even in michigan. But I got to hand it to you, you put it out there for people to enjoy.

[Voodoo Chick]

so then stop reading the thread

As if I'm really going to listen to you.......that's cute, lol......:rolf

[Voodoo Chick]

Ummmm, I think the Camaro people were the ones bashing, correct me if I am wrong.


Ummmmmm...........who cares? :thumbsup

[88Nightmare]

As if I'm really going to listen to you.......that's cute, lol......:rolf

lol then dont complain about a thread. simply dont read it.

[Voodoo Chick]

Yeah....because NO ONE here EVER bitches about anything in a thread right????? We are ALL perfectly mature at all times and politely keep our opinions to ourselves........right???? NO ONE ever ever ever adds their two cents.....My goodness-gracious....where DID my manners go???? *swoon*

[wrath]

Since you felt the need to do this so will I:
I never said that they were building the 09s while they were retooling for the 10's....they halted production of the 09 midway through the production cycle.

I read they were going to quit building them at like 45,000... isn't that about what they'd actually sell for the year? When/what count did they quit production?


Once again, true but not true. Griffen had a larger allocation of Mustangs than a lot of dealers got due to them having sold more. They have a mix of 08/09's.......so with that being said, the more cars you have of one type, the more you will have at this time in the model year.

How many did they get? 300? I get what you're saying. But if they're only selling 3,000 per month then why do they have 1% of all the cars selling each month sitting on their lot alone?



I guess you have a reading problem now too....Re read what I said. In that statement did I once say that Ford had more reliable engines? As far as I know, the v8's from both Ford and Gm are on par with eachother as far as reliability. The rest of the engines, I cant say the same for. I just have to go by what I read in the consumer mags and other articles I read from indipendant sources.

Why did you mention reliability at all then? By mentioning it at all you implied that Ford engines were more reliable.

I can't think of a particularly unreliable engine GM has made in the last ten years. They do have a ton of noisy V6s.

There's a ton more GM engines out there than Ford too.
Ford February 2009: 99,400
GM February 2009: 127,296


yet there are some people out there making 6-700 horse na with that "bastard" powerplant. To start off they are low on torque but love to rev, kind of like a Honda engine.....I guess the japs dont know what they are doing either.

Which naturally-aspirated Ford modular motor would that be?

They have a hell of a time getting the fuel economy out of them also. I don't see Subaru, Honda, or anyone building a car that puts out the numbers the Corvette does and beats it in fuel economy.


What, the fact that Ford uses tecnology that has proven to work for both power, reliability, and fuel economy make you ass hurt? When people are concerned about gas prices, but dosnt want to sacrifice styling or good power for that then Ford is a fool for doing it? I am afraid I dont understand your logic, especialy since it is that logic that has hurt gm in the first place.

Which technology is that? Sticking a blower on a DOHC 5.4L? GM started sticking blowers on stuff how long ago? Isn't the DOHC 5.4L in the GT500 only 35hp more than the LS7, 110hp more than the LS3, and 98hp short of the LS9 (supercharged)?

It'll be neat if the GT500 sells for the sticker price because then it'll be a good deal. Otherwise a LS3 Corvette is a better deal.

And I think we've seen that OHC only beats OHV in small displacements in production cars for the last ten years.

I'd still like to see the j1349 numbers for the Ford engines.

[wrath]

Seriously, that's too funny. THAT's how you came up with 9%?!?

Yes, it's called trending. No, not trendy like you. Not shaved chest and hemp necklace kind of trendy. Trending. Sometimes people use interesting math to spot trends and make money. Sometimes they use it to compare similar data for different time ranges. If you think about it, it makes sense. Well, really nonsensical sense. I crack me up.

"Year over year sales in February 2009 are down 9% more than year over year sales in September 2008". So, in essence, it's a bunch of bullshit that sales are down on the Mustang because they quit making them.


You should be a mutherfucking actuary. Priceless.

That will cost you $100. I demand you donate it to Yoosof because I told him to use the money I donated to take his kids to Chuck E Cheese and I don't think he did. :stare


I can't believe they let you graduate high school...even in michigan. But I got to hand it to you, you put it out there for people to enjoy.

Yeap, made it through college too. And somehow I managed to land a job in which if I make a mistake entire communities stop functioning.

I try. You are my support group for inane amounts of boredom. When I say I have nothing better to do I'm not kidding.

[Z28Envy]

http://www.dpccars.com/car-videos-09/03-24-09page-Camaro-SS-vs-Mustang-GT-vs-Challenger-RT.htm

[BAD LS1]

http://www.dpccars.com/car-videos-09/03-24-09page-Camaro-SS-vs-Mustang-GT-vs-Challenger-RT.htm

Nice find :thumbsup

[BadAzzGTA89]

Camaro FTMFW
I wish it were a firebird but the maro will do :dance

[Waver]

I read they were going to quit building them at like 45,000... isn't that about what they'd actually sell for the year? When/what count did they quit production? They stoped making them short of that number, how short I do not know but 45000 would of been the number if Ford decided to make the 09 a full model year instead of a half year vehicle. I believe that production of the 09 mustang was halted in the later part of 08.




How many did they get? 300? I get what you're saying. But if they're only selling 3,000 per month then why do they have 1% of all the cars selling each month sitting on their lot alone? Lets explain this....A dealer's allocation on a certain model vehicle is baised apon how many of that model they sold/took orders on. Now if you drive past griffen you see about 8 or 9 mustang Gt's, Roush, and one bullett mustang sitting on the lot, as well as about 5 or 6 v6 models there. Well the v6/gt/Bullett models that they have there are allocated to them by Ford, and the Bullett model is actually an 08 model and not an 09. To top that off the Roush Mustangs (I think there are like 4 or 5 of them that compromise what they have on that southeast side of the lot) have their own allocation from Roush, once again some are 08 models and some are 09 models.....So I wouldnt say that they get 300 or for that matter 1% of total mustang production.....the get them over the course of time, and contrary to popular belief, mustang sales are actually greater in the colder months......





Why did you mention reliability at all then? By mentioning it at all you implied that Ford engines were more reliable. I never once said that they were MORE reliable, I have stated more than once that the Ford v8 and the Gm v8 are just as reliable as eachother......I brought up that part because you said that the GM engine is far superior to the Mod motor in every way. Not true, as far as gas mileage, they are about the same, reliability, they are the same, hp wise, yeah the Gm has an advantage over the Ford, but I would hope so considering the cid advantage that the Gm engine has over the mod motor.


I can't think of a particularly unreliable engine GM has made in the last ten years. They do have a ton of noisy V6s. I can point out at least one, give more time I can do more, ie the 2.4l


There's a ton more GM engines out there than Ford too.
Ford February 2009: 99,400
GM February 2009: 127,296
Well I cant argue with that, however GM also has 6 core makes and 2 "other" makes to Fords 3 core makes and 2 "other" makes. So for that matter, who do you think is going to have more of their engines out there? now if you were to divide those wounderful GM numbers that you came up with by the 6 for gm and 3 for the ford, who is on top? You have 21,216 cars sold by each of GMs core divisions vs 33133 cars sold for each of Fords core divisions......I guess that is why ford has lost less money than gm.



Which naturally-aspirated Ford modular motor would that be? Pick up a magazine other than one that is geared towards gms or watch some racing, there are a ton of na mod motors out there making that kind of hp......


They have a hell of a time getting the fuel economy out of them also. I don't see Subaru, Honda, or anyone building a car that puts out the numbers the Corvette does and beats it in fuel economy.

You are incorrect sir. For starters, of the above mentioned car makers that you have listed do any of them have a v8 in any of their cars? Also I noticed how you left out Nissan out of the equaision....Convienent since the GTR has performance numbers equil or greater than the zr1 and gets better fuel economy
that is 16 and 21 for the nissan and 14 and 20 for the corvette......

if you do the same with the mustang gt500 vs the zr1 you get the same numbers

the mustang gt vs the basic vette, the vette gets one mpg in the city and three on the highway, thanks to it having a 6 speed manual vs the Mustangs 5 speed manual, so that being said, can you really say that the mod motor cant beat the lsx in gas mileage either? No you cant, if the transmissions have the same number of gears.....




Which technology is that? Sticking a blower on a DOHC 5.4L? GM started sticking blowers on stuff how long ago? Isn't the DOHC 5.4L in the GT500 only 35hp more than the LS7, 110hp more than the LS3, and 98hp short of the LS9 (supercharged)? Well through the use of multiple cams, variable valve timing, and multi valves I think it is impressive that an engine that has 5.4l of displacement is putting out more hp than engines that have 6.1l or 7.0l of displacement and just 100 less hp than one that has more displacement and more boost.....Ford has done more with less...The last time that Gm tried to follow Fords lead, they failed miserably (the GM 5.0l had 180 hp vs the ford 5.0, that had less cubes again, had 227 hp)


It'll be neat if the GT500 sells for the sticker price because then it'll be a good deal. Otherwise a LS3 Corvette is a better deal.Actually they are 08 and 09 Gt500s are selling for LESS than sticker......way less than Sticker


And I think we've seen that OHC only beats OHV in small displacements in production cars for the last ten years. Oh really in what?


I'd still like to see the j1349 numbers for the Ford engines.Look it up, even if the hp numbers are lower than advertised by ford, it makes what I am saying even more impressive and adds validity to what I am saying

[07ROUSHSTG3]

let it go

[88Nightmare]

nick, while GM may have more different brands out there, many of their vehicles use the same platform and drivetrains. Kinda like a Sable and a Taurus. The same is for the G6/Aura/Malibu, or the Impala/Monte Carlo. Cobalt/G5. I'm sure the Buicks share platforms with many others as well however they most certainly use other GM engines which are standard across the board. Hell, even Cadillac uses normal GM engines other then the Northstar engines. The base CTS motor is a direct injected variant of GM's 3.6L.




What is it again we are arguing about? :durr:

[BAD LS1]

nick, while GM may have more different brands out there, many of their vehicles use the same platform and drivetrains. Kinda like a Sable and a Taurus. The same is for the G6/Aura/Malibu, or the Impala/Monte Carlo. Cobalt/G5. I'm sure the Buicks share platforms with many others as well however they most certainly use other GM engines which are standard across the board. Hell, even Cadillac uses normal GM engines other then the Northstar engines. The base CTS motor is a direct injected variant of GM's 3.6L.




What is it again we are arguing about? :durr:

Yup "corporate" powertrains.

[1997 Trans-Am]

the only good thing coming from the new 5th gen is the LS engine. gonna suck when the camaro dies again in a year or two. way to go GM.....

[Waver]

nick, while GM may have more different brands out there, many of their vehicles use the same platform and drivetrains. Kinda like a Sable and a Taurus. The same is for the G6/Aura/Malibu, or the Impala/Monte Carlo. Cobalt/G5. I'm sure the Buicks share platforms with many others as well however they most certainly use other GM engines which are standard across the board. Hell, even Cadillac uses normal GM engines other then the Northstar engines. The base CTS motor is a direct injected variant of GM's 3.6L.




What is it again we are arguing about? :durr:
Yeah, I hear ya, I mean GMC's entire line is shared by chevy....Same with ford. He pulled sales figures so I did the same thing and proved my point.

[Poncho]

learn to FUCKING SPELL

AND IT'S CALLED BULLITT

thank god car salesman aren't expected to learn basic spelling.

[Waver]

learn to FUCKING SPELL

AND IT'S CALLED BULLITT

thank god car salesman aren't expected to learn basic spelling.


Thank you spelling police.......
I wrote the responce twice, the one that got posted was rushed....I apologize.

[Poncho]

Lets explain this....A dealer's allocation on a certain model vehicle is baised apon how many of that model they sold/took orders on. Now if you drive past griffen you see about 8 or 9 mustang Gt's, Roush, and one bullett mustang sitting on the lot, as well as about 5 or 6 v6 models there. Well the v6/gt/Bullett models that they have there are allocated to them by Ford, and the Bullett model is actually an 08 model and not an 09. To top that off the Roush Mustangs (I think there are like 4 or 5 of them that compromise what they have on that southeast side of the lot) have their own allocation from Roush, once again some are 08 models and some are 09 models.....So I wouldnt say that they get 300 or for that matter 1% of total mustang production.....the get them over the course of time, and contrary to popular belief, mustang sales are actually greater in the colder months......

BULLITT




I never once said that they were MORE reliable, I have stated more than once that the Ford v8 and the Gm v8 are just as reliable as each other......I brought up that part because you said that the GM engine is far superior to the Mod motor in every way. Not true, as far as gas mileage, they are about the same, reliability, they are the same, hp wise, yeah the Gm has an advantage over the Ford, but I would hope so considering the cid advantage that the Gm engine has over the mod motor.

I can point out at least one, give more time I can do more, ie the 2.4l


Well I cant argue with that, however GM also has 6 core makes and 2 "other" makes to Fords 3 core makes and 2 "other" makes. So for that matter, who do you think is going to have more of their engines out there? now if you were to divide those wounderful GM numbers that you came up with by the 6 for gm and 3 for the ford, who is on top? You have 21,216 cars sold by each of GMs core divisions vs 33133 cars sold for each of Fords core divisions......I guess that is why ford has lost less money than gm.

What does having a certain amount of brand "names" matter? seriously?



Pick up a magazine other than one that is geared towards gms or watch some racing, there are a ton of na mod motors out there making that kind of hp......

STOCK


You are incorrect sir. For starters, of the above mentioned car makers that you have listed do any of them have a v8 in any of their cars? Also I noticed how you left out Nissan out of the equaision....Convienent since the GTR has performance numbers equil or greater than the zr1 and gets better fuel economy
that is 16 and 21 for the nissan and 14 and 20 for the corvette......

if you do the same with the mustang gt500 vs the zr1 you get the same numbers

the mustang gt vs the basic vette, the vette gets one mpg in the city and three on the highway, thanks to it having a 6 speed manual vs the Mustangs 5 speed manual, so that being said, can you really say that the mod motor cant beat the lsx in gas mileage either? No you cant, if the transmissions have the same number of gears.....

Not everyones fault they stick with a 5-speed manual, and GTR handling and AWD do not = ZR1 performance, or Mustang, or whatever...


Well through the use of multiple cams, variable valve timing, and multi valves I think it is impressive that an engine that has 5.4l of displacement is putting out more hp than engines that have 6.1l or 7.0l of displacement and just 100 less hp than one that has more displacement and more boost.....Ford has done more with less...The last time that Gm tried to follow Fords lead, they failed miserably (the GM 5.0l had 180 hp vs the ford 5.0, that had less cubes again, had 227 hp)
Last time I checked the GM 5.0L 305 was never a performance engine? It was NEVER given good heads or a decent camshaft when it was used, so comparing them is LOLLerSKATES. However, compare the Chevy 4.9L 302 and the Ford 4.9L 302...



Actually they are 08 and 09 Gt500s are selling for LESS than sticker......way less than Sticker
Imaginationland?

[Poncho]

Thank you spelling police.......
I wrote the responce twice, the one that got posted was rushed....I apologize.

LOL more errors.

[Rocket Power]

Now if only the new camaro wasn't so ugly.:rolf
It's about time they get the 2008-09-10 camaro out, they waited so long the mustang in getting a facelift:goof
Way to go GM show up to the bar at last call:thumbsup

[Waver]

BULLITT
right now who gives a shit?


What does having a certain amount of brand "names" matter? seriously? the statement was that gm has more engines out there, so there for with 6 brands out there they have a bigger market share than ford does, and ford has a larger market share than toyota......you want to play the numbers game lets. By having more brands selling cars you should have more engines out there, however if you do an apples to apples compairison like I did, you will see that ford is still doing more.....with LESS


STOCK Other than the zr1 does gm have a car that is putting out 600 hp plus stock. He was referring to my initial statement that people are able to make that kind of hp with the mod motor. He said nothing about it having to be stock, he said in modded form, at least that is what I was refering to.

Not everyones fault they stick with a 5-speed manual, and GTR handling and AWD do not = ZR1 performance, or Mustang, or whatever... Um since when, all of the car mags have been compairing the gtr to the zo6, so why cant I? Top speeds are close, 1/4 mile times are close, laps around the Ring are close, skid pad numbers are close, braking is close....accell is close.....I dont see how these are not compairable cars.....


Last time I checked the 305 was never a performance engine? It was NEVER given good heads or a decent camshaft when it was used, so comparing them is LOLLerSKATES. However, compare the Chevy 302 and the Ford 302... Oh you mean the same 302 that got its ass whipped in the days of trans am by the shelbys and the boss? that 302? I think I have a car and driver article that backs that up too as well


Imaginationland?Wouldnt I know what I can sell an 08 shelby for or an 09 shelby for......do some calling around.....you will see that I am right.....or take my word for it since I SELL FORDS

[Waver]

LOL more errors.

we all know that I dont really care about spelling, this is a fucking car web forum not a god damn spelling bee

[lordairgtar]

we all know that I dont really care about spelling, this is a fucking car web forum not a god damn spelling bee
You spelled that sentence right.

[Waver]

You spelled that sentence right.

lol why thank you lol

[FourEyedFord]

Fox Bodys OWN all!

/End Thread! :thumbsup

[Waver]

Fox Bodys OWN all!

/End Thread! :thumbsup

no arguments here

[88Nightmare]

Fox Bodys OWN all!

/End Thread! :thumbsup

yeah maybe after you stick about 10-20 grand in it. Stock that 302 had what, 210hp?

[wrath]

right now who gives a shit?

the statement was that gm has more engines out there, so there for with 6 brands out there they have a bigger market share than ford does, and ford has a larger market share than toyota......you want to play the numbers game lets. By having more brands selling cars you should have more engines out there, however if you do an apples to apples compairison like I did, you will see that ford is still doing more.....with LESS

Does it really matter how many brands there are? It doesn't cost anything more to build. It only costs on the dealership end of things.

GM definitely has more engines out there than Ford. GM's modular motors (the entire gen3 and gen4 SBC) are actually modular. And one of them exceeds 500hp without boost. How many of Ford's engines make more than 500hp without boost?


Other than the zr1 does gm have a car that is putting out 600 hp plus stock. He was referring to my initial statement that people are able to make that kind of hp with the mod motor. He said nothing about it having to be stock, he said in modded form, at least that is what I was refering to.
Um since when, all of the car mags have been compairing the gtr to the zo6, so why cant I? Top speeds are close, 1/4 mile times are close, laps around the Ring are close, skid pad numbers are close, braking is close....accell is close.....I dont see how these are not compairable cars.....

Does Ford put out anything today that puts out more than 600hp stock?

Or how about how many vehicles does Ford put out today in excess of 400hp stock? Cadillac has 3 alone, the CTS-V, STS-V, and XLR-V, not including trucks.



Lets explain this....A dealer's allocation on a certain model vehicle is baised apon how many of that model they sold/took orders on. Now if you drive past griffen you see about 8 or 9 mustang Gt's, Roush, and one bullett mustang sitting on the lot, as well as about 5 or 6 v6 models there. Well the v6/gt/Bullett models that they have there are allocated to them by Ford, and the Bullett model is actually an 08 model and not an 09. To top that off the Roush Mustangs (I think there are like 4 or 5 of them that compromise what they have on that southeast side of the lot) have their own allocation from Roush, once again some are 08 models and some are 09 models.....So I wouldnt say that they get 300 or for that matter 1% of total mustang production.....the get them over the course of time, and contrary to popular belief, mustang sales are actually greater in the colder months......

So they got screwed into taking a boatload of Mustangs? Don't they get paid for that plus overages? How many Mustangs do they sell? It seems like they have like 30 on the lot at any given time.


I never once said that they were MORE reliable, I have stated more than once that the Ford v8 and the Gm v8 are just as reliable as eachother......I brought up that part because you said that the GM engine is far superior to the Mod motor in every way. Not true, as far as gas mileage, they are about the same, reliability, they are the same, hp wise, yeah the Gm has an advantage over the Ford, but I would hope so considering the cid advantage that the Gm engine has over the mod motor.

It is superior to the mod motor. The 4.6L is a good motor but the 5.4L 3valve costs a ton to build and the 2valve is junk. If you compare the fuel economy of a 2008 5.4L Ford F150 and a 5.3L Silverado which one gets the better fuel economy?


I can point out at least one, give more time I can do more, ie the 2.4l

Which one? They've had a ton of 2.4Ls. Was it built in the last ten years?



Well I cant argue with that, however GM also has 6 core makes and 2 "other" makes to Fords 3 core makes and 2 "other" makes. So for that matter, who do you think is going to have more of their engines out there? now if you were to divide those wounderful GM numbers that you came up with by the 6 for gm and 3 for the ford, who is on top? You have 21,216 cars sold by each of GMs core divisions vs 33133 cars sold for each of Fords core divisions......I guess that is why ford has lost less money than gm.

OK, so Ford is smaller. It's got a clone brand (Mercury) and a clone dying brand (Lincoln).

February 2009 Sales:
Ford: 84,422
Mercury: 5,989
Lincoln: 5,633
Volvo: 3,356

Chevrolet: 75,555
GMC: 16,204
Pontiac: 14,200
Cadillac: 7,038
Saturn: 6,338
Buick: 6,196
HUMMER: 1,053
Saab: 712

Yes, that's right kiddies, GM sold nearly as many Pontiacs as Lincoln-Mercury-Volvo combined. And yeah, they just happened to sell more "dead-brand Buicks" and "loser Saturns" than Lincoln, Mercury, or Volvo.



Pick up a magazine other than one that is geared towards gms or watch some racing, there are a ton of na mod motors out there making that kind of hp......

Where? I haven't seen one in Car Craft recently.

You can buy an LS7 and hptuners and make 600hp... and it's streetable.


You are incorrect sir. For starters, of the above mentioned car makers that you have listed do any of them have a v8 in any of their cars? Also I noticed how you left out Nissan out of the equaision....Convienent since the GTR has performance numbers equil or greater than the zr1 and gets better fuel economy
that is 16 and 21 for the nissan and 14 and 20 for the corvette......

How many of them make a V8 in a car? Or make a V8 period? The GTR isn't on the same playing field as the ZR1. It's on the same playing field as the Z06.


the mustang gt vs the basic vette, the vette gets one mpg in the city and three on the highway, thanks to it having a 6 speed manual vs the Mustangs 5 speed manual, so that being said, can you really say that the mod motor cant beat the lsx in gas mileage either? No you cant, if the transmissions have the same number of gears.....

Whose fault is that?


Well through the use of multiple cams, variable valve timing, and multi valves I think it is impressive that an engine that has 5.4l of displacement is putting out more hp than engines that have 6.1l or 7.0l of displacement and just 100 less hp than one that has more displacement and more boost.....Ford has done more with less...The last time that Gm tried to follow Fords lead, they failed miserably (the GM 5.0l had 180 hp vs the ford 5.0, that had less cubes again, had 227 hp)

But it's not. It has FORCED INDUCTION. You can put a 7lb blower on top of a LS2 and make 550rwhp. So Ford putting a blower on top of a 5.4L and making 540crankshaft horsepower doesn't blow my skirt up none.

The 305 was a smog motor. It was a piece, no doubt about it. Just like the 5.4L. Can't do much with a tiny bore and a long-ass stroke. The Vortec 305 wasn't half bad. How did the 351W compare with the 350? 460 with the 454?

When Ford tried to go with less they ended up with a wimpy little Zetec as compared to the Ecotec.


Look it up, even if the hp numbers are lower than advertised by ford, it makes what I am saying even more impressive and adds validity to what I am saying

So Ford making less horsepower than advertised is a good thing and benefits them how? Last time this happened (with the Mustang a decade ago) it didn't bode well. j1349 numbers are where it's at.



PS: I just like to argue. Sometimes about nothing, like this. haha.

[Josepy]

man everyones writing a book.

[Prince Valiant]

Fox Bodys OWN all!

/End Thread! :thumbsupyeah maybe after you stick about 10-20 grand in it. Stock that 302 had what, 210hp?
Meh, 225 or 205 iirc, depending on what year (there was no hp difference...just how they rated it).

The mustang was a little outmatched by the L98, but the mustang was the easiest by far to hit low 13's, 12's, 11's, 10's, etc.

[FourEyedFord]

Meh, 225 or 205 iirc, depending on what year (there was no hp difference...just how they rated it).

The mustang was a little outmatched by the L98, but the mustang was the easiest by far to hit low 13's, 12's, 11's, 10's, etc.

The heads differed from 79-86 to 87-93.
E7 heads from the 87-93 flow more than the 79-86 version, which is probably where most of the extra HP came from.

Compression ratios changed, carb to EFI changed, Speed density to Mass Air Flow changed, Cam possibly, etc. Over that 14 year period the motors changed quite a bit. It is amazing how much ET differs from car to car in those years (Stock ETs).

I just thought I would throw some sarcasm in for everyone with my first post. lol :D

[88Nightmare]

dont get me wrong, the fox is definitely a good platform to hit single digits with, however stock to stock, I think the IROC-Z will taken down a 5.0

[DRK]

yeah maybe after you stick about 10-20 grand in it. Stock that 302 had what, 210hp?



You don't have to hate on the foxbody just cause yours was a shitbox, that was more your fault then it was the cars.
If it wasn't for the 5.0 the aftermarket would still only consist of summit, jegs, and P.A.W.. The fox 5.0 5spd (20yrs later) is still today the biggest bang for the buck bar none.

Back to the O.P.,

If the '10 Camaro was 1000lbs lighter and 10k cheaper they wouldn't be able to build them fast enough, whether they had 3rd/4th gen type issues or not. IMO...The 2010 Camaro is one sharp land yacht.

[DRK]

I think the IROC-Z will taken down a 5.0

you smoke crack! a 1991 1le 350 Z28 would only go 14 flat, a good friend of mine bought one new. another bought a 94 Z28 auto new and it would only run 14.3 best ever bone stock

[88Nightmare]

theyre all shitboxes lol


mine was just fine, but meh. and im talkin stock for stock, they suck.

[Poncho]

you smoke crack! a 1991 1le 350 Z28 would only go 14 flat, a good friend of mine bought one new. another bought a 94 Z28 auto new and it would only run 14.3 best ever bone stock


your friend fails if he took a 275hp camaro and only pulled 14.3's when a 240HP GTP can pull off 14.3's

also so far, this is the best thread of the year. You can tell spring is here.

[DRK]

your friend fails if he took a 275hp camaro and only pulled 14.3's when a 240HP GTP can pull off 14.3's



That was bone stock 94 polo green Z28 w/ less then 20k and it was a slush box. At GLD it would chip the tires out for about 5ft when foot braking and consistently run 14.3-14.5, it wouldn't even brake them loose from idle at the strip, sad to say but that's all the turd had in it.

[Bobby "Big Daddy" Flay]

Late 07, i ran my 87k mile 97 Z28 at GLD and pulled 14.1's stock.

[Waver]

this is the last thing that I am saying because you are comming at me by repeating what I had said, not fully reading what I wrote in posts to you and others and trying to pass off opinion as fact.


Does it really matter how many brands there are? It doesn't cost anything more to build. It only costs on the dealership end of things. Here is where you are missing the whole point of what I said.you are looking at all of Gm's brands as one entity, however the over all buying public dosnt look at it like that. People look at a Ford as a Ford, a Chevy as a Chevy, ect...They are all geared towards different segments of the buying market. Lets put it this way, if you have 6 Mcdonalds restaraunts to my three Burger Kings, who do you think will sell more?


GM definitely has more engines out there than Ford. GM's modular motors (the entire gen3 and gen4 SBC) are actually modular. And one of them exceeds 500hp without boost. How many of Ford's engines make more than 500hp without boost?and I agreed with the point you made, see above and every other fucking post I made about this. Good for Gm with having one engine that makes over 500 hp with out boost....unfortunatly for gm, unless it is the vette or the ctsv it dosnt help anything with sales, because the general market is buying cars with 140 to 250hp cars....to car people it means somthing, but to joe public or jane doe it dosnt mean shit




Does Ford put out anything today that puts out more than 600hp stock? Do they need to?


Or how about how many vehicles does Ford put out today in excess of 400hp stock? Cadillac has 3 alone, the CTS-V, STS-V, and XLR-V, not including trucks. one, but then again ford only has one car that has a v8 in it....(the mustang in all of its forms)




So they got screwed into taking a boatload of Mustangs? Don't they get paid for that plus overages? How many Mustangs do they sell? It seems like they have like 30 on the lot at any given time. No they didnt. They choose to take that allocation. I dont know how many mustangs they sell, so that is a question that I cant answer.




It is superior to the mod motor. The 4.6L is a good motor but the 5.4L 3valve costs a ton to build and the 2valve is junk. If you compare the fuel economy of a 2008 5.4L Ford F150 and a 5.3L Silverado which one gets the better fuel economy? Why dont we do a more fair compairison, considering the 5.4 is the top of the line engine and the 5.3 isnt. How about the 09 f150 with the 4.6 and the xfe package (lower rear end gear ratio and light weight rims) vs your precious 5.3. Now who says the 2v 5.3 is junk? Where do you get your information from?




Which one? They've had a ton of 2.4Ls. Was it built in the last ten years? the quad 4 baised 2.4, that was in production till at least 2001





OK, so Ford is smaller. It's got a clone brand (Mercury) and a clone dying brand (Lincoln).

February 2009 Sales:
Ford: 84,422
Mercury: 5,989
Lincoln: 5,633
Volvo: 3,356

Chevrolet: 75,555
GMC: 16,204
Pontiac: 14,200
Cadillac: 7,038
Saturn: 6,338
Buick: 6,196
HUMMER: 1,053
Saab: 712

Yes, that's right kiddies, GM sold nearly as many Pontiacs as Lincoln-Mercury-Volvo combined. And yeah, they just happened to sell more "dead-brand Buicks" and "loser Saturns" than Lincoln, Mercury, or Volvo. Who said that Lincoln was dead? I dont think so, and I love how you omit MAZDA but include the dead brands of gm to help your numbers.....Pontiac I always thought was on the same line as chevy and ford, and there for would get a bigger draw than a nich brand like lincoln, merc or volvo. keep pulling out your numbers.... I can find some on the net that says other wise





Where? I haven't seen one in Car Craft recently. go figure, the one mag that is geared more to gm's than anything else.....good choice


You can buy an LS7 and hptuners and make 600hp... and it's streetable. wow, I would hope that a 7.0L engine could hit that because if it couldnt it would be a pile of shit.




How many of them make a V8 in a car? Or make a V8 period? The GTR isn't on the same playing field as the ZR1. It's on the same playing field as the Z06. god you reading skills amaze me....you repeat the same thing that I say first and then repeat somthing that Poncho said.....last time I will repeat my self here...it is on par with the z06 in everything but hp. Even all the main car mags say that....




Whose fault is that?
Repeating poncho again.....read responce to him




But it's not. It has FORCED INDUCTION. You can put a 7lb blower on top of a LS2 and make 550rwhp. So Ford putting a blower on top of a 5.4L and making 540crankshaft horsepower doesn't blow my skirt up none. With that being said a 7.0l engine making over 500 hp dosnt to a damn thing for me either. One would think bigger displacement would mean more power.


The 305 was a smog motor. It was a piece, no doubt about it. Just like the 5.4L. Can't do much with a tiny bore and a long-ass stroke. The Vortec 305 wasn't half bad. How did the 351W compare with the 350? 460 with the 454? Wow, you are really digging here arnt you? Lets see, I guess ford is able to do somthing with a tiny bore and and a longer stroke, and a lot of guys on here are doing somthing with it. It is not fords fault that with FI you can almost double the hp numbers on their engines....I guess they are better for that. Now as far as your engine compairison what time frame are you compairing them too? in what vehicles....If I do remember the 454 in the Chevy Silverado 454ss was a slug compaired to the 351 that was in the lightning, the 5.0 was able to keep up and or beat the 5.7 powered camaro/firebird (hell my 5.0 destroyed a few at the track). The 460, that was a total truck engine........


When Ford tried to go with less they ended up with a wimpy little Zetec as compared to the Ecotec. And the zetec still put up better numbers than the ecotec, the ecotec was out in 02/03 where as the zetec was out in 98.....I think there is a site on the web that I belong to that would have a field day with that statement you just made.....




So Ford making less horsepower than advertised is a good thing and benefits them how? Last time this happened (with the Mustang a decade ago) it didn't bode well. j1349 numbers are where it's at. Yeah I know all about that, what I was saying was that even if it was making less hp (which I doubt after the whole 99 cobra incident) the numbers that the fords put out on the track are even more impressive.




PS: I just like to argue. Sometimes about nothing, like this. haha. I am all for a good debate, however with a debate, you have to be open minded, and unfortunatly you are not

[Voodoo Chick]

man everyones writing a book.

QFT!! Longest........posts........ever.

[Waver]

honestly it takes too much time to do that, I really hate it, however if someone is going to try to rip apart what I say line by line, I need to respond in turn

[BAD LS1]

OMFG are the quotes insane in this thread. Conclusion: Only 1.5 mustang guys bitching about how much the new Camaro sucks... The rest of the world held their opinion or posted it and seemed to be fairly positive.

[STANMAN]

OMFG are the quotes insane in this thread. Conclusion: Only 1.5 mustang guys bitching about how much the new Camaro sucks... The rest of the world held their opinion or posted it and seemed to be fairly positive.

How do we come out with .5 of a dude? :rolf

I hope I have not been counted as part of the 1.5, I haven't even given my own opinion on the new Maro. I have only given my review of the reviews posted.

[BAD LS1]

How do we come out with .5 of a dude? :rolf

I hope I have not been counted as part of the 1.5, I haven't even given my own opinion on the new Maro. I have only given my review of the reviews posted.

You and Nick, however Nick didnt express a full dislike so i counted him as .5

Bob we all know know your thoughts and feelings on it, you dont even need to come right out and post it, its so painfully obvious. Maybe the 5th gen will suck as bad as the mullet and yuppie pleasing models of the past and have worse sales #'s and shittier quality, fall of the face of the earth again the list goes on and on and on. All while the s197 mustang marches forward till the end of time. Then you can say you told us so.

Its ok man, it doesnt hurt my feelings at all if you have diff opinions of the 5th gen car than i do. Heaven forbid a few of us are happy to see the resurection that lives up to most peoples expectations.

[88Nightmare]

How do we come out with .5 of a dude? :rolf

I hope I have not been counted as part of the 1.5, I haven't even given my own opinion on the new Maro. I have only given my review of the reviews posted.

says the guy who commented on the "Cavabolt" rear end. You yourself said the only profile on this car that looks good is the front and even that is questionable. Just because you didnt make those comments in this thread doesn't mean they didnt happen :thumbsup

[Z28Envy]

I think Bob is just upset that there will be another car at a carshow he wont be able to beat for a trophy.:rolf

[88Nightmare]

I think Bob is just upset that there will be another car at a carshow he wont be able to beat for a trophy.:rolf

http://www.intarnet.us/graphics/gif/osnap.gif

[Poncho]

Its ok man, it doesnt hurt my feelings at all if you have diff opinions of the 5th gen car than i do. Heaven forbid a few of us are happy to see the resurrection that lives up to most peoples expectations.


I think Bob is just upset that there will be another car at a carshow he wont be able to beat for a trophy.:rolf


excellent posts.

[STANMAN]

says the guy who commented on the "Cavabolt" rear end. You yourself said the only profile on this car that looks good is the front and even that is questionable. Just because you didnt make those comments in this thread doesn't mean they didnt happen :thumbsup

Actually I like the side profile, the front looks Caddy-esque to me. If you're going to qoute me from a different thread, at least have it right:rolleyes:

[STANMAN]

I think Bob is just upset that there will be another car at a carshow he wont be able to beat for a trophy.:rolf

My car wins at way more shows than it loses at. It's amount of clones on the road is a testament that I did something right wouldn't you say?


I still love the constant personal jabs though, it entertains me to no end, so keep them coming:thumbsup

[Poncho]

My car wins at way more shows than it loses at. It's amount of clones on the road is a testament that I did something right wouldn't you say?


I still love the constant personal jabs though, it entertains me to no end, so keep them coming:thumbsup

God Bob could you be any more of a douc-- oh nevermind. You can.

[STANMAN]

God Bob could you be any more of a douc-- oh nevermind. You can.

I aim to please, always:thumbsup

[Poncho]

hahaha.. ok, that did make me laugh..

internet high-5.

http://www.threadbombing.com/data/media/22/5UrwzgdtHioxfo0voMzOgXjEo1_500.jpg

[Anakonda69]

i can't to see them on the street.

[BadAzzGTA89]

i can't to see them on the street.

Is that all you got for a EPIC tread like this:goof

[88Nightmare]

Actually I like the side profile, the front looks Caddy-esque to me. If you're going to qoute me from a different thread, at least have it right:rolleyes:

doesnt matter if I got it partially wrong, I still got the fact right that you indeed DID bash the camaro in other threads. Notice how you simply argued what I got wrong and didn't deny what I got right

[Voodoo Chick]

I guess what it comes down to is, love it or hate it, it's still going to perform pretty nicely. I have been pretty open on my opinion of it's appearance, and it's heavy use of plastic, but I cannot argue it's performance virtues, and once again, I'm sure it would be fun to drive. I'm hoping that the one I saw at the auto show was maybe just a "watered down" one to appeal to the masses, and the really good ones are still yet to come. I have seen some REALLY unattractive 4th gens, and then on the other hand I have seen a few that are pure hotness, so maybe the same will apply to the new ones.....I have a really eccentric view of what looks "badass," though, so I'm sure I'm influenced by that as well..... I feel that the performance of the Gen 5's looks like it's going to be damn fine.....I just wish they looked meaner.

[STANMAN]

doesnt matter if I got it partially wrong, I still got the fact right that you indeed DID bash the camaro in other threads. Notice how you simply argued what I got wrong and didn't deny what I got right

Saying the front end looks like a Caddy and the ass end looks like a Cobalt is a bash? Do you not like the looks of the Caddy front end or the Cobalt ass end? Sounds like you have the problem, not me.

[Z28Envy]

My car wins at way more shows than it loses at. It's amount of clones on the road is a testament that I did something right wouldn't you say?


I still love the constant personal jabs though, it entertains me to no end, so keep them coming:thumbsup

Well Bob that statement is in the eyes of the beholder. Some may say that the "clones" are flattering while others may say that there is more than one person with poor taste!

[88Nightmare]

Saying the front end looks like a Caddy and the ass end looks like a Cobalt is a bash? Do you not like the looks of the Caddy front end or the Cobalt ass end? Sounds like you have the problem, not me.

youre the one who doesnt like the cobalt, so coming from you, yes, its bashing on the camaro.

[BadAzzGTA89]

This thread got gay!

[STANMAN]

youre the one who doesnt like the cobalt, so coming from you, yes, its bashing on the camaro.

Where would one come up with this opinion. Have I stated in another thread that I H8 the Cobalt? If so, please guide me there. I have stated that the SRT-4 platform, in my opinion, is the superior of the two, but I can't remeber H8ing on it.

[88Nightmare]

its gm, of course you hate it

[Poncho]

This thread got gay!

in an EPIC manner.

[Waver]

You and Nick, however Nick didnt express a full dislike so i counted him as .5

Bob we all know know your thoughts and feelings on it, you dont even need to come right out and post it, its so painfully obvious. Maybe the 5th gen will suck as bad as the mullet and yuppie pleasing models of the past and have worse sales #'s and shittier quality, fall of the face of the earth again the list goes on and on and on. All while the s197 mustang marches forward till the end of time. Then you can say you told us so.

Its ok man, it doesnt hurt my feelings at all if you have diff opinions of the 5th gen car than i do. Heaven forbid a few of us are happy to see the resurection that lives up to most peoples expectations.


Did I bash the New Camaro? I didn't think I did. Kind of hard to remember that when I spent the last few pages defending the Mustang.....I like the way the car looks, and the power is nice....I do see one good thing comming out of it.....Ford stepping up their game to be able to compete with the Camaro. I would hate to see the mustang become what the name Charger has become.

Gm did somthing right.....finally........It just might be too late

[BAD LS1]

Did I bash the New Camaro? I didn't think I did. Kind of hard to remember that when I spent the last few pages defending the Mustang.....I like the way the car looks, and the power is nice....I do see one good thing comming out of it.....Ford stepping up their game to be able to compete with the Camaro. I would hate to see the mustang become what the name Charger has become.

Gm did somthing right.....finally........It just might be too late

Thats cool.

[STANMAN]

So who bashed the new Camaro. It wasn't me, and it wasn't Nick. I did, however, see lots of Mustang bashing in this thread. Things that make you go hmmmmmmm:rolf

[Josepy]

Both cars suck. Thread over. :)

[STANMAN]

Come on, GM has gotten other things right. The 1st gen Camaro was right (and lasted a whole 3 years), the Grand National was right (and lasted 4 years maybe), and the 94-97 Impala SS's were right. Seems like anything they did do right they didn't do right for very long. Odd.

[Slow Joe]

I read the first two pages then had to take a Tylenol... Christ ok, the new Camaro came out... That's cool... It's got some good looking numbers... Ford's comming out with some new things too... The car market is in the shitter, at least for new cars on any front so numbers are down... Is there anything I missed besides some bickering on whether the Mustang is better than the Camaro? Or how you can compare a GT500 to a Z06? :rolf

[BAD LS1]

lol

[97z2801ss]

Heaven forbid a few of us are happy to see the resurection that lives up to most peoples expectations.

Agreed..... I want one:thumbsup

[nismodave]

Im not even going to bother reading this BS.

I get a kick out of guys bashing each others cars whrn they are so similar.:loser