[DGthe3]

Originally Posted by Stew

Mustang outsold Camaro by 1000 units in november, looks like it's beginning before the new model is even here.

It happened last year too, but the gap was much larger then. My personal guess is Ford sells a ton of rental Mustangs in November (and through the rest of the winter as well) to help keep volume up during otherwise slow months. But in any event, yes they did sell more Mustangs last month than GM sold Camaros.

[Overflow]

Originally Posted by FenwickHockey65

I would not be surprised if Mustang pulls ahead of Camaro in sales until the 6th gen arrives.

Just sayin'.

[motorhead]

I really don't expect many on a Camaro forum to like any mustang, but some of these comments crack me.

I think you all are going to be very surprised with just how popular this car will be with the market Ford is trying to reach. I for one think this is a very good looking car. I love the engine turned aluminum on the dash.

[2010-1SS-IBM]

Originally Posted by trademaster

If the 4-banger makes more hp and torque, responds better to modification and gets better gas mileage why would anyone want the v6? Because everyone loves the sweet rumble of a V. . . 6?

The TT4 will have higher peak HP and torque, but may not have better overall HP and most likely not better overall torque.

You'll have to specify what "responds better to modification" means exactly. You can always throw a TT on a V6 for example, but another TT is unlikely on a car that already has one.

Gas mileage will vary based on driving style. My guess is the V6 will get better gas mileage when driven hard.

Lastly, more moving parts on a TT than a naturally aspirated engine.

Edit: Also way more torque low in the powerband for the V6 than the TT.

[DGthe3]

Originally Posted by trademaster

If the 4-banger makes more hp and torque, responds better to modification and gets better gas mileage why would anyone want the v6? Because everyone loves the sweet rumble of a V. . . 6?

If turbo4s were better in every way, then of course people would be a fool to want V6s. But ... they're not better in every way. The reason why people want more efficient cars is mainly to save money. But if the engine takes premium & costs more to buy ... you aren't going to be saving much. Of course, you could run it with regular, and then lose the FE and performance advantages of the engine. While still paying more up front for it. Of course, you also have the added complication & associated failure potential of a FI engine. And don't forget turbo lag. Turbos are nice when they've spooled up. But until then, you're usually left wanting more displacement.

As for modding, well they might yield better results on light mods for a little while. But if, for whatever reasons you might have, you want to get your base/mid level car up to V8 numbers its going to take a lot more effort to get a 4 cylinder there than it will take to get a V6 there.


But aside from all that ... turbo4's are just as good as a V6.

[crysalis_01]

Originally Posted by 2010-1SS-IBM

The TT4 will have higher peak HP and torque, but may not have better overall HP and most likely not better overall torque.

You'll have to specify what "responds better to modification" means exactly. You can always throw a TT on a V6 for example, but another TT is unlikely on a car that already has one.

Gas mileage will vary based on driving style. My guess is the V6 will get better gas mileage when driven hard.

Lastly, more moving parts on a TT than a naturally aspirated engine.

Edit: Also way more torque low in the powerband for the V6 than the TT.

Firstly, it'll be a twin-scroll turbo setup and not TT.

Secondly, you may have your last statement backwards. Modern turbos, especially factory units make use of twin-scroll (seen here), bi-turbo setups, or VGT's to deal with turbo lag and to broaden the output curves. That tech matched with TiVCT will make a I4 2.3L engine that will outperform the NA 3.7 handily in every measure.

[trademaster]

Originally Posted by DGthe3

If turbo4s were better in every way, then of course people would be a fool to want V6s. But ... they're not better in every way. The reason why people want more efficient cars is mainly to save money. But if the engine takes premium & costs more to buy ... you aren't going to be saving much. Of course, you could run it with regular, and then lose the FE and performance advantages of the engine. While still paying more up front for it. Of course, you also have the added complication & associated failure potential of a FI engine. And don't forget turbo lag. Turbos are nice when they've spooled up. But until then, you're usually left wanting more displacement.

True enough on some points, but on turbo lag I disagree. The lag of years past is almost non-existent now. Engines comparable to the twin-scroll turbo DI 2.3 coming to Mustang routinely see peak torque before 3,000rpm which is way earlier than the v6 will see peak torque. As far as cost, well you are getting higher output. If that's not worth the cost to you the point is irrelevant anyway.

Originally Posted by DGthe3

As for modding, well they might yield better results on light mods for a little while. But if, for whatever reasons you might have, you want to get your base/mid level car up to V8 numbers its going to take a lot more effort to get a 4 cylinder there than it will take to get a V6 there.

Again I'll have to disagree here. To get a v6 to v8 power levels you will need forced induction (assuming we exclude nitrous). It's much easier to swap turbos, change exhaust, tune and add fuel than it is to add forced induction to a car that is N/A from the factory. Look how hard it is for the v6 Camaro guys to make 400whp then compare that to a Mitsu Evo or one of the Subarus, even a turbo cobalt. If you're talking about some really high numbers sure displacement might become more significant. Even then, a built I4 will cost you less than a built v6 and there's no shortage of 500+whp turbo 4s. Other than that mod for mod and $ for $ the turbo cars are going to wreak havoc on the v6 cars.

[2010-1SS-IBM]

Originally Posted by crysalis_01

Firstly, it'll be a twin-scroll turbo setup and not TT.

Secondly, you may have your last statement backwards. Modern turbos, especially factory units make use of twin-scroll (seen here), bi-turbo setups, or VGT's to deal with turbo lag and to broaden the output curves. That tech matched with TiVCT will make a I4 2.3L engine that will outperform the NA 3.7 handily in every measure.

At all RPM's?

[Blue Maro Demon]

This car doesn't look very good in its own right but the fact it looks like a Ford FUSION and other more tame cars doesn't help it any either.

http://www.camaro5.com/forums/attach...1&d=1386280105

[trademaster]

Originally Posted by 2010-1SS-IBM

At all RPM's?

If similar engines are an indicator, all usable RPM levels. The 2015 WRX (with 0.3l less displacement) makes peak torque @ 2,000rpm and holds it flat until 5,200rpm.

[SPARTAN sui]

Originally Posted by Blue Maro Demon

This car doesn't look very good in its own right but the fact it looks like a Ford FUSION and other more tame cars doesn't help it any either.

http://www.camaro5.com/forums/attach...1&d=1386280105

I had no idea the front end was that similar to the Fusion. Reminds me of the 06-07 Impala/Monte Carlo.

[2010-1SS-IBM]

Originally Posted by trademaster

If similar engines are an indicator, all usable RPM levels. The 2015 WRX (with 0.3l less displacement) makes peak torque @ 2,000rpm and holds it flat until 5,200rpm.

Not proof, at all. So basically you're wishing, like the Ford guys were wishing when they claimed the new Mustang would weigh 500 pounds less.

Here's what's really going to happen: The 4 will come in slightly lower, performance wise, than the V6, but the V6 will be detuned even lower than the 4, to entice people to pay the extra money for the 4.

[FINALLYSATISFIED]

Originally Posted by RubberChicken

I don't get it. That new Mustang doesn't look like a muscle car to me at all.

This one below is the last Mustang that did look like a serious muscle car...

With the hood bra and all huh? Lmao.

[Stew]

Originally Posted by DGthe3

It happened last year too, but the gap was much larger then. My personal guess is Ford sells a ton of rental Mustangs in November (and through the rest of the winter as well) to help keep volume up during otherwise slow months. But in any event, yes they did sell more Mustangs last month than GM sold Camaros.

Mustang has actually sold better the last 2 months in a row and they have been swapping the title each month for this year. The Camaro's current lead for the year is only around 4k units, but with just 1 month to go it is pretty well guaranteeed the yearly sales total win anyways. Besides I am sure the 14 mustangs are in fire sale status and that is probably helping them right now? Gotta get em sold before the 15s hit the lot