something ive noticed about Camaros

[mr02Z/28]

I bought my 2002 Z28 strictly because it is a beast with No Mods ...... Had a 1SS and they are slow as balls, getting into the 12s is impressive(wonder if it's stock) .. my '02 Z28 runs high 12s/low13s but I only paid $8,000 for it 5 years ago .... I do really like the style of the 5th Gen Camaro, is why I bought it ...

[bigssc]

Originally Posted by PalmerGA

Not overly concerned about whose 1/4 is faster - I didn't by my SS to drag race. I bought it because it is (hands down) the best looking American muscle made today.

[Mwalterhouse]

When I purchased my Camaro I was impressed with the stock performance, I thought to my self why would anyone want to mod a perfectly performing car. But, my mod plan was in place before I made my purchase. I just wanted the old school muscle car sound with the headers, exhaust, and cam. I do not race my car so, which Mfg produces the fastest car is not important to me, besides the Mfg's and individuals are always going to make changes so their vehicle is the fastest. When does it end? How fast is to fast for a street vehicle?

[REDXIIIDave]

Originally Posted by PalmerGA

Not overly concerned about whose 1/4 is faster - I didn't by my SS to drag race. I bought it because it is (hands down) the best looking American muscle made today.

Although the Challenger SRT8 is a close second, as far as looks go. For the extra 5 grand that the Challenger costs, you could make a Camaro SS that smokes it in every way. The Mustang may be fast in a straight line, but it still looks like a turd compared to the Camaro or Challenger.

[EastWood-SS]

yes, who cares if the mustang is a little faster. it looks a hell of a lot worse. the design is dated, its not as imposing or tough looking. there's a reason why you see women driving mustangs 90% of the time.

[ponywars]

agree with a lot of people
its perspective, my v6 is fast enough for me

[Wasp]

Originally Posted by newmoon

I've had all three. Stock in the SS manual the best I got was 12:87 @ 109, 5.0 manual 13:07 @109 (had a shifting issue), 392 automatic 12:46 @ 112. The manual 5.0 and SS is a drivers race whoever has the better 60' will win. The 392 well it's fast, really fast.

Your times show truth regardless of shifting issues.

I don't know if you guys have been racing L99s with the 5.0s, I can understand that. But, I've had no problem beating 5.0s with my LS3...?

I'm not sure if some of you guys are trolling or magazine/youtube racing but the last 4 Ive raced ive beaten all 4 stock for stock (2 had exhaust).
Although the 5th one I got raped because he claimed stock and had slicks and nitrous in the trunk lmao.

To say the 5.0 and the SRT8 is a lot faster than an SS is an idiotic statement. Have most of you got factory turds or what?? Go out and actually race one

[Dr. Evil]

This is why I hate magazine racing. Times are all over the place.
You're talking about a tenth here and there. I'd wager that most(but not all) drivers on all forums would struggle to get a sub 5.5 second 0 - 60mph, let alone the claimed fastest times.

[Biv08SS]

If I wanted the fastest, I'd just buy another liter bike

[87GNX]

Originally Posted by ChevyTrunkMusic

yes, who cares if the mustang is a little faster. it looks a hell of a lot worse. the design is dated, its not as imposing or tough looking. there's a reason why you see women driving mustangs 90% of the time.

They all look dated, that's why they are RETRO styled. The 2013 Mustang GT looks as good as an SS Camaro.

[silverds]

Originally Posted by 87GNX

They all look dated, that's why they are RETRO styled. The 2013 Mustang GT looks as good as an SS Camaro.

I think the difference is that the last two generations of Mustang are about as different from each other as the last two generations of Corvette.

There was a 7 year gap without a Camaro at all, which made the 5th gen seem like some kind of retro style from the future.


What I've learned from popular imports (R34 Skyline GTR, E46 - E92 M3's and Audi RS5) and domestics (Challenger, Camaro, Mustang) is everyone who loves "muscle" wants quarter glass and a rear deck and at least subconsciously, thinks fastbacks are lame.

[Q'smuscle]

Originally Posted by bigssc

is it just me or is everything stock versus stock faster than an SS? let me explain.. as i was looking up specs of new 392 srt8 chargers, challengers, 5.0 mustangs, etc. i found that almost all of them are faster STOCK. im not talking about 1LE's just bare bone SS's. whats up with that? whats even more funny to me is the new charger/challenger is around 4,300 pounds and still has faster (stock) 0-60 and 1/4 mile times. and it only has 70 more hp and tq than an L99 and only 35 more hp and tq than a manual SS. is it just our cars are tuned poorly from the factory? i know once you do basic bolt ons and a dyno the SS is nothing to underestimate but im just talking stock versus stock right now. i can already see some of the troll comments coming lol this is all from my research and opinion so please leave the butt hurt at the door its just something i noticed. and i love my SS by the way, i love everything about it, i was just noticing some numbers i read and saw on other forums.

With the same models Dodge and Ford increased their horsepower while Chevy stayed the same with their horsepower plain and simple. Nothing else to say

[Q'smuscle]

Originally Posted by 87GNX

They all look dated, that's why they are RETRO styled. The 2013 Mustang GT looks as good as an SS Camaro.

No, they don't look dated because they're Retro . People that has a 60's camaro would never say their car looks dated. People still be glued to the camaros they have a futuristic and Retro look to them as every writer wrote in magazines. That's what tears it apart. from the Challenger and mustang. Our camros isnt a 100% retro ,They're talking bout going full Retro with the 2016s but who knows. That's why 2010 to 2013 camaros will look nice for awhile its ahead of the other two.

[Fiftydriver]

Originally Posted by bigssc

is it just me or is everything stock versus stock faster than an SS? let me explain.. as i was looking up specs of new 392 srt8 chargers, challengers, 5.0 mustangs, etc. i found that almost all of them are faster STOCK. im not talking about 1LE's just bare bone SS's. whats up with that? whats even more funny to me is the new charger/challenger is around 4,300 pounds and still has faster (stock) 0-60 and 1/4 mile times. and it only has 70 more hp and tq than an L99 and only 35 more hp and tq than a manual SS. is it just our cars are tuned poorly from the factory? i know once you do basic bolt ons and a dyno the SS is nothing to underestimate but im just talking stock versus stock right now. i can already see some of the troll comments coming lol this is all from my research and opinion so please leave the butt hurt at the door its just something i noticed. and i love my SS by the way, i love everything about it, i was just noticing some numbers i read and saw on other forums.

The SRT8 would be more accurately compared to the ZL1 as its their upgraded version over the standard V-8 as is the ZL1 the upgraded version over the SS.

The mustang is just a much lighter car with lower gears and nearly identical HP as the LS3 Camaro, obviously it will be faster in 0-60 and 1/4 mile times.

If you want to keep things all stock, and want the fastest car, get the stang, if you want a car that looks awesome and has nearly endless potential, get the SS!! Different strokes, there was no choice for me, SS all the way. Course my car was stock until the first oil change and then pretty much all the bumper to bumper warrantee was voided!!!